Item-Writing Guidelines on Response Option Placement: A Systematic Review.
Saved in:
| Title: | Item-Writing Guidelines on Response Option Placement: A Systematic Review. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Lions, Séverin (AUTHOR), Blanco, María Paz (AUTHOR), Dartnell, Pablo (AUTHOR), Monsalve, Carlos (AUTHOR), Ortega, Gabriel (AUTHOR), Lemarié, Julie (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Applied Measurement in Education. Oct-Dec2024, Vol. 37 Issue 4, p289-304. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Empirical research, Standards |
| Abstract: | Multiple-choice items are universally used in formal education. Since they should assess learning, not test-wiseness or guesswork, they must be constructed following the highest possible standards. Hundreds of item-writing guides have provided guidelines to help test developers adopt appropriate strategies to define the distribution and sequence of correct answers across tests and, thus, not inadvertently provide clues to correct responses. In this study, these option placement guidelines were systematically reviewed. Consensual recommendations and recommendations from the most theoretically sound guides were identified. Additionally, results from empirical studies evaluating the effect of option position on examinees' responses and research reports on where test developers place correct answers in tests were considered to better examine these recommendations' relevance and suitability. Consistent and easy-to-follow recommendations about where and how to place options in items and tests are finally provided so that developers can gauge the adequacy of their option placement strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Applied Measurement in Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Multiple-choice items are universally used in formal education. Since they should assess learning, not test-wiseness or guesswork, they must be constructed following the highest possible standards. Hundreds of item-writing guides have provided guidelines to help test developers adopt appropriate strategies to define the distribution and sequence of correct answers across tests and, thus, not inadvertently provide clues to correct responses. In this study, these option placement guidelines were systematically reviewed. Consensual recommendations and recommendations from the most theoretically sound guides were identified. Additionally, results from empirical studies evaluating the effect of option position on examinees' responses and research reports on where test developers place correct answers in tests were considered to better examine these recommendations' relevance and suitability. Consistent and easy-to-follow recommendations about where and how to place options in items and tests are finally provided so that developers can gauge the adequacy of their option placement strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 08957347 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/08957347.2024.2424551 |
