Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

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 Vispoel, W. P.
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?

Reviewing and Changing Answers on Computerized Fixed-Item Vocabulary Tests

Walter P. Vispoel

The University of Iowawalter-vispoel{at}uiowa.edu.

Results obtained from computerized vocabulary tests were compared under conditions in which item review was permitted and not permitted. Comparisons between the review and no-review conditions yielded no statistically significant differences in number correct scores, ability estimates, or measurement error, but examinees in both conditions strongly desired review opportunities. Comparisons of answers before and after review within the review condition showed that only a small percentage of answers was changed (3.63%), that more answers were changed from wrong to right than from right to wrong (by a ratio of 2.25 to 1), that a large proportion of examinees (45%) changed answers to at least some questions, and that most examinees who changed answers improved their performance by doing so (by a ratio of 2.44 to 1). The results revealed that performance gains after review were greater for examinees of higher ability and that review was desired more by examinees with higher test anxiety. The major drawback to allowing review was a 35% increase in testing time.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 60, No. 3, 371-384 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/00131640021970600


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
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
J. Revuelta, M. C. Ximenez, and J. Olea
Psychometric and Psychological Effects of Item Selection and Review on Computerized Testing
Educational and Psychological Measurement, October 1, 2003; 63(5): 791 - 808.
[Abstract] [PDF]