Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T18:37:54.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Course in the Theory of Mental Tests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Harold Gulliksen
Harold Gulliksen*
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, The University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An outline for a course in test theory is presented, together with a list of assignments, problems, and a bibliography. The course has been given in the Psychology Department of the University of Chicago. The material is presented in outline form at the present time because of the increased need for training in test theory due to the increase in the use of psychological tests for classification of military personnel, and because much of the material in such a course must be selected from a wide array of articles in the literature. This material is presented in order that an organized body of material for instructional purposes may be readily available to those interested.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 1943 , pp. 223 - 245
Copyright
Copyright © 1943 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.)

Footnotes

*

On leave from the University of Chicago for a government research project at the College Entrance Examination Board, Princeton, New Jersey.

References

Adkins, Dorothy C. A comparative study of methods of selecting items. Dissertation on file in library of Ohio State University. Abstract, Psychology Library.Google Scholar
Adkins, Dorothy C., and Toops, Herbert A., Simplified formulas for item selection and construction. Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, Leonard P., A scale for measuring the quality of handwriting of school children, New York: Publication on Measurement in Education, Division of Education, 1911.Google Scholar
Babitz, Milton, and Keys, Noel. A method for approximating the average intercorrelation coefficient by correlating the parts with the sum of the parts. Psychometrika, 1940, 5, 283–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Board of Examinations, The University of Chicago. Manual of Examination Methods Second Edition, (pp. 177–177). Chicago: Univ. Chicago Bookstore, 1937.Google Scholar
Boring, E. G. Mathematical vs. scientific significance. Psychol. Bull., 1919, 16, 335–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boring, E. G. The logic of the normal law of error in mental measurement. Amer. J. Psychol., 1920, 31, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradford, Leland P. The effect of practice upon standard errors of estimate. Psychol. Monogr., 1940, 52(3), 56–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, William, and Thomson, Godfrey. 1921. Essentials of mental measurement. Cambridge Univ. Press. Pp. viii + 216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buros, Oscar K. Educational, Psychological, and Personality Tests of 1933, 1934, and 1935 (pp. 83–83). New Brunswick, New Jersey: School of Education, Rutgers University, 1936.Google Scholar
Buros, Oscar K. Educational, Psychological, and Personality Tests of 1936 (pp. 141–141). New Brunswick, New Jersey: School of Education, Rutgers University, 1937.Google Scholar
Buros, Oscar K. The 1938 Mental Measurements Yearbook (pp. xiv–xiv). New Brunswick, New Jersey: School of Education, Rutgers University, 1938.Google Scholar
Buros, Oscar K. The 1940 Mental Measurements Yearbook (pp. xxi–xxi). New Brunswick, New Jersey: School of Education, Rutgers University, 1941.Google Scholar
Burt, Cyril. In Hartog, P. J., and Rhodes, E. C.(Eds.), The Marks of Examiners (pp. xix–xix). London: Macmillan and Company, 1936.Google Scholar
Douglass, H. R. Some observations and data on certain methods of measuring the predictive significance of the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. J. educ. Psychol., 1934, 25, 225–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressel, Paul L. Some remarks on the Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficient. Psychometrika, 1940, 5, 305–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlap, Jack W. Note on the computation of bi-serial correlation in item evaluation. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlap, Jack W. Nomograph for computing bi-serial correlations. Psychometrika, 1939, 1, 59–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlap, Jack and Kurtz, A. K. Handbook of statistical nomographs and formulas (pp. vii–vii). New York: World Book Company, 1932.Google Scholar
Edgerton, H. A. and Toops, H. A. A formula for finding the average inter-correlation coefficient for unranked raw scores without solving any of the individual intercorrelations. J. educ. Psychol., 1928, 19, 131–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgerton, H. A. and Kolbe, Laverne E. The method of minimum variation for the combination of criteria. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 183–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Englehart, Max D. Unique types of achievement test exercises. Psychometrika, 1942, 7, 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flanagan, John C. A short method for selecting the best combination of test items for a particular purpose. Psychol. Bull., 1936, 33, 603–604.Google Scholar
Flanagan, John C. Scaled scores, New York: Cooperative Test Service, 1939.Google Scholar
Freeman, Frank N. A critique of the Yerkes-Bridges-Hardwick comparison of the Binet-Simon and point scales. Psychol. Rev., 1917, 24, 484–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Frank N. Mental tests: Their history, principles, and applications, Cambridge, Mass.: The Riverside Press, Rev., 1939.Google Scholar
Frisch, Ragnar. 1934. Statistical confluence analysis by means of complete regression systems. Oslo.Google Scholar
Garrett, Henry E. The discriminant function and its use in psychology. Psychometrika, 1943, 8, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. The determination of item difficulty when chance success is a factor. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 259–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. Psychometric methods, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. The psychophysics of mental test difficulty. Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 121–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulliksen, Harold. The content reliability of a test. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkes, H. E., Lindquist, E. F., and Mann, C. R. The construction and use of achievement examinations, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company, 1936.Google Scholar
Hildreth, G. H. A bibliography of mental tests and rating scales 2nd Ed., (pp. xxiv–xxiv). New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1939.Google Scholar
Holmes, Henry W. A descriptive bibliography of measurement in elementary subjects, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1917.Google Scholar
Holzinger, Karl J., and Clayton, Blythe. Further experiments in the application of Spearman's prophecy formula. J. educ. Psychol., 1925, 16, 289–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, Paul. Item selection by the method of successive residuals. J. exper. Educ., 1934, 2, 254–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, Paul. Increasing the efficiency of selection tests. The Personnel Journal, 1934, 12, 254–259.Google Scholar
Horst, Paul. Obtaining a composite measure from different measures of the same attributes. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, Paul. Item selection by means of a maximizing function. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 229–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, Clark L. Aptitude testing (pp. xiv–xiv). New York: World Book Company, 1928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Truman L. Interpretation of educational measurements, New York: World Book Company, 1927.Google Scholar
Kelley, Truman L. Statistical methods (pp. xi–xi). New York: Macmillan Company, 1924.Google Scholar
Kelley, Truman L. The principles and techniques of mental measurement. Amer. J. Psychol., 1923, 34, 408–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuder, G. F. Nomograph for point biserial r, biserial r, and fourfold correlations. Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 135–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuder, G. F. Richardson, M. W. The theory of the estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. M., and Symonds, P. M. New type or objective tests: a summary of investigations (Oct. 1931-Oct. 1933). J. educ. Psychol., 1934, 25, 161–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lentz, T. F., Hirshstein, Bertha, and Finch, J. H. Evaluation of methods of evaluating test items. J. educ. Psychol., 1932, 23, 344–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, E. F. Statistical analysis in educational research, New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1940.Google Scholar
Long, John A., Sandiford, Peter, et al. 1935. The validation of test items. Bull. Dept. Educ. Res., Ontario Coll. Educ., No. 3, 126 pages.Google Scholar
McCall, W. A. How to measure in education (pp. xii–xii). New York: The Macmillan Company, 1922.Google Scholar
Merrill, Walter W. Jr.. Sampling theory in item analysis. Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, Paul (Editor). Conference on examinations at Dinard, France, Sept. 16–19, 1938 (pp. xiii–xiii). New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1939.Google Scholar
Monroe, Walter S. The theory of educational measurements, New York: Houghton-Mifflin Company, 1923.Google Scholar
Monroe, Walter S. A note on efiiciency of prediction. J. educ. Psychol., 1934, 25, 547–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, Clarence Carl. The rights-minus wrongs method of correcting chance factors in the T-F examination. J. genet. Psychol., 1940, 57, 317–326.Google Scholar
Monroe, Walter S. and Englehart, Max D. Scientific study of educational problems, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1936.Google Scholar
Mosier, Charles I. A note on item analysis and the criterion of internal consistency. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mosier, Charles I. Psychophysics and mental test theory: fundamental postulates and elementary theorems. Psychol. Rev., 1940, 47, 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Society for the Study of Education. 17th Yearbook, Part II, Bloomington, Ill.: Public School Publishing Company, 1918.Google Scholar
Orleans, Jacob S. Measurement in education (pp. xvi–xvi). New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons., 1937.Google Scholar
Otis, A. S. The method for finding the correspondence between scores in two tests. J. educ. Psychol., 1922, 13, 529–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otis, A. S. A method of inferring the change in a coefficient of correlation resulting from a change in the heterogeneity of the group. J. educ. Psychol., 1922, 13, 293–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otis, A. S., and Knollin, H. E. The reliability of the Binet scale and of pedagogical scales. J. educ. Research, 1921, 4, 121–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M. W. Abac for computing tetrachoric coefficients in item analysis, Chicago: Univ. Chicago Board of Examination, 1935.Google Scholar
Richardson, M. W. Notes on the rationale of item analysis. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M. W. The relation of difficulty to the differential validity of a test. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M. W., and Adkins, Dorothy C. A rapid method of selecting test items. J. educ. Psychol., 1938, 29, 547–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M. W., and Kuder, G. F. The computation of test reliability by the method of rational equivalence. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 681–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruch, G. M. and Stoddard, G. P. Test and measurements in high-school instruction, New York: World Book Company, 1927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruch, G. M., Ackerson, L., and Jackson, J. P. An empirical study of the Spearman-Brown formula as applied to educational test material. J. educ. Psychol., 1926, 17, 309–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruger, Georgie J. Bibliography of psychological tests, New York: Bureau of Educational Measurements, 1918.Google Scholar
Rulon, Phillip J. A simplified procedure for determining the reliability of a test by split halves. Harvard educ. Rev., 1939, 9, 99–103.Google Scholar
Segel, David. A note of an error made in investigations of homogeneous grouping. J. educ. Psychol., 1933, 24, 64–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, B. O. Logical aspects of educational measurement, New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spearman, Charles. Correlation from faulty data. Brit. J. Psychol., 1910, 3, 271–295.Google Scholar
Spearman, Charles. Demonstration of formulae for true measurement of correlation. Amer. J. Psychol., 1907, 18, 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, J. M. Weighting questions in the essay-type examination. J. educ. Psychol., 1938, 29, 481–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, J. M. and Richardson, M. W. A note concerning the combination of test scores. J. gen. Psychol., 1933, 8, 460–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starch, D. and Elliot, E. C. 1912. Reliability of grading high-school work in English. School Review, September, 442–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starch, D. and Elliot, E. C. 1913. Reliability of grading high-school work in mathematics. School Review, April, 254–259.Google Scholar
Starch, D. and Elliot, E. C. 1913. Reliability of grading high-school work in history. School Review, December. 676–681.Google Scholar
Stern, William. The psychological methods of testing intelligence, Baltimore: Warwick and York, 1914.Google Scholar
Swineford, F. Validity of test items. J. educ. Psychol., 1936, 27, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. On finding equivalent scores in tests of intelligence. J. appl. Psychol., 1922, 6, 29–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. A method for scoring tests. Psychol. Bull., 1919, 16, 235–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. A method of scaling psychological and educational tests. J. educ. Psychol, 1925, 16, 433–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. The mental age concept. Psychol. Rev., 1926, 33, 268–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. The absolute zero in intelligence measurement. Psychol. Rev., 1928, 35, 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. The reliability and validity of tests, Ann Arbor, Mich.: Edwards Brothers. Planographed, 1931.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. Fundamentals of statistics (pp. xvi–xvi). New York: The Macmillan Company, 1924.Google Scholar
Thurstone, T. G. The difficulty of a test and its diagnostic value. J. educ. Psychol., 1932, 23, 335–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toops, H. A., and Symonds, P. M. What shall we expect of the A. Q.?. J. educ. Psychol., 1922, 13, 513–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Travers, R. M. W. The use of a discriminant function in the treatment of psychological group differences. Psychometrika, 1939, 4, 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Helen M. Studies in the history of statistical method (pp. 186–186). Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Company, 1929.Google Scholar
Whipple, Guy M. Manual of mental and physical tests, Baltimore: Warwick and York, 1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilks, S. S. Weighting systems for linear functions of correlated variables when there is no dependent variable. Psychometrika, 1938, 3, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yerkes, R. M., Bridges, J. W., and Hardwick, R. S. A point scale for measuring mental ability, Baltimore: Warwick and York, 1915.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed