How many questions should I answer? Using bias profiles to estimate optimal bias and maximum score on formula-scored tests

被引:24
作者
Higham, Philip A. [1 ]
Arnold, Michelle M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Southampton, Sch Psychol, Southampton SO17 1BJ, Hants, England
来源
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY | 2007年 / 19卷 / 4-5期
关键词
D O I
10.1080/09541440701326121
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
To maximise multiple choice test scores under formula scoring, students must be able to monitor their knowledge level, reporting correct answers and withholding incorrect ones. Importantly though, neither metacognitive monitoring nor optimal criterion setting has received much attention in the formula-scoring literature. The present research examined the role that both these parameters have on obtained test score. Students wrote three exams under formula-scoring rules, and from these data, we created bias profiles using methodology developed by Higham ( 2007), which allowed us to estimate the optimal number of questions that students needed to answer to maximise their scores. The results indicated that higher scoring students monitored their knowledge best, but that all students tended to guess too often, lowering their test scores. This conservatism maintained despite feedback from previous tests. The results also showed that monitoring is a stable participant skill that generalises across tests.
引用
收藏
页码:718 / 742
页数:25
相关论文
共 21 条
[11]   Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy [J].
Koriat, A ;
Goldsmith, M .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1996, 103 (03) :490-517
[12]   FORMULA SCORING AND NUMBER-RIGHT SCORING [J].
LORD, FM .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT, 1975, 12 (01) :7-11
[13]  
Muijtjens AMM, 1999, MED EDUC, V33, P267
[14]   MEMORY AND METAMEMORY PERFORMANCE IN OLDER ADULTS - ONE DEFICIT OR 2 [J].
PERFECT, TJ ;
STOLLERY, B .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION A-HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1993, 46 (01) :119-135
[15]   Improving students' self-evaluation of learning for key concepts in textbook materials [J].
Rawson, Katherine A. ;
Dunlosky, John .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 19 (4-5) :559-579
[16]   EFFECTS OF DIFFERING INSTRUCTIONS AND GUESSING FORMULAS ON RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY [J].
SAX, G ;
COLLET, L .
EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1968, 28 (04) :1127-&
[17]  
Sherriffs AC., 1954, Journal of Educational Psychology, V45, P81, DOI DOI 10.1037/H0053756
[18]   EFFECT OF GUESSING STRATEGY ON OBJECTIVE TEST SCORES [J].
SLAKTER, MJ .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT, 1968, 5 (03) :217-221
[19]  
SLAKTER MJ, 1968, J EDUC MEAS, V5, P41
[20]   A SCORING METHOD FOR MENTAL TESTS [J].
Thurstone, L. L. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1919, 16 (07) :235-240