Literature DB >> 29795850

Investigation of Response Changes in the GRE Revised General Test.

Ou Lydia Liu1, Brent Bridgeman1, Lixiong Gu1, Jun Xu1, Nan Kong1.   

Abstract

Research on examinees' response changes on multiple-choice tests over the past 80 years has yielded some consistent findings, including that most examinees make score gains by changing answers. This study expands the research on response changes by focusing on a high-stakes admissions test-the Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning measures of the GRE revised General Test. We analyzed data from 8,538 examinees for Quantitative and 9,140 for Verbal sections who took the GRE revised General Test in 12 countries. The analyses yielded findings consistent with prior research. In addition, as examinees' ability increases, the benefit of response changing increases. The study yielded significant implications for both test agencies and test takers. Computer adaptive tests often do not allow the test takers to review and revise. Findings from this study confirm the benefit of such features.

Keywords:  GRE; computer adaptive test; response change

Year:  2015        PMID: 29795850      PMCID: PMC5965601          DOI: 10.1177/0013164415573988

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0013-1644            Impact factor:   2.821


  6 in total

1.  Not all errors are created equal: metacognition and changing answers on multiple-choice tests.

Authors:  Philip A Higham; Catherine Gerrard
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2005-03

2.  Counterfactual thinking and the first instinct fallacy.

Authors:  Justin Kruger; Derrick Wirtz; Dale T Miller
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2005-05

3.  Medical students' reasons for changing answers on multiple-choice tests.

Authors:  L M Harvill; G Davis
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 6.893

4.  The relationship between changing answers and performance on multiple-choice nursing examinations.

Authors:  L Jordan; D Johnson
Journal:  J Nurs Educ       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 1.726

5.  Student perceptions of changing answers on multiple choice examinations.

Authors:  S Gaskins; L Dunn; L Forte; F Wood; P Riley
Journal:  J Nurs Educ       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 1.726

6.  Changing answers on multiple-choice examinations taken by baccalaureate nursing students.

Authors:  R M Nieswiadomy; W K Arnold; C Garza
Journal:  J Nurs Educ       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.726

  6 in total
  3 in total

1.  Statistical Foundations for Computerized Adaptive Testing with Response Revision.

Authors:  Shiyu Wang; Georgios Fellouris; Hua-Hua Chang
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 2.500

2.  The Use of Theory of Linear Mixed-Effects Models to Detect Fraudulent Erasures at an Aggregate Level.

Authors:  Luyao Peng; Sandip Sinharay
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 2.821

3.  Investigation of answer changes on the USMLE® Step 2 Clinical Knowledge examination.

Authors:  Wenli Ouyang; Polina Harik; Brian E Clauser; Miguel A Paniagua
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 2.463

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.