Kodo Keiryogaku (The Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics)
Online ISSN : 1880-4705
Print ISSN : 0385-5481
ISSN-L : 0385-5481
A subjective evaluation of a two-phase infants' standing broad jump test using item response theory
Author information

2007 Volume 34 Issue 2 Pages 155-170


The standing broad jump test performed by infants can apparently be too easy or too difficult for those with high and low motor abilities, respectively. This causes test subjects to become frustrated or bored, and leads to difficulties with evaluations. Therefore, the present study aimed to use item response theory to create a reliable and feasible two-phase subjective evaluation of the standing broad jump performed by infants.
Kindergarten children (n=196) performed a standing broad jump that was measured and videotaped. Nineteen measures (items) of body movement during the jump were categorically evaluated as ‘success’, ‘no opinion’, or ‘failure’.
The correlation matrix among the movement measures was analyzed using principal factor solution, and a one-dimensional structure among the measures was confirmed. The difficulty parameter and ability characteristic values were then obtained by applying item response theory. The correlation was high among difficulty parameters obtained separately from samples that had been randomly divided into two. The correlation was also high among θ values separately obtained from groups of items that had also been randomly divided into two. These results confirmed sample and item invariance. The mean value of θ according to age significantly varied, indicating that θ would reflect increasing motor ability with growth.
Based on the adaptive possibility to the item response theory data, the following types of two-phase testing were created that do not require complicated calculations :
1) A low-reliability, high feasibility type, in which the reliability coefficients of the first and second tests were 0.7 and 0.8, respectively.
2) A medium-reliability, medium-feasibility type, in which the reliability coefficients of the first and second tests were 0.8 and 0.85, respectively.
3) A high-reliability but low-feasibility type, in which the reliability coefficients of the first and second tests were 0.85 and 0.9, respectively.

Information related to the author
© 2007 The Behaviormetric Society
Previous article