Empirical Option Weights Improve the Validity of a Multiple-Choice Knowledge Test

被引:4
|
作者
Diedenhofen, Birk [1 ]
Musch, Jochen [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Dusseldorf, Dept Expt Psychol, Univ Str 1,Bldg 23-03, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
关键词
empirical option weighting; multiple-choice test; reliability; validity; partial knowledge; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; TEST RELIABILITY; APTITUDE;
D O I
10.1027/1015-5759/a000295
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Standard dichotomous scoring of multiple-choice test items grants no partial credit for partial knowledge. Empirical option weighting is an alternative, polychotomous scoring method that uses the point-biserial correlation between option choices and total score as a weight for each answer alternative. Extant studies demonstrate that the method increases reliability of multiple-choice tests in comparison to conventional scoring. Most previous studies employed a correlational validation approach, however, and provided mixed findings with regard to the validity of empirical option weighting. The present study is the first investigation using an experimental approach to determine the reliability and validity of empirical option weighting. To obtain an external validation criterion, we experimentally induced various degrees of knowledge in a domain of which participants had no knowledge. We found that in comparison to dichotomous scoring, empirical option weighting increased both reliability and validity of a multiple-choice knowledge test employing distractors that were appealing to test takers with different levels of knowledge. A potential application of the present results is the computation and publication of empirical option weights for existing multiple-choice knowledge tests that have previously been scored dichotomously.
引用
收藏
页码:336 / 344
页数:9
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] Option weights should be determined empirically and not by experts when assessing knowledge with multiple-choice items
    Diedenhofen, Birk
    Musch, Jochen
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, 2019, 27 (03) : 256 - 266
  • [2] Development, item analysis, and initial reliability and validity of a multiple-choice knowledge of mental illnesses test for lay samples
    Compton, Michael T.
    Hankerson-Dyson, Dana
    Broussard, Beth
    PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH, 2011, 189 (01) : 141 - 148
  • [3] Guessing, Partial Knowledge, and Misconceptions in Multiple-Choice Tests
    Lau, Paul Ngee Kiong
    Lau, Sie Hoe
    Hong, Kian Sam
    Usop, Hasbee
    EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY, 2011, 14 (04): : 99 - 110
  • [4] An axiomatization of multiple-choice test scoring
    Zapechelnyuk, Andriy
    ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2015, 132 : 24 - 27
  • [5] Multiple-choice Testing: Knowledge, or Random Choice?
    Simonova, Ivana
    2014 IEEE GLOBAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION CONFERENCE (EDUCON), 2014, : 819 - 823
  • [6] The "None of the Above" Option in Multiple-Choice Testing: An Experimental Study
    DiBattista, David
    Sinnige-Egger, Jo-Anne
    Fortuna, Glenda
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL EDUCATION, 2014, 82 (02): : 168 - 183
  • [7] Validity of multiple-choice format in language testing
    吴雪媚
    校园英语, 2017, (30) : 214 - 214
  • [8] Theoretical evaluation of partial credit scoring of the multiple-choice test item
    Persson, Rasmus A. X.
    METRON-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STATISTICS, 2023, 81 (02): : 143 - 161
  • [9] Knowledge Assessment: Squeezing Information From Multiple-Choice Testing
    Nickerson, Raymond S.
    Butler, Susan F.
    Carlin, Michael T.
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-APPLIED, 2015, 21 (02) : 167 - 177
  • [10] Measures of partial knowledge and unexpected responses in multiple-choice tests
    Chang, Shao-Hua
    Lin, Pei-Chun
    Lin, Zih-Chuan
    EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY, 2007, 10 (04): : 95 - 109