Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

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 Bruno, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Dirkzwager, A.
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?

Determining the Optimal Number of Alternatives to a Multiple-Choice Test Item: An Information Theoretic Perspective

James E. Bruno

University of California, Los Angeles

A. Dirkzwager

University of Twente, Netherlands

This study examines the question of the optimal number of choices on a multiple-choice test from an information theory perspective. Results are compared to addressing this question using more traditional statistical approaches. Based on information theory, the study reveals that, in general, three choices to a multiple-choice test item seem optimal. This finding verifies what other researchers have found from statistical and observational (item analysis) approaches.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 55, No. 6, 959-966 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164495055006004
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
W. T. Rogers and J. Ndalichako
Number-Right, Item-Response, and Finite-State Scoring: Robustness with Respect to Lack of Equally Classifiable Options and Item Option Independence
Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 2000; 60(1): 5 - 19.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
W. T. Rogers and D. Harley
An Empirical Comparison of Three-and Four-Choice Items and Tests: Susceptibility to Testwiseness and Internal Consistency Reliability
Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 1999; 59(2): 234 - 247.
[Abstract] [PDF]