Positional response bias in multiple-choice tests of learning: Its relation to testwiseness and guessing strategy.

Abstract

Although response sets have been extensively investigated as determiners of individual responses to personality tests, their impact on educational tests has not been well studied. In this study, I investigated positional response bias, testwiseness, and guessing strategy as components of variance in test responses on multiple-choice tests of learning. University students (A r = 62) enrolled in a learning skills course responded to two content exams, a testwiseness measure, and a guessing strategy measure. Of the students, 6 showed a statistically significant tendency to mark early options. The proportion of variance in test scores accounted for by positional response bias, testwiseness, and guessing strategy was . 18 (R = .43, p < .05). Scores on the content exams were confounded by students' degree of testwiseness and, in six cases, by a positional response bias.

Multiple‐choice and Constructed Response Tests of Ability: Race‐based Subgroup Performance Differences on Alternative Paper‐and‐pencil Test Formats

“…Testwiseness. It is widely recognized that performance on multiplechoice tests is susceptible to specific test-taking strategies or testwiseness (Fagley, 1987;Millman et al, 1965;Powers, 1993;Sarnacki, 1979;ltaub, 1993). Testwiseness typically associated with multiple-choice tests involves the identification of correct alternatives using secondary cues that make the correct alternative more attractive in the absence of knowledge of the test content.…”

An Examination of the Relationship Between Answer Changing, Testwiseness, and Examination Performance

“…Some researchers in this area have qeveloped the construct (Carter, 1986;Engelhardt, 1979;Millman, 1966;Millmain et al, 1965;Rogers & Bateson, 199 1 ), and others have attempted to create instruments to assess individual testwiseness skills or abilities (Brown, 1964;Diamond & Evans, 1972;Gibb, 1964;Johnson, 1976;Millman, 1966). Researchers have also found that testwiseness skills introduce additional variance into examination scores (Cronbach, 1946;Fagley, 1987;Flynn &Anderson, 1977;Thorndike, 195 1) and that there is a positive association between testwiseness skills and classroom examination performance (Bruch, Juster, & Kaflowitz, 1983;Dolly & Williams, 1986;Fagley, Miller, & Downing, 1990).…”

“…The assessment of individual testwiseness skills, however, is complicated because of the broad array of possible cognitive and behavioral traits encompassed by the construct, as well as the existence of relatively few instruments developed to empirically measure any of the possible testwiseness skills (Fagley, Miller, & Downing, 1990;Sarnacki, 1979 total score appears to be acceptably reliable (Fagley, 1987;Gibb, 1964;Miller, Fagley, & Lane, 1988) and valid (Fagley, Miller, & Downing, 1990;Harmon, Morse, & Morse, 1996;Miller et al 1989) for the purpose of assessing students' testwiseness. As discussed further in the next section, Gibb's (1964) instrument assesses a student's ability to use noncontent clues in multiple-choice items to arrive at the correct answer.…”

Examining the effects of testwiseness in conceptual physics evaluations

“…Another form of testwiseness involves students' bias towards selecting multiple-choice answers based on the option's position [22][23][24][25]. Attali and Bar-Hillel measured a predisposition to select the central answers both by instructors when generating multiple-choice questions and by students when guessing the answer to a question [26].…”