T-Score Procedure vs Rights only or Corrected Formula Scores

1968 ◽  
Vol 23 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1305-1306
Author(s):  
Jin Ong
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Data ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
General Psychology ◽  
Multiple Choice Tests ◽  
T Score ◽  
Choice Tests

T-score procedure was suggested in place of the rights only or corrected formula score for guessing. Multiple-choice tests were administered to 179 general psychology students. T scores using both rights only and corrected formula were calculated. Results showed that the empirical data fit the defined values of the T score quite well and that the T scores for all individual students from both procedures are comparable.

Multiple-Choice Tests: Polytomous IRT Models Misestimate Item Information

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel A. García-Pérez
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Data ◽  
Choice Model ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Information Functions ◽  
Multiple Choice Tests ◽  
Test Information ◽  
Choice Tests ◽  
Polytomous Models

AbstractLikert-type items and polytomous models are preferred over yes–no items and dichotomous models for the measurement of attitudes, because a broader range of response categories provides superior item and test information functions. Yet, for ability assessment with multiple-choice tests, the dichotomous three-parameter logistic model (3PLM) is often chosen. Because multiple-choice responses are polytomous before they are categorized as correct or incorrect, a polytomous characterization might render more efficient tests. Early studies suggested that the nominal response model (NRM) is advantageous in this respect. We investigate the reasons for those results and the outcomes of a polytomous characterization based on the multiple-choice model (MCM). An empirical data set is used to compare polytomous (NRM and MCM) and dichotomous (3PLM) characterizations of a test. The results revealed superior item and test information functions from polytomous models. Yet, close inspection suggests that these outcomes are artifactual and two simulation studies confirmed this point. These studies revealed a structural inadequacy of the NRM for multiple-choice items and that the MCM characterization outperforms the 3PLM characterization only when distractor endorsement frequencies vary non-monotonically with ability, although this feature is rarely observed in empirical data sets.

Two Models for Multiple Choice Tests

1968 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Brown Grier ◽  
Raymond Ditrichs
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Tests ◽  
Choice Tests

Using multiple-choice tests as learning events

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeri L. Little ◽  
Elizabeth Ligon Bjork ◽  
Ashley Kees
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Tests ◽  
Choice Tests

Cheating Probabilities on Multiple Choice Tests

1997 ◽  
Vol 74 (10) ◽  
pp. 1185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaspard T. Rizzuto ◽  
Fred Walters
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Tests ◽  
Choice Tests

Multiple-objective optimization applied in extracting multiple-choice tests

2021 ◽  
Vol 105 ◽  
pp. 104439
Author(s):  
Tram Nguyen ◽  
Toan Bui ◽  
Hamido Fujita ◽  
Tzung-Pei Hong ◽  
Ho Dac Loc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Objective ◽  
Multiple Objective Optimization ◽  
Multiple Choice Tests ◽  
Choice Tests
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document