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

被引:5
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 34 条
[1]   Seriousness checks are useful to improve data validity in online research [J].
Aust, Frederik ;
Diedenhofen, Birk ;
Ullrich, Sebastian ;
Musch, Jochen .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2013, 45 (02) :527-535
[2]   WHAT ONE INTELLIGENCE-TEST MEASURES - A THEORETICAL ACCOUNT OF THE PROCESSING IN THE RAVEN PROGRESSIVE MATRICES TEST [J].
CARPENTER, PA ;
JUST, MA ;
SHELL, P .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1990, 97 (03) :404-431
[3]  
Claudy J. G., 1978, APPL PSYCH MEAS, V2, P25, DOI [10.1177/014662167800200102, DOI 10.1177/014662167800200102]
[4]   USING CHOICE-WEIGHTED SCORING OF MULTIPLE-CHOICE TESTS FOR DETERMINATION OF GRADES IN COLLEGE COURSES [J].
CROSS, LH ;
ROSS, FK ;
GELLER, ES .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL EDUCATION, 1980, 48 (04) :296-301
[5]   EMPIRICAL CHOICE WEIGHTING UNDER GUESS AND DO NOT GUESS DIRECTIONS [J].
CROSS, LH ;
FRARY, RB .
EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1978, 38 (03) :613-620
[6]   THE EFFECT ON TEST RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF SCORING APTITUDE AND ACHIEVEMENT-TESTS WITH WEIGHTS FOR EVERY CHOICE [J].
DAVIS, FB ;
FIFER, G .
EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1959, 19 (02) :159-170
[7]  
Diedenhofen B., 2013, COCRON STAT COMP 2 M
[8]  
Downey R. G., 1979, APPL PSYCH MEAS, V3, P453, DOI [10.1177/014662167900300403, DOI 10.1177/014662167900300403]
[9]   RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF ITEM OPTION WEIGHTING SCHEMES [J].
ECHTERNACHT, G .
EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1976, 36 (02) :301-309
[10]   A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests: Application to abstract reasoning [J].
Embretson, SE .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 1998, 3 (03) :380-396