On the construct validity of multiple-choice items for reading comprehension
Loading...
View/Download File
Persistent link to this item
Statistics
View StatisticsJournal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Title
On the construct validity of multiple-choice items for reading comprehension
Alternative title
Authors
Published Date
1990
Publisher
Type
Article
Abstract
In this study 590 third-grade students took one of
four reading comprehension tests with either multiple-choice
items or open-ended items. Each also took 32
tests indicating 16 semantic Structure-of-Intellect (si)
abilities. Four conditions or groups were distinguished
on the basis of the reading comprehension tests. The
four 33 x 33 correlation matrices were analyzed simultaneously
with a four-group LISREL model. The 16
intellectual abilities explained approximately 62% of
the variance in true reading comprehension scores.
None of the SI abilities proved to be differentially related
to item type. Therefore, it was concluded that
item type for reading comprehension is congeneric
with respect to the SI abilities measured. Index
terms: construct validity, item format, free response,
reading comprehension, Structure-of-Intellect model.
Keywords
Description
Related to
Replaces
License
Series/Report Number
Funding information
Isbn identifier
Doi identifier
Previously Published Citation
Van den Bergh, Huub. (1990). On the construct validity of multiple-choice items for reading comprehension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 1-12. doi:10.1177/014662169001400101
Other identifiers
doi:10.1177/014662169001400101
Suggested citation
Van den Bergh, Huub. (1990). On the construct validity of multiple-choice items for reading comprehension. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/107646.
Content distributed via the University Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor. By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. Materials in the UDC may contain content that is disturbing and/or harmful. For more information, please see our statement on harmful content in digital repositories.