REFERENCES
- Bodescu, D. V., & Bo, Y. (in press). Analyzing test-taking behavior: Decision theory meets psychometric theory. Psychometrika.
- Chuderski, A. (2013). When are fluid intelligence and working memory isomorphic and when are they not? Intelligence, 41, 244–262. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2013.04.003
- Eklöf, H. (2010). Skill and will: Test-taking motivation and assessment quality. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17, 345–356.
- Frazier, P., & Yu, A. J. (2008). Sequential hypothesis testing under stochastic deadlines. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 465–472.
- Goldhammer, F. (2015). Measuring Ability, Speed, or Both? Challenges, Psychometric Solutions and What Can Be Gained from Experimental Control. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 13(3–4), 133–164.
- Goldhammer, F., Naumann, J., Stelter, A., Tóth, K., Rölke, H., & Klieme, E. (2014). The time on task effect in reading and problem solving is moderated by task difficulty and skill: Insights from a computer-based large-scale assessment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 608–626.
- Lavergne, C., & Vigneau, F. (1997). Response speed on aptitude tests as an index of intellectual performance: A developmental perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 283–290. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00037-8
- Pieters, J. P., & van der Ven, A. (1982). Precision, speed, and distraction in time-limit tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 93–109. doi:10.1177/014662168200600110
- Ranger, J., & Kuhn, J.-T. (2014). An accumulator model for responses and response times in tests based on the proportional hazards model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67, 388–407. doi:10.1111/bmsp.2014.67.issue-3
- Ranger, J., & Kuhn, T. (in press). A mixture proportional hazards model with random effects for response times in tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement.
- Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 353–387.
- Roskam, E. E. (1997). Models for speed and time-limit tests. In W. J. van der Linden & R. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 187–208). New York, NY: Springer.
- Rutkowski, D., & Wild, J. (2015). Stakes matter: Student motivation and the validity of student assessments for teacher evaluation. Educational Assessment, 20, 165–179.
- Van der Maas, H. L. J., Molenaar, D., Maris, G., Kievit, R. A., & Borsboom, D. (2011). Cognitive psychology meets psychometric theory: On the relation between process models for decision making and latent variable models for individual differences. Psychological Review, 118, 339–356.
- Van der Maas, H. L. J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2005). A psychometric analysis of chess expertise. American Journal of Psychology, 118, 29–60.
- Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
- Yamamoto, K., & Everson, H. (1997). Modeling the effects of test length and test time on parameter estimation using the hybrid model. In J. Rost & R. Langeheine (Eds.), Applications of latent trait and latent class models in the social sciences (pp. 89–98). New York, NY: Waxmann.