a systematic assessment of ‘none of the above’ on multiple choice tests in a first year psychology classroom
Clicks: 73
ID: 217094
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
21.6
/100
73 views
13 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #14 of 15 articles by views in biotechnology progress
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Multiple choice writing guidelines are decidedly split on the use of ‘none of the above’ (NOTA), with some authors discouraging and others advocating its use. Moreover, empirical studies of NOTA have produced mixed results. Generally, these studies have utilized NOTA as either the correct response or a distractor and assessed its effect on difficulty and discrimination. In these studies, NOTA commonly yields increased difficulty when it is used as the correct response, and no change in discrimination regardless of usage. However, when NOTA is implemented as a distractor, rarely is consideration given to the distractor that could have been written in its place. Here, we systematically replaced each distractor in a series of questions with NOTA across different versions of an Introductory Psychology examination. This approach allowed us to quantify the quality of each distractor based on its relative discrimination index and assess the effect of NOTA relative to the quality of distractor it replaced. Moreover, our use of large Introductory Psychology examinations afforded highly stable difficulty and discrimination estimates. We found that NOTA increased question difficulty only when it was the correct response, with no effect on difficulty of replacing any distractor type with NOTA. Moreover, we found that NOTA decreased discrimination when it replaced the most effective distractors, with no effect on discrimination of replacing either the correct response or lowest quality distractor with NOTA. These results replicate the common finding that inclusion of NOTA as the correct response increases question difficulty by equally luring high-performing and low-performing students toward distractors. Moreover, we have shown that including NOTA as a distractor can reduce discrimination if used in lieu of a well written alternative, suggesting that multiple choice authors should avoid using NOTA on multiple choice tests.
| Reference Key |
pachai2015canadiana
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Matthew V. Pachai;David DiBattista;Joseph A. Kim |
| Journal | biotechnology progress |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2015.3.2
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.