Item response theory.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
IRT models the probability of a correct response as a function of an examinee's latent proficiency and item characteristics, independent of the specific test-taker sample, unlike Classical Test Theory, which yields sample-dependent scores.
“Item Response Theory (IRT), regarded as a modern test theory, models the probability of a correct response as a function of an examinee’s latent proficiency (θ) and item characteristics, independent of the specific test-taker sample—unlike Classical Test Theory, which yields sample-dependent scores24,25.”
From Leveraging computerized adaptive testing for cost-effective evaluation of large language models in medical benchmarking (2026) · cites this paper as [24]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scaling of theory-of-mind tasks.
Wellman, H. M., & Liu, D. (2004) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00691.x · Cited by 1,980 · see citing works
Recommendations for reporting the results of studies of instrument and scale development and testing
Streiner, D. L., & Kottner, J. (2014) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.12402 · Cited by 463 · see citing works
The Addiction Severity Index at 25: Origins, contributions, and transitions
McLellan, A. T., Cacciola, J. C., Alterman, A. I., Rikoon, S. H., & Carise, C. (2006) · The American Journal on Addictions · doi:10.1080/10550490500528316 · Cited by 450 · see citing works
Plausibility and belief in autobiographical memory
Scoboria, A., Mazzoni, G., Kirsch, I., & Relyea, M. (2004) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1062 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
Mazefsky, C. A., Yu, L., White, S. W., Siegel, M., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2018) · Autism Research · doi:10.1002/aur.1947 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Witkiewitz, K., Vowles, K. E., McCallion, E., Frohe, T., Kirouac, M., & Maisto, S. A. (2015) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/add.12964 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Olino, T. M., Yu, L., Klein, D. N., Rohde, P., Seeley, J. R., Pilkonis, P. A., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (2012) · International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1002/mpr.1348 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Efficient Standard Error Formulas of Ability Estimators with Dichotomous Item Response Models
Magis, D. (2016) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/s11336-015-9443-3 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Zheng, T., Jiang, Z., Liu, J., & Feng, S. (2026) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02671-w · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Embretson, S. E., & Diehl, K. A.
- ORCID
- Embretson, Susan E.
- Venue
- Encyclopedia of psychology, Vol. 4.
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2000
- Pages
- 378-380
- OpenAlex
- W4245044266
- Cited by
- 595
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 44 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 13
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- item response theory, psychometrics, latent trait models, test theory, item response models
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
