I will probably fail: Higher ability students' motivational experiences during adaptive achievement testing

European Journal of Psychological Assessment

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 48-56

  Ortner, Tuulia M ^a   Weißkopf, Eva ^b   Koch, Tobias ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SALZBURG   (Austria)

^b FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Adaptive testing; CAT; Fairness; Motivation; Reasoning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84892645478     PISSN: 10155759     EISSN: 21512426     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000168     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing.Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Arvey, R. D., Strickland, W., Drauden, G., & Martin, C. (1990). Motivational components of test taking. Personnel Psychology, 43, 695-716. doi 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1990.tb00679.x
4. Betz, N. E., &Weiss, D. J. (1976). Psychological effects of immediate knowledge of results and adaptive ability testing (Research Report 76-4). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology.
5. Cassady, J. C., &Johnson, R.E. (2002). Cognitive test anxiety and academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 270-295. doi 10.1006/ceps.2001.1094
6. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
7. Dauenheimer, D., Stahlberg, D., Spreemann, S., & Sedikides, C. (2002). Self-enhancement, self-verification, or self-assessment? The intricate role of trait modifiability in the self-evaluation process. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 15, 89-112.
8. Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J.T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
9. Eggen, T. J.H. M., &Verschoor, A. J. (2006). Optimal testing with easy or difficult items in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 379-393. doi 10.1177/0146621606288890
10. Engeser, S., & Rheinberg, F. (2008). Flow, performance and moderators of challenge-skill balance. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 158-172. doi 10.1007/s11031-008-9102-4
11. Frey, A., Hartig, J., & Moosbrugger, H. (2009). Effects of adaptive testing on testtaking motivation with the example of the Frankfurt Adaptive Concentration Test. Diagnostica, 55, 20-28. doi 10.1026/0012-1924.55.1.20
12. Green, J.D., Pinter, B., &Sedikides, C. (2005).Mnemic neglect and self-threat: Trait modifiability moderates self-protection. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 225-235. doi 10.1002/ejsp.242
13. Hagtvet, K. A., & Benson, J. (1997). The motive to avoid failure and test anxiety responses: Empirical support for integration of two research traditions. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 10, 35-57. doi 10.1080/ 10615809708249294
14. Häusler, J., & Sommer, M. (2008). The effect of success probability on test economy and self-confidence in computerized adaptive tests. Psychology Science, 50, 75-87.
15. Helms, J.E. (2006). Fairness is not validity or cultural bias in racial group assessment: A quantitative perspective. American Psychologist, 61, 845-859. doi 10.1037/0003-066X.61.8.845
16. Hembree, R. (1988). Correlates, causes, effects, and treatment of test anxiety. Review of Educational Research, 58, 47-77. doi 10.3102/ 00346543058001047
17. Hornke, L. F., Etzel, S., Rettig, K., & Prieler, J. (2005). Adaptive Matrices Test. Mödling: Schuhfried.
18. Hornke, L. F., Küppers, A., & Etzel, S. (2000). Design and evaluation of an adaptive matrices test. Diagnostica, 46, 182-188. doi 10.1026//0012-1924.46.4.182
19. Keller, J., & Bless, H. (2008). Flow and regulatory compatibility: An experimental approach to the flow model of intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 196-209. doi 10.1177/0146167207310026
20. Linacre, J.M. (2000). Computer-adaptive testing: A methodology whose time has come. Memo 69. Retrieved from http://www.rasch.org/memos.htm
21. Meece, J. L., Bower Glienke, B., & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 351-373. doi 10.1016/j.jsp.2006. 04.004
22. Ortner, T. M., & Caspers, J. (2011). Consequences of test anxiety on adaptive versus fixed item testing. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 157-163. doi 10.1027/1015- 5759/a000062
23. Ortner, T. M., Weißkopf, E., & Gerstenberg, F. R. (2012). Skilled but unaware of it: CAT undermines a testtaker's metacognitive competence. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 1-15. doi 10.1007/s10212-011-0100-7
24. Pine, S. M., Church, A.T., Gialluca, K. A., &Weiss, D. J. (1979). Effects of computerized adaptive testing on black and white students (Research report 79-2). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology.
25. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Nielsen & Lydiche.
26. Reschly, D. J., & Robinson-Zanartu, C. (2000). Evaluation of aptitudes. In G.Goldstein, &M.Hersen (Eds.), Handbook of psychological assessment (pp. 183-202). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
27. Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., & Burns, B.D. (2001). FAM: Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung aktueller Motivation in Lern- und Leistungssituationen [QCM: A questionnaire to assess motivation in learning situations]. Diagnostica, 47, 57-66. doi 10.1026//0012-1924.47.2.57
28. Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., &Engeser, S. (2003). Die Erfassung des Flow-Erlebens [The assessment of flow experience]. In J. Stiensmeier-Pelster & F. Rheinberg (Eds.), Diagnostik von Selbstkonzept, Lernmotivation und Selbstregulation (pp. 261- 279). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
29. Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261-288. doi 10.1037/0033-2909.130.2.261
30. Seipp, B. (1991). Anxiety and academic performance: A metaanalysis of findings. Anxiety Research, 4, 27-41.
31. Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2008). Sex differences in school achievement: What are the roles of personality and achievement motivation? European Journal of Personality, 22, 185-209. doi 10.1002/per.676
32. Thissen, D., & Mislevy, R. J. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Testing algorithms (pp. 475-496). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
33. Tonidandel, S., & Quinones, M.A. (2000). Psychological reactions to adaptive testing. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 7-15. doi 10.1111/1468-2389.00126
34. Tonidandel, S., Quinones, M.A., & Adams, A.A. (2002). Computer- adaptive testing: The impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and testtakers' reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 320-332. doi 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.320
35. Truxillo, D.M., Bodner, T.E., Bertolino, M., Bauer, T.N., &Yonce, C.A. (2009). Effects of explanations on applicant reactions: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 346-360. doi 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00478.x
36. Van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C.A.W. (Eds.). (2000). Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice. St. Paul, MN: Assessment Systems Corporation.
37. Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (1998). Motivationale Einflüsse auf Erwerb und Anwendung von Wissen in einem computersimulierten System [Motivational influences on the acquisition and application of knowledge in a computer-simulated system]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 12, 11-23.
38. Vollmeyer, R., &Rheinberg, F. (2006). Motivational effects on selfregulated learning with different tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 239-253. doi 10.1007/s10648-006-9017-0
39. Wainer, H., Dorans, N. J., Flaugher, R., Green, B. F., Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Wainer, H., &Eignor, D. (2000). Caveats, pitfalls, and unexpected consequences of implementing large scale computerized testing. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 271-299). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Weiss, D. J., & Betz, N. E. (1973). Ability measurement: conventional or adaptive? (Research report 73-1). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology.
42. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81. doi 10.1006/ceps.1999.1015