𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Prospect theory analysis of guessing in multiple choice tests

✍ Scribed by Yoella Bereby-Meyer; Joachim Meyer; Oded M. Flascher


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2002
Tongue
English
Weight
117 KB
Volume
15
Category
Article
ISSN
0894-3257

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Abstract

The guessing of answers in multiple choice tests adds random error to the variance of the test scores, lowering their reliability. Formula scoring rules that penalize for wrong guesses are frequently used to solve this problem. This paper uses prospect theory to analyze scoring rules from a decision‐making perspective and focuses on the effects of framing on the tendency to guess. In three experiments participants were presented with hypothetical test situations and were asked to indicate the degree of certainty that they thought was required for them to answer a question. In accordance with the framing hypothesis, participants tended to guess more when they anticipated a low grade and therefore considered themselves to be in the loss domain, or when the scoring rule caused the situation to be framed as entailing potential losses. The last experiment replicated these results with a task that resembles an actual test. Copyright Β© 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Autonomic evaluation by means of standar
✍ Dieter Linden; Rolf R. Diehl; Anke Kretzschmar; Peter Berlit πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1997 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 161 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

Standard autonomic tests [heart rate response to deep breathing (HR DB ), change in systolic blood pressure due to tilt], and spectral analysis of heart rate (HR), arterial blood pressure (ABP), and the associated transfer function analysis (gains and phases) were performed in 20 patients with multi

Autonomic evaluation by means of standar
✍ Dieter Linden πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1998 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 93 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

ms. In 5 of them (28%), SSR of the hand was delayed. SSR of the foot was absent on 9 (50%) right and 10 (56%) left legs. The others exhibited a mean latency of 2.47 Β± 0.35 ms on the right foot and 2.34 Β± 0.22 ms on the left. In 5 of them (28%) the response was delayed on the right foot and in 3 (17%