Alternative response and scoring methods for multiple-choice items: An empirical study of probabilistic and ordinal response modes

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

View/Download File

Persistent link to this item

Statistics
View Statistics

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Title

Alternative response and scoring methods for multiple-choice items: An empirical study of probabilistic and ordinal response modes

Alternative title

Published Date

1978

Publisher

Type

Article

Abstract

Binary, probability, and ordinal scoring procedures for multiple-choice items were examined. In a situation where true scores were experimentally controlled by the manipulation of partial information, it was found that both the probability and ordinal scoring systems were more reliable than the binary scoring method. A second experiment using vocabulary items and standard reliability estimation procedures also showed higher reliability for the two partial information scoring methods relative to binary scoring.

Keywords

Description

Related to

Replaces

License

Series/Report Number

Funding information

Isbn identifier

Doi identifier

Previously Published Citation

Poizner, Sharon B, Nicewander, W. Alan & Gettys, Charles F. (1978). Alternative response and scoring methods for multiple-choice items: An empirical study of probabilistic and ordinal response modes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 83-96. doi:10.1177/014662167800200109

Other identifiers

doi:10.1177/014662167800200109

Suggested citation

Poizner, Sharon B.; Nicewander, W. Alan; Gettys, Charles F.. (1978). Alternative response and scoring methods for multiple-choice items: An empirical study of probabilistic and ordinal response modes. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/99167.

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.