The purpose of this three-phase investigation was to develop and evaluate a computerized adaptive test of tonal memory. In the first phase, characteristics of commercially available tonal memory tests (instrument timbre, rhythmic complexity, tonality) were systematically varied and compared to determine the types of items most likely to yield reliable and valid scores. Results from ANOVA, factor-analytic, correlation, and regression analyses indicated that synthesizer-produced, varied-rhythm tonal and atonal melodies of four to nine notes would provide reliable and concurrently valid scores over a wide range of ability levels. In the second phase, the adaptive test was constructed, and its measurement precision and efficiency were evaluated in a series of computer-simulation analyses. Results showed that the adaptive test required 5 to 11 items to yield reliabilities from .80 to .90, and 80% fewer items to surpass the reliability of the Seashore Tonal Memory Test. In the final phase, the adaptive test was field-tested on the PLATO computer system. In line with the computer-simulation findings, the adaptive test required an average of 6.05, 8.55, and 11.60 items to reach reliabilities of .80, .85, and .90, respectively.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
2.
Bentley, A. (1966a). Measures of musical abilities.London: Harrap.
3.
Bentley, A. (1966b). Musical ability in children and its measurement.New York: October House.
4.
Bock, R. D., & Aitken, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: An application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.
5.
Bock, R. D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37, 431–444.
6.
Brown, J. M., & Weiss, D. J. (1977). An adaptive testing strategy for achievement test batteries (Research Report 77-6). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Psychometric Methods Program.
7.
Davies, J. B. (1971). New tests of musical aptitude. British Journal of Psychology, 62, 557–565.
8.
Davies, J. B. (1978). The psychology of music.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
9.
de la Torre, R., & Vispoel, W. P. (1991, April). The development and evaluation of a computerized adaptive testing system. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 338 711).
10.
Drake, R. M. (1957). Drake Musical Aptitude Tests.Sarasota, FL: Raleigh M. Drake.
11.
Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of educational measurement (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
12.
Green, B. F., Bock, R. D., Humphreys, L. G., Linn, R. L., & Reckase, M. D. (1984). Technical guidelines for assessing computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 7–375.
13.
Gronlund, N. E., & Linn, R. L. (1990). Measurement and evaluation in teaching (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
14.
Haken, L., & Schmid, V. (1984). The interactive music systems user's manual.Urbana, IL: Computer-Based Education Research Laboratory.
15.
Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications.Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff.
16.
Hinkle, D. E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (1988). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
17.
Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Item response theory: Application to psychological measurement.Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
18.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1988). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications.Chicago: SPSS.
19.
Levine, M. V., & Drasgow, F. (1983). Appropriateness measurement: Validating studies and variable ability models. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 109–131). New York: Academic Press.
20.
Lord, F. M. (1977). A broad-range tailored test of verbal ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 95–100.
21.
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems.Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22.
Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores.Menlo Park, CA: Addition-Wesley.
23.
Marsh, H. W. (1990). The structure of academic self-concept: The Marsh/Shavelson model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 623–636.
24.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychobgical Bulletin, 103, 391–410.
25.
McBride, J. R. (1985). Computerized adaptive testing. Educational Leadership, 43, 25–28.
26.
McBride, J. R. (1986). A computerized adaptive edition of the Differential Aptitude Tests. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 285 918). Psychological Corporation.
27.
McBride, J. R., & Martin, J. T. (1983). Reliability and validity of adaptive ability tests in a military setting. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 223–236). New York: Academic Press.
28.
McLeish, J. (1968). Musical cognition (Research Paper No. 2). London: Novello.
29.
Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I. J. (1991). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
30.
Moreno, K. E., Wetzel, C. D., McBride, J. R., & Weiss, D. J. (1984). Relationship between corresponding Armed Services Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) subtests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 155–163.
31.
Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. H. (1975). SPSS: Statistical package for the social sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
32.
Owen, R. J. (1969). A Bayesian approach to tailored testing. [Technical report.] Research Bulletin, 69-92. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
33.
Owen, R. J. (1975). A Bayesian sequential procedure for quantal responses in the context of adaptive mental testing. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 351–356.
34.
Reckase, M. D. (1985). The difficulty of items that measure more than one ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 401–412.
35.
Samejima, F. (1974). Normal Ogive model on the continuous response level in the multidimensional latent space. Psychometrika, 39, 111–121.
36.
Seashore, C. E. (1917). Auditory memory. Music Supervisors Journal, 4, 6–11.
37.
Seashore, C. E. (1919). Manual of instructions and interpretations of measures of musical talents.Chicago: C. F. Stoelting.
38.
Seashore, C. E. (1939). Psychology of music.New York: McGraw-Hill.
39.
Seashore, C. E., Lewis, D., & Saetveit, J. C. (1960). Manual of instructions and interpretations of measures of musical talents (2nd edition). New York: The Psychological Corporation.
40.
Shuter-Dyson, R., & Gabriel, C. (1981). The psychology of musical ability (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.
41.
Stankov, L., & Horn, J. L. (1980). Human abilities revealed through auditory tests. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 21–44.
42.
Swaminathan, H., & Gifford, J. A. (1986). Bayesian estimation in the three-parameter logistic model. Psychometrika, 51, 589–601.
43.
Sympson, J. B., Weiss, D. J., & Ree, M. (1982). Predictive validity of conventional and adaptive tests in an Air Force training environment (AF HRL-TR-81-40). Brooks Air Force Base, San Antonio, TX: USAF Human Resources Laboratory.
44.
Trabin, I., & Weiss, D. J. (1983). The person response curve fit of individuals to item response theory models. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 83–108). New York: Academic Press.
45.
Tatsuoka, K. K. (1986). A cognitive error diagnostic adaptive testing system. In the 28th ADCIS International Conference Proceedings. Washington, DC: ADCIS.
46.
Tatsuoka, K. K., Tatsuoka, M. M. & Baillie, R. (1984). Application of adaptive testing to a fraction test (Research Report 84-3-NIE). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois, Computer-Based Education Research Laboratory.
47.
Thissen, D. (1990) Reliability and measurement. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 161–186). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
48.
Urry, V. W. (1977). Tailored testing: A successful application of latent trait theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 181–196.
49.
Vispoel, W. P. (1987). An adaptive test of musical memory: An application of item response theory to the assessment of musical ability (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Illinois: Urbana-Champaign). Dissertation Abstracts International, 59, 79A.
50.
Wainer, H. (1990). Introduction and history. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 1–21). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51.
Weiss, D. J. (1982). Improving measurement quality and efficiency with adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 473–492.
52.
Weiss, D. J. (1985). Adaptive testing by computer. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 774–789.
53.
Wing, H. D. (1961). Wing Standardized Tests of Musical Intelligence.Windsor, England: NFER Publishing Company.
54.
Wing, H. D. (1970). Tests of musical ability and appreciation (2nd ed.). The British Journal of Psychology: Monograph Supplements, 28.
55.
Wingersky, M. S., Barton, M. A., & Lord, F. M. (1982). LOGIST user's guide.Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
