01934cam a22004212u 4500001000800000005001700008007001400025008004100039035002000080037001900100040002700119088002100146091000800167100002200175245012400197260006800321300001000389500012000399500004600519520030700565521002400872530007900896533008100975650003301056650002701089650003601116650003201152650003501184650002401219650001901243650003301262650002401295655003001319700003601349710004801385856003701433984004201470543192520181019101230.0he u||024||||080220s1983 xxu ||| bt ||| | eng d 9(ericd)ED236207 aED236207bERIC aericdbengcericddMvI aETS-RR-83-26-ONR amfm1 aLord, Frederic M.10aComparison of IRT Observed-Score and True-Score 'Equatings.'h[microform] /cFrederic M. Lord and Marilyn S. Wingersky. a[Washington, D.C.] :bDistributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,c1983. a38 p. aSponsoring Agency: Office of Naval Research, Arlington, VA. Personnel and Training Research Programs Office.5ericd aContract Number: N00014-80-C-0402.5ericd aTwo methods of 'equating' tests using item response theory (IRT) are compared, one using true scores, the other using the estimated distribution of observed scores. On the data studied, they yield almost indistinguishable results. This is a reassuring result for users of IRT equating methods. (Author)8 aResearchers.bericd aMay also be available online. Address as at 14/8/18:uhttps://eric.ed.gov/ aMicrofiche.b[Washington D.C.]:cERIC Clearinghouseemicrofiches : positive.17aComparative Analysis.2ericd17aEquated Scores.2ericd07aEstimation (Mathematics)2ericd17aLatent Trait Theory.2ericd07aMeasurement Techniques.2ericd07aReliability.2ericd17aScores.2ericd07aStatistical Analysis.2ericd17aTrue Scores.2ericd 7aReports, Research.2ericd1 aWingersky, Marilyn S.,eauthor.2 aEducational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.41uhttps://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED236207 aANLcmc 2253 ED236207d77000000242208