Operational Calibration of the Circular-Response Optical-Mark-Reader Answer Sheets for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)

Initial Operational Test and Evaluation of New Optical-Mark-Reader Answer Sheets for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)

“…Answer-sheet effects similar to those obtained by Ree and Wegner (1990) and Bloxom, et al (1993) were expected in this study. Also, as in Bloxom, et al (1993), answer sheet effects were not expected on the power tests, because the number of items to be answered per unit of allowed time is much smaller than on speed tests --considerably reducing the influence of variation in the time required to fill in the answer spaces. However, the power tests were investigated here as a precautionary step.…”

“…The results of this study indicated that the speed tests of the ASVAB produce lower scores on the new, circular-response answer sheet than on the previously used vertical-response answer sheet; the results indicated no difference between the two answer sheets on the power tests. The direction and magnitude of the effects on speed tests --and on the score scale calibration needed to correct for these effects -were generally consistent with results obtained in earlier answer-sheet studies by Ree and Wegner (1990) and Bloxom et al (1993). Also, the lack of statistically significant answer-sheet effects on power tests was consistent with results obtained by Bloxom et al (1993).…”

“…The direction and magnitude of the effects on speed tests --and on the score scale calibration needed to correct for these effects -were generally consistent with results obtained in earlier answer-sheet studies by Ree and Wegner (1990) and Bloxom et al (1993). Also, the lack of statistically significant answer-sheet effects on power tests was consistent with results obtained by Bloxom et al (1993).…”

“…Mean number-right scores for the circular-response answer sheet were significantly lower than mean number-right scores for the vertical-response answer sheet on both NO (effect size = .26) and CS (effect size = .09) but not on any of the other tests. Obtaining slightly smaller effect sizes here than in Ree and Wegner (1990) can be attributed to the more restricted range for the military recruit population sampled in Bloxom, et al (1993) than for the military applicant population sampled in Ree and Wegner (1990).…”

“…In a replication and extension of this study, Bloxom, McCully, Branch, Waters, Barnes and Gribben (1993) conducted a randomized-groups experiment in which one group of military recruits took all tests of ASVAB 15c using the circular-response answer sheet; another group took the same ASVAB form using the vertical-response answer sheet. Mean number-right scores for the circular-response answer sheet were significantly lower than mean number-right scores for the vertical-response answer sheet on both NO (effect size = .26) and CS (effect size = .09) but not on any of the other tests.…”