ABSTRACT
Introduction: A problem that applied researchers and practitioners often face is the fact that different institutions within research consortia use different scales to evaluate the same construct which makes comparison of the results and pooling challenging. In order to meaningfully pool and compare the scores, the scales should be harmonized. The aim of this paper is to use different test equating methods to harmonize the ADHD scores from Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) and to see which method leads to the result. Methods: Sample consists of 1551 parent reports of children aged 10-11.5 years from Raine study on both CBCL and SDQ (common persons design). We used linear equating, kernel equating, Item Response Theory (IRT), and the following machine learning methods: regression (linear and ordinal), random forest (regression and classification) and Support Vector Machine (regression and classification). Efficacy of the methods is operationalized in terms of the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of differences between predicted and observed scores in cross-validation. Results and discussion: Results showed that with single group design, it is the best to use the methods that use item level information and that treat the outcome as interval measurement level (regression approach).