The role of instructions in the variability of sex-related differences in multiple-choice tests

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 1067-1077

  Prieto, Gerardo ^a   Delgado, Ana R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SALAMANCA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Guessing; Human sex differences; Multiple choice testing method; Scoring testing; Verbal aptitude; Visuospatial aptitude

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141552853     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00049-5     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Ben-Shakhar G., Sinai Y. Gender differences in multiple-choice tests: the role of differential guessing tendencies. Journal of Educational Measurement. 28:1991;23-35.
2. Budescu D., Bar-Hillel M. To guess or not to guess: a decision theoretic view of formula scoring. Journal of Educational Measurement. 30:1993;277-291.
3. Burkam, A., & Burkam, D. (1993). The interaction of test item format and gender with mathematics achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta.
4. Cizek G.J., O'Day D.M. Further investigation of nonfunctioning options in multiple-choice test items. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 54:1994;861-872.
5. Delgado A.R., Prieto G. Sex differences in visuospatial ability: do performance factors play such an important role? Memory and Cognition. 24:1996;504-510.
6. Dwyer C.A. The role of tests and their construction in producing apparent sex-related differences. Wittig M.A., Petersen A.C. Sex-related differences in cognitive functioning: developmental issues. 1979;335-353 Academic Press, New York.
7. Eagly A.H. Some meta-analytic approaches to examining the validity of gender-difference research. Hyde J.S., Linn M. The Psychology of Gender. Advances through Meta-analysis. 1986;159-177 The Johns Hopkins University Press, London.
8. Feingold A. Cognitive gender differences are disappearing. American Psychologist. 43:1988;95-103.
9. Goldstein D., Haldane D., Mitchell C. Sex differences in visual-spatial ability: the role of performance factors. Memory and Cognition. 18:1990;546-550.
10. Haladyna T.M. Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. 1994;LEA, Hillsdale, NJ.
11. Halpern D.F. Sex differences in cognitive abilities. 2nd ed. 1992;LEA, London.
12. Hunter J.E., Schmidt F.L. Methods of Meta-Analysis. 1990;Sage, London.
13. Koriat A., Goldsmith M. Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. Psychological Review. 103:1996;490-517.
14. Linn M., Petersen A.C. A meta-analysis of gender differences in spatial ability: implications for mathematics and science achievement. Hyde J.S., Linn M. The psychology of gender. Advances through meta-analysis. 1986;67-101 The Johns Hopkins University Press, London.
15. Maccoby E.E., Jacklin C.N. The psychology of sex differences. 1974;Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
16. Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. R. (in press). The effect of instructions on multiple-choice test scores. European Journal of Psychological Assessment.
17. Schmidt F.L. Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods. 1:1996;115-129.
18. Sherif C.W. Bias in psychology. Sherman J.A., Beck E.T. The prism of sex: essays in the sociology of knowledge. 1979;93-133.
19. Thurstone L.L. A method for scoring tests. Psychological Bulletin. 16:1919;235-240.
20. Thurstone L.L. Manual of instructions for the Primary Mental Abilities Test. 1939;American Council of Education, Washington, DC.
21. Thurstone, T. G., & Thurstone L. L. (1949). Mechanical aptitude II; description of group tests. Chicago, Ill. Univ. of Chicago, Psychometric Laboratory Report 54.
22. Traub R.E., Hambleton R.K. The effect of scoring instructions and degree of speededness on the validity and reliability of multiple-choice tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 32:1972;737-758.
23. Traub R.E., Hambleton R.K., Singh B. Effects of promised reward and threatened penalty on performance of a multiple-choice vocabulary test. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 29:1969;847-861.
24. Voyer D. Scoring procedure, performance factors and magnitude of sex differences in spatial performance. American Journal of Psychology. 110:1997;259-276.
25. Voyer D., Voyer S., Bryden M.P. Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin. 117:1995;250-270.
26. Wolf D.P. Assessment as an episode of learning. Bennett R.E., Ward W.C. Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement. 1993;213-240 LEA, London.
27. Yela M. Rotación de figuras macizas. Manual. 1968;TEA, Madrid.