Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Trevisan, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Michael, W. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Estimating the Optimum Number of Options Per Item Using an Incremental Option Paradigm

Michael S. Trevisan

Multnomah County Education Service District

Gilbert Sax

University of Washington

Willilam B. Michael

University of Southern California

Previous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of using three-option multiple-choice items. In these studies three- and four-option items were constructed from preexisting item analysis data obtained from five-option items. In this study, a two-option test was constructed, and options were systematically added to this test by using a taxonomy of item writing rules to guide the process of distractor development. Nonsignificant differences (p 2 .05) were found among the reliability coefficients, the reliability estimates for the three-, four-, and five-option formats being all on the same order of magnitude. These findings continue to provide evidence for the efficacy of the three-option item.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 54, No. 1, 86-91 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164494054001008
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Language TestingHome page
T. Shizuka, O. Takeuchi, T. Yashima, and K. Yoshizawa
A comparison of three- and four-option English tests for university entrance selection purposes in Japan
Language Testing, January 1, 2006; 23(1): 35 - 57.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
G. Sax
The Fields Teaching Tests
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 1996; 56(4): 642 - 655.
[Abstract]