Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8,022

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores

Rozeboom, William W., Lord, Frederic M., Novick, Melvin R., Birnbaum, Allan·1969·American Educational Research Journal
DOI 10.2307/1162101
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This is a reprint of the orginal book released in 1968. Our primary goal in this book is to sharpen the skill, sophistication, and in- tuition of the reader in the interpretation of mental test data, and in the construction and use of mental tests both as instruments of psychological theory and as tools in the practical problems of selection, evaluation, and guidance. We seek to do this by exposing the reader to some psychologically meaningful statistical theories of mental test scores. Although this book is organized in terms of test-score theories and models, the practical applications and limitations of each model studied receive substantial emphasis, and these discussions are presented in as nontechnical a manner as we have found possible. Since this book catalogues a host of test theory models and formulas, it may serve as a reference handbook. Also, for a limited group of specialists, this book aims to provide a more rigorous foundation for further theoretical research than has heretofore been available.One aim of this book is to present statements of the assumptions, together with derivations of the implications, of a selected group of statistical models that the authors believe to be useful as guides in the practices of test construction and utilization. With few exceptions we have given a complete proof for each major result presented in the book. In many cases these proofs are simpler, more complete, and more illuminating than those originally offered. When we have omitted proofs or parts of proofs, we have generally provided a reference containing the omitted argument. We have left some proofs as exercises for the reader, but only when the general method of proof has already been demonstrated. At times we have proved only special cases of more generally stated theorems, when the general proof affords no additional insight into the problem and yet is substantially more complex mathematically.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1162101

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Items 101–178 of 178

Metadata

Authors
Rozeboom, W. W., Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R., & Birnbaum, A.
Venue
American Educational Research Journal
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1969-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
112
ISSN
0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/1162101
OpenAlex
W2084398551
Cited by
8,022
References
0
FWCI
114.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.