LAUSR

Proctored remote testing of cognitive abilities in the private homes of test-takers is becoming an increasingly popular alternative to standard psychological assessments in test centers or classrooms. Because these tests are administered under less standardized conditions, differences in computer devices or situational contexts might contribute to measurement biases that impede fair comparisons between test-takers. Because it is unclear whether cognitive remote testing might be a feasible assessment approach for young children, the present study (N = 1,590) evaluated a test of reading comprehension administered to children at the age of 8 years. To disentangle mode from setting effects, the children finished the test either in the classroom on paper or computer or remotely on tablets or laptops. Analyses of differential response functioning found notable differences between assessment conditions for selected items. However, biases in test scores were largely negligible. Only for children with below-average reading comprehension small setting effects between on-site and remote testing were observed. Moreover, response effort was higher in the three computerized test versions, among which, reading on tablets most strongly resembled the paper condition. Overall, these results suggest that, on average, even for young children remote testing introduces little measurement bias.