Comparison of finite state score theory, classical test theory, and item response theory in scoring multiple-choice items

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 57, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 580-589

  Ndalichako, Joyce L ^a   Rogers, W Todd ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031514486     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164497057004004     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Aiken, L. R. (1987). Testing with multiple-choice items. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20(4), 44-58.
2. Assessment System Corporation. (1989). User's manual for ASCAL: 2- and 3-parameter IRT calibration program. St. Paul, MN: Author.
3. Assessment System Corporation. (1992). User's manual for RASCAL: Rasch analysis program. St. Paul, MN: Author.
4. Assessment System Corporation. (1993). User's manual for ITEMAN: Conventional item analysis program. St. Paul, MN: Author.
5. Bennet, R. E., & Ward, W. C. (1993). Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement: Issues in constructed response, performance testing, and portfolio assessment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Bock, R. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29-51.
7. Claudy, J. G. (1978). Biserial weights: A new approach to test item option weighting. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 25-30.
8. Frary, R. B. (1989). Partial-credit scoring methods for multiple-choice tests: Comparative review. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(1), 79-96.
9. García-Pérez, M. A. (1987). A finite state theory of performance in multiple-choice tests. In E. Roskam & R. Suck (Eds.), Progress in mathematical psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 455-464). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
10. García-Pérez, M. A. (1993). In defence of none of the above. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 46, 213-229.
11. García-Pérez, M. A. (1994). Parameter estimation and goodness-of-fit testing in multinomial models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 47, 247-282.
12. García-Pérez, M. A., & Frary, R. B. (1989). Psychometric properties of finite state scores versus number-correct and formula scores: A simulation study. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 403-417.
13. García-Pérez, M. A., & Frary, R. B. (1991). Finite state polynomic item characteristic curves. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 44, 45-75.
14. Glaser, R. (1981). The future of testing: A research agenda for cognitive psychology and psychometrics. American Psychologist, 36, 923-936.
15. Glass, G. V., & Hopkins, K. D. (1984). Statistical methods in education and psychology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
16. Haladyana, T. M. (1994). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Hutchinson, T. P. (1985, July). Predicting performance in variants of the multiple-choice test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society and the Classification Societies, Cambridge, England. (ERIC Document No. ED 263 177)
18. Maguire, T. O., Hattie, J., & Haig, B. (1994). Construct validity and achievement assessment. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 40(2), 109-126.
19. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149-173.
20. Rogers, W. T., & Bateson, D. J. (1991). Verification of a model of test-taking behaviour of high school seniors. Journal of Experimental Education, 59, 331-350.
21. Rogers, W. T., & Wilson, C. (1993). The influence of test-wiseness upon performance of high school students on Alberta Diploma Examinations. Unpublished research report, Centre for Research in Applied Measurement and Evaluation, University of Alberta.
22. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, No. 17.
23. Smith, R. M. (1987). Assessing partial knowledge in vocabulary. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 217-233.
24. Suen, H. K. (1990). Principles of test theories. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Fitzpatrick, A. R. (1989). Multiple-choice models: The distractors are also part of the item. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 161-177.
26. Wainer, H. (1989). The future of item analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 191-208.
27. Zin, T. T. (1992). Comparing 12 finite state models of examinee performance on multiple-choice tests. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53(4), 1137. (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and State University)