This article examines the differences between computer adaptive (CAT) and self-adapted testing (SAT) along with possible differences in feedback conditions and gender. Areas of comparison include measurement precision/ efficiency and student test characteristics. Participants included 623 undergraduates from a large Midwestern university who took math placement tests in a 4 (condition) × 2 (feedback) × 2 (gender) design. The four conditions included: a) CAT; b) SAT-Global; c) SAT-Individual; and d) SAT-Placebo groups. Multivariate Analysis of Variance was used to analyze the data. The perceived control hypothesis was used as a framework to explain the differences between CAT and SAT. Results indicated that measurement efficiency is differentially affected by the type of test condition with the SAT-Global condition performing worse than the others. Moreover, there were significant gender effects with regard to ability, test length, and test anxiety. There was no relative advantage for the inclusion of item feedback. Implications for computerized adaptive testing and areas of future research are discussed. fewer items than traditional fixed-item tests [1]. However, the increased efficiency of computerized testing may come at the cost of higher test anxiety for some examinees [2].As an attempt to give the examinee increased control over the testing situation and thereby reduce test anxiety, self-adapted testing (SAT) is a technique that has met with some success [3,4]. Instead of the computer systematically selecting an item in an attempt to maximize information at the examinee's current ability estimate, SAT lets individuals select items calibrated to a "desired" (relative) difficulty level. Otherwise, the calculation of ability level and estimate precision is carried out as it normally is with CAT. For example, before an individual is presented with an item, he/she is asked how difficult of an item they would prefer. The levels of difficulty can vary, typically ranging from three (easy, medium, hard) up to eight. Using the difficulty range chosen by the individual, the algorithm selects items specifically tailored to the present ability estimate. SAT has been found to lessen the increase in anxiety that occurs with computerized testing [3][4][5].Research has not fully investigated the cause of anxiety reduction in SAT. Three hypotheses were offered by Wise et al. [6]. One possible explanation, the self-monitoring hypothesis, states that SAT allows the examinee access to information beyond which would be available to a traditional computerized testing algorithm (e.g., current affective (emotional) and motivational states) [7]. For example, some examinees begin an examination by feeling apprehensive, anxious, or insecure about their ability. In other cases, examinees may feel quite optimistic and confident in their mastery of the test content. This additional information about affective and motivational states allows the student to tailor the test to their specific psychological states and thus reduce their anxiety....

No abstract

No abstract