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 Experiment Videos

Focus on quantitative methods. Determining cut-off scores

L D Goodwin1

  • 1School of Education, University of Colorado at Denver 80217-3364, USA.

Research in Nursing & Health
|June 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Advocating for continuing nursing education in a pediatric hospital: the Prince Scholar and Sabbatical Programs.

Journal of continuing education in nursing·2000
Same author

Culture of Helicobacter pylori from a gastric string may be an alternative to endoscopic biopsy.

Journal of clinical microbiology·2000
Same author

Changing conceptions of measurement validity.

The Journal of nursing education·1997
Same author

Meeting the challenge of immunizing the nation's children.

Pediatric nursing·1991
Same author

Focus on psychometrics. Estimating construct validity.

Research in nursing & health·1991
Same author

Whose needs are we meeting? Results of a consumer satisfaction survey of persons with developmental disabilities in Colorado.

Research in developmental disabilities·1991
Same journal

Missed Nursing Care in Neonatal Intensive Care Units for Infants Experiencing or at Risk of Experiencing Substance Withdrawal.

Research in nursing & health·2026
Same journal

The Impact of Stress, Trauma, and Violence on Well-Being and Physical Health.

Research in nursing & health·2026
Same journal

A Comparison of Post-Traumatic Stress and Depressive Symptoms by Suicidal Ideation Among Black Transgender Women.

Research in nursing & health·2026
Same journal

Exploring Prolonged Grief Experiences of Ethnoracial Minoritized Caregivers: An Emic Perspective.

Research in nursing & health·2026
Same journal

The Psychometric Properties of the Caregiver Feeding Style Questionnaire: A Cross-Cultural Validation in Spanish Parents.

Research in nursing & health·2026
Same journal

Feasibility of an Online Resilience Program for Mothers With Adverse Childhood Experiences.

Research in nursing & health·2026
See all related articles

Determining fair pass/fail scores on tests involves examination-centered and examinee-centered methods. The Angoff method is a key technique, but procedural and statistical issues require further attention for clinical and research measures.

Area of Science:

  • Psychometrics
  • Educational Measurement
  • Test Theory

Background:

  • Certification and licensing examinations, alongside other criterion-referenced tests, necessitate the establishment of precise cut-off scores for pass/fail determinations.
  • The accurate setting of these cut-off scores is critical for maintaining the validity and fairness of high-stakes assessments.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically describe the primary methodologies employed in establishing cut-off scores for criterion-referenced tests.
  • To highlight the importance of robust cut-off score determination in professional certification and licensing contexts.

Main Methods:

  • Categorization of cut-off score determination methods into two main approaches: examination-centered and examinee-centered.
  • Detailed examination of the widely utilized Angoff (1971) method and its prevalent modifications.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Brief discussion of significant procedural and statistical challenges associated with cut-off score setting.

    • Main Results:

    • Identification of distinct examination-centered and examinee-centered frameworks for setting test cut-off scores.
    • Emphasis on the Angoff method as a foundational technique, with acknowledgment of its variations.
    • Recognition of unresolved procedural and statistical issues impacting the reliability of cut-off scores.

    Conclusions:

    • The selection and application of appropriate methods for determining cut-off scores are essential for test validity.
    • Further research and attention are needed to address the complexities of cut-off score determination, particularly for clinical and research applications.
    • Ensuring rigorous cut-off score setting practices enhances the credibility of certification, licensing, and other critical assessments.