The effects of test difficulty manipulation in computerized adaptive testing and self-adapted testing.

Compared easy and difficult versions of self-adapted tests (SATs) and computerized adaptive tests (CATs) among a sample of 187 high school students (aged 17–19 yrs). No significant differences were found among the 4 tests (easy vs difficult SAT, easy vs difficult CAT) for either estimated ability or posttest state anxiety. Significant differences were found for the number of correct responses, testing time, anxiety change, and standard error of ability. The difficulty manipulation was successful as easy and difficult tests differed in the number of items passed. Conditions with high percentage of items passed produced less posttest than pretest anxiety for both SATs and the easy CATs. In the difficult CAT condition, the number of correct responses was lower and posttest anxiety exceeded pretest anxiety. Results suggest that SAT research should continue to take into account the variable “number of items passed” as it may hide the effects on anxiety when CATs and SATs are compared. The 2 easy conditions show good psychometric and motivational characteristics. However, the easy CAT gave a higher precision than the easy SAT. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)