Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Reliability and Validity01:29

Reliability and Validity

13.3K
Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.
13.3K
Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test01:09

Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test

3.4K
The t-test is a statistical method used to compare the sample mean with a population mean or compare two means from two data sets. The test statistic is calculated from the standard deviation, mean, and number of measurements in the data set at a selected confidence interval and then compared to a table of critical values at this confidence level. If the test statistic is smaller than the critical value, the null hypothesis is accepted. In this case, we state that the difference between the...
3.4K
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

4.1K
Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
4.1K
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks01:21

Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks

339
Friedman's Two-Way Analysis of Variance by Ranks is a nonparametric test designed to identify differences across multiple test attempts when traditional assumptions of normality and equal variances do not apply. Unlike conventional ANOVA, which requires normally distributed data with equal variances, Friedman's test is ideal for ordinal or non-normally distributed data, making it particularly useful for analyzing dependent samples, such as matched subjects over time or repeated measures...
339
Group Design02:01

Group Design

9.9K
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between...
9.9K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Two Statistics for Measuring the Score Comparability of Computerized Adaptive Tests.

Applied psychological measurement·2023
Same journal

A Kurtosis-Adjusted Bias Correction for the Standardized Mean Difference: Extending Hedges' <i>g</i> to Nonnormal Populations.

Educational and psychological measurement·2026
Same journal

A Simple Approach for Differential Test Functioning Based on Sum Scores.

Educational and psychological measurement·2026
Same journal

Evaluating Factor Retention in Large Factor Analysis Models: A Simulation Study Comparing 15 Methods.

Educational and psychological measurement·2026
Same journal

Agreement and Alignment in Binary Rating Tasks: Strategic Convergence as an Equilibrium Outcome.

Educational and psychological measurement·2026
Same journal

Interactions Between Termination Criteria and Ability Estimators in Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Educational and psychological measurement·2026
Same journal

Identification and Diagnosis of Misreporting in Surveys.

Educational and psychological measurement·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 28, 2025

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke
05:21

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke

Published on: January 7, 2019

6.0K

How Days Between Tests Impacts Alternate Forms Reliability in Computerized Adaptive Tests.

Adam E Wyse1

  • 1Renaissance, Arden Hills, MN, USA.

Educational and Psychological Measurement
|July 16, 2021
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

For optimal alternate forms reliability, retest after 2-3 weeks. Waiting longer may inflate scores as student ability grows, impacting test-retest comparisons.

Keywords:
alternate formscomputerized adaptive testingreliabilitytest–retesttime interval

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Validation of SICOLE-R for Assessing Cognitive and Reading Skills in Spanish-Speaking Children and Its Role in Personalized Education
09:00

Author Spotlight: Validation of SICOLE-R for Assessing Cognitive and Reading Skills in Spanish-Speaking Children and Its Role in Personalized Education

Published on: August 16, 2024

982
A Computerized Functional Skills Assessment and Training Program Targeting Technology Based Everyday Functional Skills
07:31

A Computerized Functional Skills Assessment and Training Program Targeting Technology Based Everyday Functional Skills

Published on: February 13, 2020

7.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 28, 2025

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke
05:21

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke

Published on: January 7, 2019

6.0K
Author Spotlight: Validation of SICOLE-R for Assessing Cognitive and Reading Skills in Spanish-Speaking Children and Its Role in Personalized Education
09:00

Author Spotlight: Validation of SICOLE-R for Assessing Cognitive and Reading Skills in Spanish-Speaking Children and Its Role in Personalized Education

Published on: August 16, 2024

982
A Computerized Functional Skills Assessment and Training Program Targeting Technology Based Everyday Functional Skills
07:31

A Computerized Functional Skills Assessment and Training Program Targeting Technology Based Everyday Functional Skills

Published on: February 13, 2020

7.1K

Area of Science:

  • Educational measurement
  • Psychometrics
  • Cognitive psychology

Background:

  • Determining appropriate intervals for test-retest and alternate forms reliability is crucial for accurate assessment.
  • Computerized adaptive tests (CATs) offer dynamic assessment but require careful consideration of retest timing.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of the time interval between tests on alternate forms reliability coefficients.
  • To identify the optimal retest interval for maintaining stable student ability estimates in reading and math CATs.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of data from reading and math CATs.
  • Examination of how varying days between the first and second test administration affects reliability coefficients.
  • Exploration of factors such as test length, ability distribution, average ability, demographics, and testing time.

Main Results:

  • Highest alternate forms reliability coefficients were achieved when the second test was administered 2-3 weeks after the first.
  • Reliability coefficients remained similar after longer intervals, but student ability tended to increase, suggesting a potential tradeoff.
  • Shorter test lengths and narrower initial ability distributions were associated with lower reliability coefficients.

Conclusions:

  • An optimal retest interval of shortly after 3 weeks is recommended for reading and math CATs to balance reliability and stable ability estimates.
  • Test length and examinee ability distribution significantly influence reliability estimates.
  • Factors like average ability, demographics, and testing time had minimal impact on the observed reliability coefficients.