ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Reanalysis of the German PISA Data: A Comparison of Different Approaches for Trend Estimation With a Particular Emphasis on Mode Effects.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Teleassessment can overestimate the risk of learning disability in first and second grade of primary school.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Remote Testing of Reading Comprehension in 8-Year-Old Children: Mode and Setting Effects.Assessment · 2024Article
- Power Analysis for the Wald, LR, Score, and Gradient Tests in a Marginal Maximum Likelihood Framework: Applications in IRT.Psychometrika · 2023Article
- Exploring the Multiverse of Analytical Decisions in Scaling Educational Large-Scale Assessment Data: A Specification Curve Analysis for PISA 2018 Mathematics Data.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2022Article
- On the Choice of the Item Response Model for Scaling PISA Data: Model Selection Based on Information Criteria and Quantifying Model Uncertainty.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Digitalization in psychology: A bit of challenge and a byte of success.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Review
- The inattentive on-screen reading: Reading medium affects attention and reading comprehension under time pressure.Learning and instruction · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
International large-scale assessments, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), are conducted to provide information on the effectiveness of education systems. In PISA, the target population of 15-year-old students is assessed every 3 years. Trends show whether competencies have changed in the countries between PISA cycles. In order to provide valid trend estimates, it is desirable to retain the same test conditions and statistical methods in all PISA cycles. In PISA 2015, however, the test mode changed from paper-based to computer-based tests, and the scaling method was changed. In this paper, we investigate the effects of these changes on trend estimation in PISA using German data from all PISA cycles (2000-2015). Our findings suggest that the change from paper-based to computer-based tests could have a severe impact on trend estimation but that the change of the scaling model did not substantially change the trend estimates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.