Quantitative word problems were written as parallel
completion and multiple-choice items, and were administered
to 232 undergraduate students to compare
the reliabilities and item difficulties associated with
these formats. The multiple-choice options were written
using specific numerical responses for each of five
alternatives, revised by replacing the fifth option with
"none of the above," and also by replacing each of
the five responses with ranges of numerical values.
Differences in distributions of scores imply a need to
reestablish standards if changes are made in the proportions
of completion and multiple-choice items included
in a test. Findings did not support camouflaging
the correct response by using "none of the above"
or ranges of numerical values as multiple-choice alternatives.
The increased time required to develop and
administer a multiple-choice test with reliability equal
to that of a completion test suggests use of the latter
even in classes with relatively large enrollments.
Oosterhof, Albert C & Coats, Pamela K. (1984). Comparison of difficulties and reliabilities of quantitative word problems in completion and multiple-choice item formats. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 287-294. doi:10.1177/014662168400800305
Oosterhof, Albert C.; Coats, Pamela K..
Comparison of difficulties and reliabilities of quantitative word problems in completion and multiple-choice item formats.
Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy,
Content distributed via the University of Minnesota's Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor.