Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T10:06:49.733Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Note on Use of Extreme Criterion Groups in Item Discrimination Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Leonard S. Feldt
Leonard S. Feldt*
Affiliation:
State University of Iowa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this note is to reconsider the Kelley-Cureton definition of optimal extreme groups for estimating item-criterion correlations. Optimal tail per cents are derived, using the criterion of minimum sampling variance of the tetrachoric correlation coefficient, and the findings are related to earlier work of Mosteller. It is shown that upper and lower 27 per cent groups yield the most precise estimate of the tetrachoric coefficient only when the population correlation is close to zero. When the population value is .4, extreme 20 per cent groups provide estimates with the smallest sampling error variance. It is further shown, however, that 27 per cent extremes yield highly efficient estimates. Thus no change is recommended in traditional item analysis procedures.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , March 1963 , pp. 97 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © 1963 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cureton, E. E. The upper and lower twenty-seven per cent rule. Psychometrika, 1957, 22, 293–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, Chung-Teh Item analysis table, Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1952.Google Scholar
Feldt, L. S. The use of the extreme groups to test for the presence of a relationship. Psychometrika, 1961, 26, 307–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flanagan, J. C. General considerations in the selection of test items and a short method of estimating the product-moment coefficient from the data at the tails of the distributions. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 674–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, T. L. The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, T. L. The Kelley statistical tables, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1948.Google Scholar
Kendall, M. G. The advanced theory of statistics. Vol. II, London: Griffin, 1946.Google Scholar
Mosteller, F. On some useful “inefficient” statistics. Ann. math. Statist., 1946, 17, 377–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, E. S. and Hartley, H. O. Biometrika tables for statisticians. Vol. I, Cambridge, England: Univ. Press, 1956.Google Scholar
Peters, C. C. and Van Voorhis, W. R. Statistical procedures and their mathematical bases, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar