VALIDITY OF THE COGNITIVE ABILITY TESTS – COMPARISON OF THE COMPUTERIZED ADAPTIVE TESTING WITH PAPER AND PENCIL AND COMPUTER-BASED FORMS OF ADMINISTRATIONS

The study analyses and compares the validity of computerized adaptive testing, paper and pencil and computer-based forms of cognitive abilities tests. The research was conducted on a sample of 803 secondary school students (567 paper and pencil, 236 computer-based/computerized adaptive administration; 363 males, 440 females), their mean age was 16.8 years (SD = 1.33). The test set consisted of the Test of Intellect Potential and the Vienna Matrices Test. Overall results showed that the validity of CAT was reasonably comparable across administration modes. Consistent with previous research, CAT selecting only a small number of items gave results which, in terms of validity, were only marginally different from the results of traditional administration. CAT simulated administration of the TIP was roughly 55% and VMT 54% more economical than the traditional version. These results indicate that CAT is a useful way of improving methodology of psychological testing.