Wikia

Psychology Wiki

Multiple choice (testing method)

Talk1
34,143pages on
this wiki

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social Processes: Methodology · Types of test


This article is in need of attention from a psychologist/academic expert on the subject.
Please help recruit one, or improve this page yourself if you are qualified.
This banner appears on articles that are weak and whose contents should be approached with academic caution
.
MCQ

Multiple choice items are a form of assessment item for which respondents are asked to select one or more of the choices from a list. This type of item is used in educational examinations, in elections (choose between multiple candidates, parties, or policies), in market research, and many other areas.

Frederick J. Kelly is credited with creating multiple choice items in 1914 at the University of Kansas. One of the first uses of multiple choice questions was to assess the capabilities of World War I military recruits. Test writers are often trained in Bloom's taxonomy.

While often colloquially referred to as "questions," this is a misnomer because many items are not phrased as a question. They can be presented as incomplete statements or mathematical equations.

Structure Edit

Multiple-choice items consist of a stem and a set of options. The stem is the beginning part of the item that presents the item as a problem to be solved, a question asked of the examinee, or an incomplete statement to be completed, as well as any other relevant information. The options are the possible answers that the examinee can choose from, with the correct answer called the key and the incorrect answers called distractors.[1]

For advanced items, such as an applied knowledge item, the stem can consist of multiple part. It can include extended or ancillary material like a vignette, a medical case study, a graph, a table, or detailed description which has multiple elements to it. It is as long as necessary to ensure maximum validity and authenticity to the problem at hand. The stem ends with a lead-in question describes what the exam taker must do. In a medical multiple-choice item the lead-in question may ask "What is the most likely diagnosis?" or "What pathogen is the most likely cause?" after presenting a case study.

.

AdvantagesEdit

There are several advantages to the multiple choice style. If item writers are well trained and items are quality assured, this can be a very effective item format.[2] First of all, if students are instructed on the way in which the item format works and the myths surrounding the assessment type are destroyed, students are found to perform better on the test.[3] On many assessments, reliability has been shown to improve with larger numbers of items on a test, and with good sampling and care over case specificity overall test reliability can be further increased.[4]

Multiple choice tests often require less time to administer for a given amount of material than would tests requiring written responses, meaning that more questions can be given in the assessment without increasing the time needed; this results in a more comprehensive evaluation of the candidate's extent of knowledge. Even greater efficiency can be created by use of online examination delivery software. Multiple choice questions lend themselves to the development of objective assessment items, however, without author training, questions can be subjective in nature. Because this style of test does not require a teacher to mark the given answers, test-takers are graded purely on their selections, creating a lower likelihood of teacher-student bias in the results. Factors irrelavent to the assessed material (such as handwriting and clarity of presentation) do not come into play in a multiple choice assessment, and so the candidate is marked purely on their knowledge of the topic. Finally, if test-takers are aware of how to use mark sheets and/or online examination tick boxes their responses can be relied upon with clarity.

DisadvantagesEdit

Multiple choice tests do have disadvantages. One of these is ambiguity; failing to interpret information as the test maker intended can result in an "incorrect" response, even if the taker's response is potentially valid. The term "multiple guess" has been used to describe this scenario because test-takers may attempt to guess rather than determine the correct answer. A free response test allows the test taker to make an argument for their viewpoint and potentially receive credit.

In addition, even if a student has some knowledge of a question, they receive no credit for knowing that information if they select the wrong answer. However, free response questions may allow a taker to demonstrate their understanding of the subject and receive partial credit. Finally, test takers may be able to rule out answers due to infeasibility. In some cases they may even test each answer individually, especially when dealing with mathematics, thereby increasing the chance of providing a correct answer without actually knowing the subject matter. On the other hand, especially on mathematics tests, some answers are included to actually encourage the test taker to logically rule out responses. An example would be giving the equation 4x^2 + bx=3 and asking what b^2 equals. The test taker should be able to eliminate all answers that are a negative number. It should be noted that in some cases the candidate receives partial credit for certain incorrect, yet somewhat plausible, selections (and might be penalised for other, less suitable ones), but this is rare and is still not a solution that is as optimal as that offered in a written examination.

The use of multiple choice questions in certain educational fields is sometimes contested due to some of the negative aspects, whether actual or perceived, but the format remains popular due to its utility and cost effectiveness.

Another disadvantage of multiple choice examinations is that a student who is incapable of answering a particular question can simply select a random answer and still have a chance of receiving a mark for it. It is common practice for students with no time left to give all remaining questions random answers in the hope that they will get at least some of them right. Some exams, such as the Australian Mathematics Competition, have systems in place to negate this, in this case by making it more beneficial to not give an answer than to give a wrong one. This is usually not a great issue, however, since the odds of a student receiving significant marks by guessing are very low when four or more selections are available.

ExamplesEdit

In the equation 2x+3=4, solve for x.
A) 4
B) 10
C) 0.5
D) 1.5
E) 8

What is the IT superpower in India?
A) Bangalore
B) Mumbai
C) Mysore
D) Chennai

MultipleChoice single

MultipleChoice more

Recognition memoryEdit

A practical application of recognition memory is in relation to developing multiple choice tests in an academic setting. A good test does not tap recognition memory, it wants to discern how well a person encoded and can recall a concept. If people rely on recognition for use on a memory test (such as multiple choice) they may recognize one of the options but this does not necessarily mean it is the correct answer. [5]


Notable tests with multiple choice sectionsEdit

See alsoEdit

ReferencesEdit

  1. Kehoe, Jerard (1995). Writing multiple-choice test items. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 4(9). Retrieved February 12, 2008 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=4&n=9 .
  2. Item Writing Manual by the National Board of Medical Examiners
  3. Lutz Beckert, Tim J Wilkinson, Richard Sainsbury (2003) A needs-based study and examination skills course improves students' performance Medical Education 37 (5), 424–428.doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01499.x
  4. Steven M Downing (2004) Reliability: on the reproducibility of assessment data Medical Education 38 (9), 1006–1012. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01932.x
  5. University of Waterloo. Writing Multiple Choice Tests. Retrieved from http://www.sdc.uwo.ca/learning/mcwrit.html.
  • Abad, F. J., Olea, J., & Ponsoda, V. (2001). Analysis of the optimum number alternatives from the item response theory: Psicothema Vol 13(1) Feb 2001, 152-158.
  • Abrahamowicz, M., & Ramsay, J. O. (1992). Multicategorical spline model for item response theory: Psychometrika Vol 57(1) Mar 1992, 5-27.
  • Abu-Sayf, F. K. (1976). The investigation of a new formula score: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Abu-Sayf, F. K., & Diamond, J. J. (1976). Effect of confidence level in multiple-choice test answers on reliability and validity of scores: Journal of Educational Research Vol 70(2) Nov-Dec 1976, 62-63.
  • Ackerman, T. A., & Smith, P. L. (1988). A comparison of the information provided by essay, multiple-choice, and free-response writing tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 12(2) Jun 1988, 117-128.
  • Agarie, Y. (1973). An error model for multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International Vol.
  • Aiken, L. R., Jr. (1964). Item context and position effects on multiple-choice tests: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 58(2) 1964, 369-373.
  • Aiken, L. R. (1982). Writing multiple-choice items to measure higher-order educational objectives: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(3) Fal 1982, 803-806.
  • Aiken, L. R. (1987). Testing with multiple-choice items: Journal of Research & Development in Education Vol 20(4) Sum 1987, 44-58.
  • Akar, I. G. (1984). The extent of sequence effects on item difficulty and ability estimates in multiple-choice achievement tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Albanese, M. A. (1993). Type K and other complex multiple-choice items: An analysis of research and item properties: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 12(1) Spr 1993, 28-33.
  • Al-Fallay, I. S. M. (1997). Investigating the reliability and validity of the fixed ratio multiple-choice cloze test: Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences Vol 24(2) Aug 1997, 507-526.
  • Al-Hamly, M., & Coombe, C. (2005). To change or not to change: Investigating the value of MCQ answer changing for Gulf Arab students: Language Testing Vol 22(4) Oct 2005, 509-531.
  • Anbar, M. (1991). Comparing assessments of students' knowledge by computerized open-ended and multiple-choice tests: Academic Medicine Vol 66(7) Jul 1991, 420-422.
  • Andersen, E. B. (1973). Conditional inference for multiple-choice questionnaires: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 26(1) May 1973, 31-44.
  • Anderson, R. I. (1982). Computer-based confidence testing: Alternatives to conventional, computer-based multiple-choice testing: Journal of Computer-Based Instruction Vol 9(1) Sum 1982, 1-9.
  • Anderson, S. B. (1952). Sequence in multiple choice item options: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 43(6) Oct 1952, 364-368.
  • Andres, A. M., & Luna del Castillo, J. D. (1989). Tests and intervals in multiple choice tests: A modification of the simplest classical model: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 42(2) Nov 1989, 251-263.
  • Andres, A. M., & Luna del Castillo, J. D. (1990). Multiple choice tests: Power, length and optimal number of choices per item: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 43(1) May 1990, 57-71.
  • Andrews, M. L., & Summers, A. C. (1991). The awareness phase of voice therapy: Providing a knowledge base for the adolescent: Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools Vol 22(3) Jul 1991, 158-162.
  • Applebaum, W. R. (1977). The effect of nonlinear utility on distortion of test scores in probabilistic testing: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Appleby, D. C. (1990). A cognitive taxonomy of multiple-choice questions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Arce-Ferrer, A. J., Backhoff-Escudero, E., & Pena-Gonzalez, L. I. (2001). Effects of the number of choices on the psychometric properties of multiple-choice tests: Revista Mexicana de Psicologia Vol 18(3) Dec 2001, 337-345.
  • Arita, S. (1992). Mathematical model for multiple-choice question scores based on the incomplete knowledge of examinees: Behaviormetrika Vol 19(1)[31] Jan 1992, 1-22.
  • Arita, S., Saito, T., & Nasu, I. (1982). Mathematical models to assess the contribution of the partial knowledge of examinees to the scores of multiple-choice test: Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics Vol 10(1) [18] Dec 1982, 53-66.
  • Armstrong, A.-M. (1993). Cognitive-style differences in testing situations: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 12(3) Fal 1993, 17-22.
  • Atkins, E. W., & Dashiell, J. F. (1921). Reactions of the White Rat to Multiple Stimuli in Temporal Orders: Journal of Comparative Psychology Vol 1(5) Oct 1921, 433-452.
  • Attali, Y. (2005). Reliability of Speeded Number-Right Multiple-Choice Tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 29(5) Sep 2005, 357-368.
  • Attali, Y., & Bar-Hillel, M. (2003). Guess where: The position of correct answers in multiple-choice test items as a psychometric variable: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(2) Sum 2003, 109-128.
  • Attkisson, C. C., & Snyder, C. R. (1975). Student evaluation of multiple choice and word association exams: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 2(1) Win 1975, 9-15.
  • Atwell, C. R., & Wells, F. L. (1937). Wide range multiple choice vocabulary tests: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 21(5) Oct 1937, 550-555.
  • Audubon, J. J., & Vanbuskirk, C. (1965). Projective across sensory modalities: Journal of Projective Techniques & Personality Assessment 29(2) 1965, 140-150.
  • Ault, L. H. (1972). A comparison of multiple-choice and created-response test-item formats: Dissertation Abstracts International Vol.
  • Austin, J. D. (1983). Distractor-identification testing in geometry: Educational & Psychological Research Vol 3(1) Win 1983, 25-41.
  • Avila, C., & Torrubia, R. (2004). Personality, expectations, and response strategies in multiple-choice question examinations in university students: A test of Gray's hypotheses: European Journal of Personality Vol 18(1) Jan-Feb 2004, 45-59.
  • Awdah, A. S. (1988). The effect of multiple-choice item response changes on test scores and the relation of such changes to anxiety and item difficulty: Dirasat Vol 15(1) Jan 1988, 68-80.
  • Bajtelsmit, J. W. (1978). The effects of test anxiety, intelligence, and test format on adult academic achievement: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Balch, W. R. (1989). Item order affects performance on multiple-choice exams: Teaching of Psychology Vol 16(2) Apr 1989, 75-77.
  • Balch, W. R. (2002). Item order affects performance on multiple-choice exams. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Baldauf, R. B. (1982). The effects of guessing and item dependence on the reliability and validity of recognition based cloze tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(3) Fal 1982, 855-867.
  • Ballance, C. T. (1976). An investigation of the relation of the alteration of responses to objective test questions to selected student and test item characteristics: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Ballance, C. T. (1977). Students' expectations and their answer-changing behavior: Psychological Reports Vol 41(1) Aug 1977, 163-166.
  • Ballance, C. T. (2006). Item Characteristics and Answer-Changing Behaviors: Psychological Reports Vol 98(1) Feb 2006, 205-208.
  • Ballance, C. T., & Gentzel, W. E. (1980). Effect of several scoring techniques on answer-changing by students: Psychological Reports Vol 46(2) Apr 1980, 653-654.
  • Banks, K. (2005). Exploring racial differences in items that differ in cultural characteristics through differential bundle and distractor functioning. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Barnes, L. B. (1989). Correcting for guessing in the one-parameter logistic Item Response Theory model: An investigation with small samples: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Barnett-Foster, D., & Nagy, P. (1995). A comparison of undergraduate test response strategies for multiple-choice and constructed-response questions: Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 41(1) Mar 1995, 18-35.
  • Barrett, R. S. (1996). Multiple-choice tests. Westport, CT: Quorum Books/Greenwood Publishing Group.
  • Barton, K. E., & Huynh, H. (2003). Patterns of errors made by students with disabilities on a reading test with oral reading administration: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 63(4) Aug 2003, 602-614.
  • Battermann, M. M. (1974). Worst wrong answer scoring as a means of identifying guessing on multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Baum, S. D. (1983). A study of answer-changing behavior on multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Bechger, T. M., Maris, G., Verstralen, H. H. F. M., & Verhelst, N. D. (2005). The Nedelsky Model for Multiple-Choice Items. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Beck, G. L., Matache, M. T., Riha, C., Kerber, K., & McCurdy, F. A. (2007). Clinical experience and examination performance: Is there a correlation? : Medical Education Vol 41(6) Jun 2007, 550-555.
  • Bedard, R. R. (1975). Effects of two structured modes of student response to lecture material: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Beekmans, R., Eyckmans, J., Janssens, V., Dufranne, M., & Van de Velde, H. (2001). Examining the Yes/No vocabulary test: Some methodological issues in theory and practice: Language Testing Vol 18(3) Jul 2001, 236-274.
  • Beeson, R. O. (1973). Immediate knowledge of results and test performance: Journal of Educational Research Vol 66(5) Jan 1973, 224-226.
  • Bejar, I. I., & Weiss, D. J. (1977). A comparison of empirical differential option weighting scoring procedures as a function of inter-item correlation: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 37(2) Sum 1977, 335-340.
  • Bell, R. C., & Hay, J. A. (1987). Differences and biases in English language examination formats: British Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 57(2) Jun 1987, 212-220.
  • Bellezza, F. S., & Bellezza, S. F. (1989). Detection of cheating on multiple-choice tests by using error-similarity analysis: Teaching of Psychology Vol 16(3) Oct 1989, 151-155.
  • Bellezza, F. S., & Bellezza, S. F. (1995). Detection of copying on multiple-choice tests: An update: Teaching of Psychology Vol 22(3) Oct 1995, 180-182.
  • Bellezza, F. S., & Bellezza, S. F. (2002). Detection of cheating on multiple-choice tests by using error-similarity analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bellezza, F. S., & Bellezza, S. F. (2002). Detection of copying on multiple-choice tests: An update. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., Braun, H. I., Frye, D., & et al. (1990). The relationship of expert-system scored constrained free-response items to multiple-choice and open-ended items: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 14(2) Jun 1990, 151-162.
  • Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., & Wang, M. (1991). Equivalence of free-response and multiple-choice items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 28(1) Spr 1991, 77-92.
  • Ben-Shakhar, G., & Sinai, Y. (1991). Gender differences in multiple-choice tests: The role of differential guessing tendencies: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 28(1) Spr 1991, 23-35.
  • Ben-Simon, A., Budescu, D. V., & Nevo, B. (1997). A comparative study of measures of partial knowledge in multiple-choice tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 21(1) Mar 1997, 65-88.
  • Benson, J., & Crocker, L. (1979). The effects of item format and reading ability on objective test performance: A question of validity: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 39(2) Sum 1979, 381-387.
  • Bereby-Meyer, Y., Meyer, J., & Budescu, D. V. (2003). Decision making under internal uncertainty: The case of multiple-choice tests with different scoring rules: Acta Psychologica Vol 112(2) Feb 2003, 207-220.
  • Bereby-Meyer, Y., Meyer, J., & Flascher, O. M. (2002). Prospect theory analysis of guessing in multiple choice tests: Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Vol 15(4) Oct 2002, 313-327.
  • Berg, C. A., & Smith, P. (1994). Assessing students' abilities to construct and interpret line graphs: Disparities between multiple-choice and free-response instruments: Science Education Vol 78(6) Nov 1994, 527-554.
  • Bergling, B. M. (1998). Constructing items measuring logical operational thinking: Facet design-based item construction using multiple categories scoring: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 14(2) 1998, 172-187.
  • Bergman, I. (1980). The effects of test-taking instruction vs. practice without instruction on the examination responses of college freshmen to multiple-choice, open-ended, and cloze type questions: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Berrien, E. K. (1940). Are scores increased on objective tests by changing the initial decision? : Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 31(1) Jan 1940, 64-67.
  • Berry, K. J., & Mielke, P. W., Jr. (2003). Longitudinal analysis of data with multiple binary category choices: Psychological Reports Vol 93(1) Aug 2003, 127-131.
  • Berry, K. J., & Mielke, P. W., Jr. (2003). Permutation analysis of data with multiple binary category choices: Psychological Reports Vol 92(1) Feb 2003, 91-98.
  • Best, J. B. (1979). Item difficulty and answer changing: Teaching of Psychology Vol 6(4) Dec 1979, 228-230.
  • Beullens, J., Struyf, E., & van Damme, B. (2005). Do extended matching multiple-choice questions measure clinical reasoning? : Medical Education Vol 39(4) Apr 2005, 410-417.
  • Bezruczko, N. (1995). Validation of a multiple choice visual arts achievement test: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 55(4) Aug 1995, 664-674.
  • Biddle, W. B. (1976). Response mode of questions in learning from prose: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Bielinski, J., & Davison, M. L. (1998). Gender differences by item difficulty interactions in multiple-choice mathematics items: American Educational Research Journal Vol 35(3) Fal 1998, 455-476.
  • Bielinski, J. S. (1999). Sex difference by item difficulty: An interaction in multiple-choice mathematics achievement test items administered to national probability samples. (DIF). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Bierbaum, W. B. (1965). Immediate knowledge of performance on multiple choice tests: Journal of Programed Instruction 3(1) 1965, 19-22.
  • Bing, S. B. (1977). Effects of question type and response mode on rote and conceptual learning from prose: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Birdd, D. L. (1982). A correlation study utilizing two types of measuring instruments for determining Piagetian levels of mental maturation: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Tatsuoka, K. K. (1987). Open-ended versus multiple-choice response formats--it does make a difference for diagnostic purposes: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 11(4) Dec 1987, 385-395.
  • Birenbaum, M., Tatsuoka, K. K., & Gutvirtz, Y. (1992). Effects of response format on diagnostic assessment of scholastic achievement: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 16(4) Dec 1992, 353-363.
  • Bleske-Rechek, A., Zeug, N., & Webb, R. M. (2007). Discrepant performance on multiple-choice and short answer assessments and the relation of performance to general scholastic aptitude: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 32(2) Apr 2007, 89-105.
  • Blozis, S. A. (2007). On fitting nonlinear latent curve models to multiple variables measured longitudinally: Structural Equation Modeling Vol 14(2) 2007, 179-201.
  • Blum, M. L. (1935). Ability of students to estimate their grades on a multiple choice examination: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 26(7) Oct 1935, 547-551.
  • Blumberg, P. (1981). A practical methodology for developing content parallel multiple-choice tests: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 50(2) Win 1981-1982, 56-63.
  • Blumberg, P., Alschuler, M. D., & Rezmovic, V. (1982). Should taxonomic levels be considered in developing examinations? : Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(1) Spr 1982, 1-7.
  • Blumenthal, G. B., & Robbins, D. (1977). Delayed release from proactive interference with meaningful material: How much do we remember after reading brief prose passages? : Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory Vol 3(6) Nov 1977, 754-761.
  • Blunch, N. J. (1984). Position bias in multiple-choice questions: Journal of Marketing Research Vol 21(2) May 1984, 216-220.
  • Boisvert, M., Standing, L., & Moller, L. (1999). Successful part-whole perception in young children using multiple-choice tests: Journal of Genetic Psychology Vol 160(2) Jun 1999, 167-180.
  • Bokhorst, F. D. (1986). Confidence-weighting and the validity of achievement tests: Psychological Reports Vol 59(2, Pt 1) Oct 1986, 383-386.
  • Boldt, R. F. (1974). An approximately reproducing scoring scheme that aligns random response and omission: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 34(1) Spr 1974, 57-61.
  • Bolt, D. M. (2000). A SIBTEST approach to testing DIF hypotheses using experimentally designed test items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 37(4) Win 2000, 307-327.
  • Bolt, D. M., Cohen, A. S., & Wollack, J. A. (2001). A mixture item response model for multiple-choice data: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 26(4) Win 2001, 381-409.
  • Bondy, A. S. (1978). Effects of reviewing multiple-choice tests on specific versus general learning: Teaching of Psychology Vol 5(3) Oct 1978, 144-146.
  • Boone, W. J., & Scantlebury, K. (2006). The Role of Rasch Analysis When Conducting Science Education Research Utilizing Multiple-Choice Tests: Science Education Vol 90(2) Mar 2006, 253-269.
  • Bowering, E. R., & Wetmore, A. A. (1997). Success on multiple choice examinations: A model and workshop intervention: Canadian Journal of Counselling Vol 31(4) Oct 1997, 294-304.
  • Boyd, W. D. (1984). The effect of four distractor elimination procedures on the reliability of a multiple choice achievement test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Bradbard, D. A., & Green, S. B. (1985). Use of the Coombs elimination procedure in classroom tests: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 54(2) Win 1985-1986, 68-72.
  • Bradlow, E. T., Wainer, H., & Wang, X. (1999). A Bayesian random effects model for testlets: Psychometrika Vol 64(2) Jun 1999, 153-168.
  • Brantley, H. T., & Clifford, E. (1980). When My Child Was Born: Maternal reactions to the birth of a child: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 44(6) Dec 1980, 620-623.
  • Breese, E. L., & Hillis, A. E. (2004). Auditory comprehension: Is multiple choice really good enough? : Brain and Language Vol 89(1) Apr 2004, 3-8.
  • Breland, H. M. (1977). Multiple-choice test assesses writing ability: Findings Vol 4(1) 1977, 1-4.
  • Bridgeman, B. (1992). A comparison of quantitative questions in open-ended and multiple-choice formats: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 29(3) Fal 1992, 253-271.
  • Bridgeman, B., & Lewis, C. (1994). The relationship of essay and multiple-choice scores with grades in college courses: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 31(1) Spr 1994, 37-50.
  • Bridgeman, B., & Morgan, R. (1996). Success in college for students with discrepancies between performance on multiple-choice and essay tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 88(2) Jun 1996, 333-340.
  • Bridgeman, B., & Rock, D. A. (1993). Relationships among multiple-choice and open-ended analytical questions: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 30(4) Win 1993, 313-329.
  • Briggs, D. C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items: Educational Assessment Vol 11(1) 2006, 33-63.
  • Briggs, L. J. (1947). Intensive classes for superior students: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 38(4) Apr 1947, 207-215.
  • Broder, P. K. (1974). Multiple-choice recognition as a function of the relative frequencies of correct and incorrect alternatives: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Brown, J. (1965). Multiple response evaluation of discrimination: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 18(1) 1965, 125-137.
  • Brown, W., & Whittell, F. (1923). Yerkes' Multiple Choice Method with Human Adults: Journal of Comparative Psychology Vol 3(4) Aug 1923, 305-318.
  • Brozo, W. G., Schmelzer, R. V., & Spires, H. A. (1984). A study of test-wiseness clues in college and university teacher-made tests: Journal of Learning Skills Vol 3(2) Win 1984, 56-68.
  • Bruno, J. E., & Dirkzwager, A. (1995). Determining the optimal number of alternatives to a multiple-choice test item: An information theoretic perspective: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 55(6) Dec 1995, 959-966.
  • Brunworth, D. W. (1988). Answer-changing gains and losses related to reasons, confidence, beliefs, and item characteristics: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Buday, E. M. (1999). The effects of writing in three content areas on the critical thinking abilities of statistics students. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Budescu, D. V., & Nevo, B. (1985). Optimal number of options: An investigation of the assumption of proportionality: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 22(3) Fal 1985, 183-196.
  • Buiten, B. (1964). Mutilated Words Test: Open end or multiple choice? : Nederlandsch Tijdschrift voor Psychologie 19(3) 1964, 309-314.
  • Burke, T. L. (1992). An investigation of exam type preference, performance attribution, and exam outcome: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Burton, R. (2005). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items: Review: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 30(6) Dec 2005, 657-658.
  • Burton, R. F. (2002). Misinformation, partial knowledge and guessing in true/false tests: Medical Education Vol 36(9) Sep 2002, 805-811.
  • Burton, R. F. (2004). Multiple choice and true/false tests: Reliability measures and some implications of negative marking: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 29(5) Oct 2004, 585-595.
  • Burton, R. F. (2005). Multiple-choice and true/false tests: Myths and misapprehensions: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 30(1) Feb 2005, 65-72.
  • Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied Vol 13(4) Dec 2007, 273-281.
  • Cai, J. (1995). A cognitive analysis of United States and Chinese students' mathematical performance on tasks involving computation, simple problem solving, and complex problem solving. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Caldwell, J. A. (1981). The development and assessment of procedures to derive representations of students' propositional knowledge from multiple choice test responses: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Campbell, J. R. (2000). Cognitive processes elicited by multiple-choice and constructed-response questions on an assessment of reading comprehension. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Campbell, J. R. (2005). Single Instrument, Multiple Measures: Considering the Use of Multiple Item Formats to Assess Reading Comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Cann, A. J. (2005). Extended matching sets questions for online numeracy assessments: A case study: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 30(6) Dec 2005, 633-640.
  • Cannon, G. E. (1995). Empirical option weighting and polytomous scoring of multiple choice tests. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Cantor, J. A. (1987). Developing multiple-choice test items: Training & Development Journal Vol 41(5) May 1987, 85-88.
  • Carlin, J. B., & Rubin, D. B. (1991). Summarizing multiple-choice tests using three informative statistics: Psychological Bulletin Vol 110(2) Sep 1991, 338-349.
  • Carrier, C. A., & Titus, A. (1981). Effects of notetaking pretraining and test mode expectations on learning from lectures: American Educational Research Journal Vol 18(4) Win 1981, 385-397.
  • Carroll, J. G., & Senter, R. J. (1979). Test administration in large lectures: An alternative to the paper chase: Teaching of Psychology Vol 6(4) Dec 1979, 233-234.
  • Carroll, J. L., & Carroll, J. A. (1977). A comparison of the WISC Information and Arithmetic subtests with a multiple choice procedure using kindergarten, first-, and second-grade children: Psychology in the Schools Vol 14(4) Oct 1977, 416-418.
  • Carter, A. M. (1977). The effects of directions regarding guessing and formula scoring on multiple-choice test scores: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Carter, H. D., & Crone, A. P. (1940). The reliability of new-type or objective tests in a normal classroom situation: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 24(3) Jun 1940, 353-368.
  • Carver, R. P. (1975). Revised procedures for developing reading-input materials and reading-storage tests: Journal of Reading Behavior Vol 7(2) Sum 1975, 155-172.
  • Case, S. M., Swanson, D. B., & Ripkey, D. R. (1994). Comparison of items in five-option and extended-matching formats for assessment of diagnostic skills: Academic Medicine Vol 69(10, Suppl) Oct 1994, S1-S3.
  • Casler, L. (1983). Emphasizing the negative: A note on "not" in multiple-choice questions: Teaching of Psychology Vol 10(1) Feb 1983, 51.
  • Casno, P. (1972). Psychological studies and test of knowledge in "multiple choice" form: Revue de Psychologie et des Sciences de l'Education Vol 7(2) 1972, 187-208.
  • Casteel, C. A. (1991). Answer changing on multiple-choice test items among eighth-grade readers: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 59(4) Sum 1991, 300-309.
  • Castle, R. A. (1998). The relative efficiency of two-stage testing versus traditional multiple choice testing using item response theory in licensure. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Cauzinille, E., & Weil-Barais, A. (1974). Evaluation of different modalities of multiple choice utilized during learning in school: Programmed instruction of a grammatical concept in the 6th and 5th forms: Bulletin de Psychologie Vol 28(1-6) 1974-1975, 236-245.
  • Chaffin, W. W. (1979). Dangers in using the Z index for detection of cheating on tests: Psychological Reports Vol 45(3) Dec 1979, 776-778.
  • Challman, R. C. (1946). Review of Large scale Rorschach techniques. A manual for the Group Rorschach and Multiple Choice Test: Psychological Bulletin Vol 43(3) May 1946, 285-287.
  • Chang, L., Van Der Linden, W. J., & Vos, H. J. (2004). Setting Standards and Detecting Intrajudge Inconsistency Using Interdependent Evaluation of Response Alternatives: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 64(5) Oct 2004, 781-801.
  • Changas, P. S. (1992). An investigation of the information provided by the distractors of multiple-choice test items: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Chapman, C. J., & Toops, H. A. (1919). A written trade test: multiple choice method: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 3(4) Dec 1919, 358-365.
  • Chapman, L. J., & Chapman, J. P. (1975). Schizophrenic reasoning about affect-laden material: Archives of General Psychiatry Vol 32(10) Oct 1975, 1233-1236.
  • Chase, C. I. (1964). Relative length of option and response set in multiple choice items: Educational and Psychological Measurement 24(4) 1964, 861-866.
  • Choi, N. (1998). The effects of test format and locus of control on test anxiety: Journal of College Student Development Vol 39(6) Nov-Dec 1998, 616-620.
  • Choppin, B. (1975). Guessing the answer on objective tests: British Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 45, Pt 2 Jun 1975, 206-213.
  • Chorro Gasco, J. L. (1980). A computer program for analyzing objective tests: Psicologica International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology Vol 1(1) Mar 1980, 35-40.
  • Cicciarella, C. F., & Corbin, C. B. (1986). A computer based multiple choice stimulus-response apparatus: Journal of Sport Psychology Vol 8(1) Mar 1986, 70-74.
  • Cizek, G. J. (1994). The effect of altering the position of options in a multiple-choice examination: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 54(1) Spr 1994, 8-20.
  • Cizek, G. J., & O'Day, D. M. (1994). Further investigations of nonfunctioning options in multiple-choice test items: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 54(4) Win 1994, 861-872.
  • Cizek, G. J., Robinson, K. L., & O'Day, D. M. (1998). Nonfunctioning options: A closer look: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 58(4) Aug 1998, 605-611.
  • Clariana, R. B. (2003). The Effectiveness of Constructed-response and Multiple-choice Study Tasks in Computer Aided Learning: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 28(4) 2003, 395-406.
  • Clariana, R. B., & Lee, D. (2001). The effects of recognition and recall study tasks with feedback in a computer-based vocabulary lesson: Educational Technology Research and Development Vol 49(3) 2001, 23-36.
  • Clariana, R. B., & Wallace, P. (2007). A computer-based approach for deriving and measuring individual and team knowledge structure from essay questions: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 37(3) 2007, 211-227.
  • Clarke, S., Lindsay, K., McKenna, C., & New, S. (2004). INQUIRE: A case study in evaluating the potential of online MCQ tests in a discursive subject: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 249-260.
  • Coburn, C. A., & Yerkes, R. M. (1915). A study of the behavior of the crow Corvus Americanus Aud. by the multiple choice method: Journal of Animal Behavior Vol 5(2) Mar-Apr 1915, 75-114.
  • Cohen, R., Rothman, A. I., Bilan, S., & Ross, J. (1996). Analysis of the psychometric properties of eight administrations of an objective structured clinical examination used to assess international medical graduates: Academic Medicine Vol 71 (Suppl 1) Jan 1996, S22-S24.
  • Colonius, H. (1977). On Keats' generalization of the Rasch model: Psychometrika Vol 42(3) Sep 1977, 443-445.
  • Conrad, H. S. (1936). The scoring of the rearrangement test: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 27(4) Apr 1936, 241-252.
  • Cook, J. O. (1953). A gradient theory of multiple-choice learning: Psychological Review Vol 60(1) Jan 1953, 15-22.
  • Copeland, J. S., & Gilliland, A. R. (1943). A comparison of the validity and reliability of three types of objective examinations: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 34(4) Apr 1943, 242-246.
  • Couch, R. W. (1986). The effects of fluency training on multiple-choice tests in a personalized system of instruction, contingency managed lecture, and traditional lecture style course: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Coulson, J. E., & Silberman, H. F. (1960). Effects of three variables in a teaching machine: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 51(3) Jun 1960, 135-143.
  • Coulter, M. A. (1973). The effect of omissions on the reliability of multiple choice tests: Psychologia Africana Vol 15(1) Jul 1973, 53-64.
  • Crehan, K. D., Haladyna, T. M., & Brewer, B. W. (1993). Use of an inclusive option and the optimal number of options for multiple-choice items: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(1) Spr 1993, 241-247.
  • Crocker, L., & Schmitt, A. (1987). Improving multiple-choice test performance for examinees with different levels of test anxiety: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 55(4) Sum 1987, 201-205.
  • Croll, J. C. (1977). Multiple-choice versus confidence weighted true-false tests: A study of reliability differences in achievement testing: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Cronbach, L. J. (1941). An experimental comparison of the multiple true-false and multiple multiple-choice tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 32(7) Oct 1941, 533-543.
  • Cross, L. H. (1974). An investigation of a scoring procedure designed to eliminate score variance due to guessing in multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Cross, L. H., & Frary, R. B. (1977). An empirical test of Lord's theoretical results regarding formula scoring of multiple-choice tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 14(4) Win 1977, 313-321.
  • Cuff, N. B. (1932). Scoring objective tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 23(9) Dec 1932, 681-686.
  • Curlette, W. L. (1978). Demonstration of response strategies in a confidence-testing procedure: Psychological Reports Vol 43(2) Oct 1978, 479-485.
  • Dalton, B., Tivnan, T., Riley, M. K., Rawson, P., & et al. (1995). Revealing competence: Fourth-grade students with and without learning disabilities show what they know on paper-and-pencil and hands-on performance assessments: Learning Disabilities Research & Practice Vol 10(4) Fal 1995, 198-214.
  • Dambrot, F. (1980). Test item order and academic ability, or should you shuffle the test item deck? : Teaching of Psychology Vol 7(2) Apr 1980, 94-96.
  • Dardano, J. F. (1965). Modification of observed behavior: Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 8(4) 1965, 207-214.
  • Daringer, H. F. (1929). An objective measure of ability to make topical outlines: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 20(2) Feb 1929, 112-118.
  • Davies, P. (2004). Don't write, just mark: The validity of assessing student ability via their computerized peer-marking of an essay rather than their creation of an essay: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 261-277.
  • de Gruijter, D. N. (1984). Some reflections on how many choices to choose in multiple choice tests: Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 9(5) Sep 1984, 221-229.
  • de Wolf, D. (1972). Free responses and multiple choice responses: Revue de Psychologie et des Sciences de l'Education Vol 7(2) 1972, 209-226.
  • Defayolle, M., Fedida, P., Bournet, P., & Malaret, J. F. (1964). Remarks on the problem of projection in relation to an experiment on the multiple choice Rorschach: Bulletin de la Societe du Rorschach et des Methodes Projectives de Langue Francaise No 17-18 1964, 7-16.
  • Delgado, A. R. (2007). Using the Rasch model to quantify the causal effect of test instructions: Behavior Research Methods Vol 39(3) Aug 2007, 570-573.
  • Delgado, A. R., & Prieto, G. (1998). Further evidence favoring three-option items in multiple-choice tests: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 14(3) 1998, 197-201.
  • Delgado, A. R., & Prieto, G. (2003). The effect of item feedback on multiple-choice test responses: British Journal of Psychology Vol 94(1) Feb 2003, 73-85.
  • DeMars, C. E. (1998). Gender differences in mathematics and science on a high school proficiency exam: The role of response format: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 11(3) 1998, 279-299.
  • Deni, R. (1979). A BASIC program for objective item test construction and test item management: Teaching of Psychology Vol 6(4) Dec 1979, 241-242.
  • Depue, P. (1965). On a uniform standard for marking: Journal of Experimental Education 33(3) 1965, 231-235.
  • Di Milia, L. (2007). Benefiting from multiple-choice exams: The positive impact of answer switching: Educational Psychology Vol 27(5) Oct 2007, 1-9.
  • Diamond, J. J., Ayrer, J., Fishman, R., & Green, P. (1977). Are inner city children test-wise? : Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 14(1) Spr 1977, 39-45.
  • Diamond, J. J., & Evans, W. J. (1972). An investigation of the cognitive correlates of test-wiseness: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 9(2) Sum 1972, 145-150.
  • DiBattista, D., Mitterer, J. O., & Gosse, L. (2004). Acceptance by undergraduates of the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique for multiple-choice testing: Teaching in Higher Education Vol 9(1) Jan 2004, 17-28.
  • Dickson, K. L., Devoley, M. S., & Miller, M. D. (2006). Effect of study guide exercises on multiple-choice exam performance in introductory psychology: Teaching of Psychology Vol 33(1) Win 2006, 40-42.
  • Diehl, V. A., & Mills, C. B. (1995). The effects of interaction with the device described by procedural text on recall, true/false, and task performance: Memory & Cognition Vol 23(6) Nov 1995, 675-688.
  • Digby, S. P. (1981). The nature of the cloze and multiple-choice test order effect: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Dimmick, G. B. (1931). An automatic rotary switch for use with the Ranschburg exposure apparatus for continuous multiple choice work: Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol 14(3) Jun 1931, 303-309.
  • Ding, S., Luo, f., Dai, H., & Zhu, W. (2007). The development of multiple-attempt, multiple-item test models and their applications: Acta Psychologica Sinica Vol 39(4) Jul 2007, 730-736.
  • Dirkzwager, A. (1996). Testing with personal probabilities: 11-year-olds can correctly estimate their personal probabilities: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 56(6) Dec 1996, 957-971.
  • Divgi, D. R. (1986). Does the Rasch model really work for multiple choice items? Not if you look closely: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 23(4) Win 1986, 283-298.
  • Dix, L. J. (1987). Reliability differences of ability grouped college students' verbal analogies multiple-choice test scores with varying numbers of choices per item and a fixed number of choices per test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Dochy, F., Moerkerke, G., De Corte, E., & Segers, M. (2001). The assessment of quantitative problem-solving skills with "none of the above"-items (NOTA items): European Journal of Psychology of Education Vol 16(2) Jun 2001, 163-177.
  • Dodd, D. K., & Leal, L. (2002). Answer justification: Removing the "trick" from multiple-choice questions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Dolly, J. P., & Williams, K. S. (1986). Using test-taking strategies to maximize multiple-choice test scores: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 46(3) Fal 1986, 619-625.
  • Doron, R. (1991). The application of facet theory for examining the construct validity of item banks: Megamot Vol 33(3-4) Jun 1991, 381-389.
  • Downing, S. M. (1992). True-false, alternate-choice, and multiple choice items: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 11(3) Fal 1992, 27-30.
  • Downing, S. M. (2002). Construct-irrelevant variance and flawed test questions: Do multiple-choice item-writing principles make any difference? : Academic Medicine Vol 77(Suppl10) Oct 2002, S103-S104.
  • Downing, S. M. (2003). Guessing on selected-response examinations: Medical Education Vol 37(8) Aug 2003, 670-671.
  • Downing, S. M. (2005). The Effects of Violating Standard Item Writing Principles on Tests and Students: The Consequences of Using Flawed Test Items on Achievement Examinations in Medical Education: Advances in Health Sciences Education Vol 10(2) Jun 2005, 133-143.
  • Downing, S. M., Baranowski, R. A., Grosso, L. J., & Norcini, J. J. (1995). Item type and cognitive ability measured: The validity evidence for multiple true-false items in medical specialty certification: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 8(2) 1995, 187-197.
  • Drasgow, F. (1982). Choice of test model for appropriateness measurement: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 6(3) Sum 1982, 297-308.
  • Drasgow, F., Levine, M. V., Tsien, S., Williams, B., & et al. (1995). Fitting polytomous item response theory models to multiple-choice tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 19(2) Jun 1995, 143-165.
  • Drasgow, F., Levine, M. V., & Williams, E. A. (1985). Appropriateness measurement with polychotomous item response models and standardized indices: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 38(1) May 1985, 67-86.
  • Droegemueller, W., Gant, N., Brekken, A., & Webb, L. (2005). Comedy Workshop: An Enjoyable Way to Develop Multiple-Choice Questions: Teaching and Learning in Medicine Vol 17(3) Sum 2005, 290-291.
  • Duchastel, P. C., & Nungester, R. J. (1982). Testing effects measured with alternate test forms: Journal of Educational Research Vol 75(5) May-Jun 1982, 309-313.
  • Dudley, A. P. (2005). The viability of the multiple true-false test format in second language testing. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Duell, O. K. (1978). Overt and covert use of objectives of different cognitive levels: Contemporary Educational Psychology Vol 3(3) Jul 1978, 239-245.
  • Duncan, G. T., & Milton, E. O. (1978). Multiple-answer multiple-choice test items: Responding and scoring through Bayes and minimax strategies: Psychometrika Vol 43(1) Mar 1978, 43-57.
  • Duncan, R. E. (1983). An appropriate number of multiple-choice item alternatives: A difference of opinion: Measurement & Evaluation in Guidance Vol 15(4) Jan 1983, 283-292.
  • Dunham, M. L. (2007). An investigation of the multiple true-false item for nursing licensure and potential sources of construct-irrelevant difficulty. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Dunn, B. R. (1979). Effects of specific cueing on multiple-choice test performance: Psychological Reports Vol 44(3, Pt 2) Jun 1979, 1051-1054.
  • Dyck, W., & Plancke-Schuyten, G. (1976). Manipulations with multiple choice tests: A probability function of a total test score V: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 36(2) Sum 1976, 259-262.
  • Earleywine, M. (2005). Where Choice Begins: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 50 (4), 2005.
  • Ebel, R. L. (1975). Can teachers write good true-false test items? : Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(1) Spr 1975, 31-35.
  • Eberhardt, B. J., Yap, C. K., & Basuray, M. T. (1988). A psychometric evaluation of the multiple choice version of the Miner Sentence Completion Scale: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(1) Spr 1988, 119-126.
  • Eheim, W. P. (1977). Effect of response position on response frequency for multiple-choice items: Diagnostica Vol 23(3) 1977, 193-198.
  • Ehrenstein, A., & Proctor, R. W. (1998). Selecting mapping rules and responses in mixed compatibility four-choice tasks: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung Vol 61(4) 1998, 231-248.
  • Ellsworth, R. A., Dunnell, P., & Duell, O. K. (1990). Multiple-choice test items: What are textbook authors telling teachers? : Journal of Educational Research Vol 83(5) May-Jun 1990, 289-293.
  • Elstein, A. S. (1993). Beyond multiple-choice questions and essays: The need for a new way to assess clinical competence: Academic Medicine Vol 68(4) Apr 1993, 244-249.
  • Engle, T. L. (1946). The use of the Harrower-Erickson Multiple Choice (Rorschach) Test in differentiating between well-adjusted and maladjusted high-school pupils: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 37(9) Dec 1946, 550-556.
  • Entin, E. B., & Klare, G. R. (1978). Some inter-relationships of readability, cloze, and multiple choice scores on a reading comprehension test: Journal of Reading Behavior Vol 10(4) Win 1978, 417-436.
  • Epstein, M. L., & Brosvic, G. M. (2002). Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique: Multiple-choice test that "behaves" like an essay examination: Psychological Reports Vol 90(1) Feb 2002, 226.
  • Epstein, M. L., Epstein, B. B., & Brosvic, G. M. (2001). Immediate feedback during academic testing: Psychological Reports Vol 88(3) Jun 2001, 889-894.
  • Epstein, M. L., Lazarus, A. D., Calvano, T. B., Matthews, K. A., Hendel, R. A., Epstein, B. B., et al. (2002). Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique promotes learning and corrects inaccurate first responses: Psychological Record Vol 52(2) Spr 2002, 187-201.
  • Ercikan, K., Schwarz, R. D., Julian, M. W., Burket, G. R., Weber, M. M., & Link, V. (1998). Calibration and scoring of tests with multiple-choice and constructed-response item types: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(2) Sum 1998, 137-154.
  • Eurich, A. C. (1931). Four types of examinations compared and evaluated: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 22(4) Apr 1931, 268-278.
  • Evans, R. M., & Misfeldt, K. (1974). Effect of self-scoring procedures on test reliability: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 38(3, Pt 2) Jun 1974, 1248.
  • Fabre, J.-M., & Noizet, G. (1977). Confidence attached to responses to multiple-choice questions: Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique Vol 74(3) Jul-Sep 1977, 335-361.
  • Fagley, N. S. (1984). Positional response bias in multiple-choice test performance revisited: Its relation to test-wiseness and guessing strategy: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Fagley, N. S. (1987). Positional response bias in multiple-choice tests of learning: Its relation to testwiseness and guessing strategy: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 79(1) Mar 1987, 95-97.
  • Farkas, E. (1988). The relationship of cognitive style and scaffolding on a multiple choice visual matching task and assessment of the zone of proximal development: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Feger, B. (1984). A discussion of item-writing techniques for instructional texts: Diagnostica Vol 30(1) 1984, 24-46.
  • Feldt, L. S. (1993). The relationship between the distribution of item difficulties and test reliability: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 6(1) 1993, 37-48.
  • Feldt, L. S. (1997). Can validity rise when reliability declines? : Applied Measurement in Education Vol 10(4) 1997, 377-387.
  • Feldt, R. C., & Ray, M. (1989). Effect of test expectancy on preferred study strategy use and test performance: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 68(3, Pt 2) Jun 1989, 1157-1158.
  • Feliciano, S. (1987). Comparison of males and females on math item performance: Analysis of response patterns: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Fellenz, M. R. (2004). Using assessment to support higher level learning: The multiple choice item development assignment: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 29(6) Dec 2004, 703-719.
  • Fennig, S. (2005). Review of MCQs in Psychiatry: Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences Vol 42(1) 2005, 64-65.
  • Ferland, J. J., Dorval, J., & Levasseur, L. (1987). Measuring higher cognitive levels by multiple choice questions: A myth? : Medical Education Vol 21(2) Mar 1987, 109-113.
  • Fischer, F. E. (1987). Effects of instruction for guessing on multiple-choice test performance: Educational Research Quarterly Vol 12(1) 1987-1988, 6-9.
  • Fischer, M. R., Herrmann, S., & Kopp, V. (2005). Answering multiple-choice questions in high-stakes medical examinations: Medical Education Vol 39(9) Sep 2005, 890-894.
  • Fleming, P. R. (1988). The profitability of "guessing" in multiple choice question papers: Medical Education Vol 22(6) Nov 1988, 509-513.
  • Flynn, T. M. (1976). Validation of preschool teachers' recall of children's behavior: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 45(2) Win 1976, 46-51.
  • Foos, P. W. (1989). Completion time and performance on multiple-choice and essay tests: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society Vol 27(2) Mar 1989, 179-180.
  • Foos, P. W. (1989). Effects of student-written questions on student test performance: Teaching of Psychology Vol 16(2) Apr 1989, 77-78.
  • Foos, P. W. (1992). Test performance as a function of expected form and difficulty: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 60(3) Spr 1992, 205-211.
  • Foos, P. W. (2002). Effects of student-written questions on student test performance. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Foote, R., & Belinky, C. (1972). It pays to switch? Consequences of changing answers on multiple-choice examinations: Psychological Reports Vol 31(2) Oct 1972, 667-673.
  • Ford, V. A. (1977). The influence of two test-wiseness programs upon students' test performance: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Fortus, R., Coriat, R., & Fund, S. (1998). Prediction of item difficulty in the English Subtest of Israel's Inter-University Psychometric Entrance Test. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Fossett, T. R. D., McNeil, M. R., Doyle, P. J., Rubinsky, H., Nixon, S., Hula, W., et al. (2004). Assessing the validity of multiple-choice questions for RAPP story comprehension: Aphasiology Vol 18(5-7) May-Jul 2004, 493-519.
  • Foster, R. R., & Ruch, G. M. (1927). On corrections for chance in multiple-response tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 18(1) Jan 1927, 48-51.
  • Frary, R. B. (1980). The effect of misinformation, partial information, and guessing on expected multiple-choice test item scores: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 4(1) Win 1980, 79-90.
  • Frary, R. B. (1982). A simulation study of reliability and validity of multiple-choice test scores under six response-scoring modes: Journal of Educational Statistics Vol 7(4) Win 1982, 333-351.
  • Frary, R. B. (1985). Multiple-choice versus free-response: A simulation study: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 22(1) Spr 1985, 21-31.
  • Frary, R. B. (1989). The effect of inappropriate omissions on formula scores: A simulation study: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 26(1) Spr 1989, 41-53.
  • Frary, R. B. (1993). Statistical detection of multiple-choice answer copying: Review and commentary: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 6(2) 1993, 153-165.
  • Frary, R. B., & Hutchinson, T. P. (1982). Willingness to answer multiple-choice questions as manifested both in genuine and in nonsense items: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(3) Fal 1982, 815-821.
  • Frary, R. B., & Tideman, T. N. (1997). Comparison of two indices of answer copying and development of a spliced index: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 57(1) Feb 1997, 20-32.
  • Frederickson, C. G. (1999). Multiple-choice answer changing: A type connection? : Journal of Psychological Type Vol 51 1999, 40-46.
  • Frederiksen, N. (1984). The real test bias: Influences of testing on teaching and learning: American Psychologist Vol 39(3) Mar 1984, 193-202.
  • Freedle, R., & Kostin, I. (1994). Can mutiple-choice reading tests be construct-valid? A reply to Katz, Lautenschlager, Blackburn, and Harris: Psychological Science Vol 5(2) Mar 1994, 107-110.
  • Freedle, R., & Kostin, I. (1999). Does the text matter in a multiple-choice test of comprehension? The case for the construct validity of TOEFL's minitalks: Language Testing Vol 16(1) Jan 1999, 2-32.
  • Freidman, M. P., & Fleishman, E. A. (1956). A note on the use of a "don't know" alternative in multiple choice tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 47(6) Oct 1956, 344-349.
  • Friedman, A. F., Wakefield, J. A., Sasek, J., & Schroeder, D. (1977). A new scoring system for the Spraings Multiple Choice Bender Gestalt Test: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 33(1) Jan 1977, 205-207.
  • Friedman, H. (2002). Immediate feedback, no return test procedure for introductory courses. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Friedman, S. J., & Cook, G. L. (1995). Is an examinee's cognitive style related to the impact of answer changing on multiple-choice tests? : Journal of Experimental Education Vol 63(3) Spr 1995, 199-213.
  • Friedman, T. B. (1987). Comparison of test methods used to assess competence in the health fields: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Friedrich, H. F. (1978). A comparison of some methods to weight options in a multiple-choice knowledge test: A note on the evaluation of the Funkkolleg-examinations: Zeitschrift fur Empirische Padagogik Vol 2(2) 1978, 70-88.
  • Friedrich, H. F., Klemt, W., & Schubring, G. (1980). A guessing model for multiple choice items of the type "n out of N." Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaftliche Forschung Vol 14 1980, 189-208.
  • Frisbie, D. A. (1973). Multiple choice versus true-false: A comparison of reliabilities and concurrent validities: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 10(4) Win 1973, 297-304.
  • Frisbie, D. A. (1974). The effect of item format on reliability and validity: A study of multiple choice and true-false achievement tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 34(4) Win 1974, 885-892.
  • Frisbie, D. A., & Sweeney, D. C. (1982). The relative merits of multiple true-false achievement tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 19(1) Spr 1982, 29-35.
  • Fujimori, S. (1997). Bias reduction in Lord's procedure of dealing with omitted responses in multiple-choice tests: Japanese Journal of Psychology Vol 67(6) Feb 1997, 429-435.
  • Fujimori, S., & Nakano, K. (1994). Effect of test directions upon examinees' test-taking behaviors and performance: Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 42(4) Dec 1994, 455-462.
  • Fulmer, R. S., & Rollings, H. E. (1976). Item-by-item feedback and multiple choice test performance: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 44(4) Sum 1976, 30-32.
  • Fuqua, R. W. (1977). Concurrent academic behaviors: The titration of preference for item format: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Furnham, A., Thompson, C., & Baluch, B. (1998). Measuring psychological "knowledge" by means of instructors' test manuals: An issue for concern? : European Psychologist Vol 3(3) Sep 1998, 189-191.
  • Galbraith, F. L. (1987). The use of multiple choice items and holistically scored writing samples to assess student writing ability: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Garcia-Perez, M. A. (1987). A finite state theory of performance in multiple-choice tests. New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
  • Garcia-Perez, M. A. (1990). A comparison of two models of performance in objective tests: Finite states versus continuous distributions: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 43(1) May 1990, 73-91.
  • Garner, M., & Engelhard, G., Jr. (1999). Gender differences in performance on multiple-choice and constructed response mathematics items: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 12(1) 1999, 29-51.
  • Gates, F. R. (1986). Further comments on the miscomprehension of televised advertisements: Journal of Advertising Vol 15(1) 1986, 4-9.
  • Gay, L. R. (1980). The comparative effects of multiple-choice versus short-answer tests on retention: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 17(1) Spr 1980, 45-50.
  • Geiger, M. A. (1990). Correlates of net gain from changing multiple-choice answers: Replication and extension: Psychological Reports Vol 67(3, Pt 1) Dec 1990, 719-722.
  • Geiger, M. A. (1991). Changing multiple-choice answers: A validation and extension: College Student Journal Vol 25(2) Jun 1991, 181-186.
  • Geiger, M. A. (1991). Changing multiple-choice answers: Do students accurately perceive their performance? : Journal of Experimental Education Vol 59(3) Spr 1991, 250-257.
  • Geiger, M. A. (1997). Educators' warnings about changing examination answers: Effects on student perceptions and performance: College Student Journal Vol 31(3) Sep 1997, 429-432.
  • George, S. (2003). Extended matching item(EMIs): Solving the conundrum: Psychiatric Bulletin Vol 27(6) Jun 2003, 230-232.
  • Gerner, F. J. (1973). The analysis of the specificity of feedback available in multiple-choice test items as a teaching instrument: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Ghandour, M. M. (1986). Effect on item reliability, difficulty, and discrimination of conventional versus complex "all-of-the-above" and "none-of-the-above" multiple-choice items: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Gibbons, J. D., Olkin, I., & Sobel, M. (1979). A subset selection technique of scoring items on a multiple choice test: Psychometrika Vol 44(3) Sep 1979, 259-270.
  • Giles, M. B. (1980). An investigation of the relationships of test characteristics and personality variables to partial information and misinformation in multiple-choice test scores: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Glass, G. V., & Wiley, D. E. (1964). Formula scoring and test reliability: Journal of Educational Measurement 1(1) 1964, 43-49.
  • Gordon, E. M. (1977). A comparison of three bases for determining item discrimination: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Gordon, O. E., & Malloy, T. E. (2002). On-line homework/quiz/exam applet: Freely available Java software for evaluating performance on line: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 34(2) May 2002, 241-244.
  • Gorin, J. S. (2005). Manipulating processing difficulty of reading comprehension questions: The feasibility of verbal item generation: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 42(4) Win 2005, 351-373.
  • Gorrell, J., & Cramond, B. (1988). Students' attitudes toward and use of written justifications for multiple-choice answers: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(4) Win 1988, 935-943.
  • Gough, E. R. (1977). The science-related problem-solving processes of visually impaired adolescents: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Granich, L. (1931). A technique for experimentation on guessing in objective tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 22(2) Feb 1931, 145-156.
  • Green, K. (1984). Effects of item characteristics on multiple-choice item difficulty: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 44(3) Fal 1984, 551-561.
  • Green, K. E. (1982). Identification and investigation of determinants of multiple-choice test item difficulty: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Green, K. E. (1986). Fundamental measurement: A review and application of additive conjoint measurement in educational testing: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 54(3) Spr 1986, 141-147.
  • Gregson, T. (1990). Measuring job satisfaction with a multiple-choice format of the Job Descriptive Index: Psychological Reports Vol 66(3, Pt 1) Jun 1990, 787-793.
  • Grier, J. B. (1975). The number of alternatives for optimum test reliability: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(2) Sum 1975, 109-113.
  • Griffiths, R. R., Rush, C. R., & Puhala, K. A. (1996). Validation of the multiple-choice procedure for investigating drug reinforcement in humans: Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology Vol 4(1) Feb 1996, 97-106.
  • Gritten, F., & Johnson, D. M. (1941). Individual differences in judging multiple-choice questions: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 32(6) Sep 1941, 423-430.
  • Grmek, M. I., & Krecic, M. J. (2004). Impact of external examinations (Matura) on school lessons: Educational Studies Vol 30(3) Sep 2004, 319-329.
  • Gross, L. J. (1994). Logical versus empirical guidelines for writing test items: The case of "none of the above." Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 17(1) Mar 1994, 123-126.
  • Gustafsson, J.-E. (1979). The Rasch model in vertical equating of tests: A critique of Slinde and Linn: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 16(3) Fal 1979, 153-158.
  • Haertel, E. H. (1980). Determining what is measured by multiple-choice tests of reading comprehension: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hai-qi, D., De-zhi, C., Shuliang, D., & Taiping, D. (2006). The Comparison Among Item Selection Strategies of CAT with Multiple-choice Items: Acta Psychologica Sinica Vol 38(5) Sep 2006, 778-783.
  • Hakel, M. D. (1998). Beyond multiple choice: Evaluating alternatives to traditional testing for selection. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Hakstian, A. R., & Kansup, W. (1975). A comparison of several methods of assessing partial knowledge in multiple-choice tests: II. Testing procedures: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(4) Win 1975, 231-239.
  • Haladyna, T. M. (1992). The effectiveness of several multiple-choice formats: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 5(1) 1992, 73-88.
  • Haladyna, T. M. (1994). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Haladyna, T. M. (1999). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Haladyna, T. M. (2004). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (1993). How many options is enough for a multiple-choice test item? : Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(4) Win 1993, 999-1010.
  • Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 15(3) Jul 2002, 309-334.
  • Hambleton, R. K., & Murphy, E. (1992). A psychometric perspective on authentic measurement: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 5(1) 1992, 1-16.
  • Hamer, R., & Young, F. W. (1978). TESTER: A computer program to produce individualized multiple choice tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 38(3) Fal 1978, 819-821.
  • Hamer, R., & Young, F. W. (1978). TESTER: A computer program to produce individualized multiple-choice tests: Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation Vol 10(1) Feb 1978, 77.
  • Hamilton, L. S. (1998). Construct validity of constructed-response assessments: Male and female high school science performance. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Hamilton, L. S. (1998). Gender differences in high school science achievement tests: Do format and content matter? : Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis Vol 20(3) Fal 1998, 179-195.
  • Hancock, G. R., Thiede, K. W., Sax, G., & Michael, W. B. (1993). Reliability of comparably written two-option multiple-choice and true-false test items: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(3) Fal 1993, 651-660.
  • Hanna, G. S. (1975). Incremental reliability and validity of multiple-choice tests with an answer-until-correct procedure: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(3) Fal 1975, 175-178.
  • Hanna, G. S. (1976). Effects of total and partial feedback in multiple-choice testing upon learning: Journal of Educational Research Vol 69(5) Jan 1976, 202-205.
  • Hanna, G. S. (1977). A study of reliability and validity effects of total and partial immediate feedback in multiple-choice testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 14(1) Spr 1977, 1-7.
  • Hanna, G. S., & Johnson, F. R. (1978). Reliability and validity of multiple-choice tests developed by four distractor selection procedures: Journal of Educational Research Vol 71(4) Mar-Apr 1978, 203-206.
  • Hanna, G. S., & Long, C. A. (1979). Effect of answer until correct testing on reliability: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 49(2) Oct 1979, 464-466.
  • Hanna, G. S., & Oaster, T. R. (1980). Studies of the seriousness of three threats to passage dependence: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 40(2) Sum 1980, 405-411.
  • Harasym, P. H., Price, P. G., Brant, R., Violato, C., & et al. (1992). Evaluation of negation in stems of multiple-choice items: Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 15(2) Jun 1992, 198-220.
  • Harper, R. (2003). Correcting computer-based assessments for guessing: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 19(1) Mar 2003, 2-8.
  • Harris, D. K., & Changas, P. S. (1994). Revision of Palmore's second Facts on Aging Quiz from a true-false to a multiple-choice format: Educational Gerontology Vol 20(8) Dec 1994, 741-754.
  • Harrison, A. F. (1985). Mental imagery: An instructional strategy to facilitate memory performance in the taking of multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hartman, A. G. (1987). Detecting cheating on multiple-choice examinations: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Harvil, L. M., & Davis, G., III. (1997). Medical students' reasons for changing answers on multiple-choice tests: Academic Medicine Vol 72(10, Suppl 1) Oct 1997, S97-S99.
  • Hassmen, P., & Hunt, D. P. (1994). Human self-assessment in multiple-choice testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 31(2) Sum 1994, 149-160.
  • Hautau, B., Turner, H. C., Carroll, E., Jaspers, K., Krohn, K., Parker, M., et al. (2006). Differential Daily Writing Conditions and Performance on Major Multiple-Choice Exams: Journal of Behavioral Education Vol 15(3) Sep 2006, 171-181.
  • Haven, S. E., & Copeland, H. A. (1932). A note on the multiple choice test: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 16(2) Apr 1932, 219-221.
  • Haydel, A. M. (2003). Measuring more than we know? An examination of the motivational and situational influences in science achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Hebel, R. (1974). The number of questions needed for discriminatory power on multiple choice examinations: Journal of Medical Education Vol 49(8) Aug 1974, 787-789.
  • Heck, R. H., & Crislip, M. (2001). Direct and indirect writing assessments: Examining issues of equity and utility: Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis Vol 23(3) Fal 2001, 275-292.
  • Henning, G. (1989). Does the Rasch model really work for multiple-choice items? Take another look: A response to Divgi: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 26(1) Spr 1989, 91-97.
  • Heuer, S., & Hallowell, B. (2007). An evaluation of multiple-choice test images for comprehension assessment in aphasia: Aphasiology Vol 21(9) Sep 2007, 883-900.
  • Hewson, C. (2007). Web-MCQ: A set of methods and freely available open source code for administering online multiple choice question assessments: Behavior Research Methods Vol 39(3) Aug 2007, 471-481.
  • Hickman, A. (1973). Guessing Rates in Triple Choice Music Items: Psychology of Music Vol 1(1) Jan 1973, 22-28.
  • Hidalgo, J. J. N., & Roche, J. M. (2003). Metaknowledge assessment about the understanding of texts: Analysis of a measure instrument in a descriptive study: Apuntes de Psicologia Vol 21(2) Sep 2003, 193-209.
  • Higham, P. A., & Gerrard, C. (2005). Not All Errors Are Created Equal: Metacognition and Changing Answers on Multiple-Choice Tests: Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale Vol 59(1) Mar 2005, 28-34.
  • Hilgard, E. R., & Jandron, E. L. (1960). Stability of item statistics in two institutions: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 51(4) Aug 1960, 195-198.
  • Hodson, D. (1984). The effect of changes in item sequence on student performance in a multiple-choice chemistry test: Journal of Research in Science Teaching Vol 21(5) May 1984, 489-495.
  • Hodson, D. (1984). Some effects of changes in question structure and sequence on performance in a multiple choice chemistry test: Research in Science & Technological Education Vol 2(2) 1984, 177-185.
  • Hofstee, W. K. (1973). Participation control by means of fatuous test items: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden Vol 28(3-4) Aug 1973, 189-198.
  • Horber, D. T. (1983). The relationships of attitudes toward, and performance on, multiple-choice tests to convergent production, divergent production, and risk-taking: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Horst, P. (1932). The difficulty of multiple choice test item alternatives: Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol 15(4) Aug 1932, 469-472.
  • Horst, P. (1933). The difficulty of a multiple choice test item: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 24(3) Mar 1933, 229-232.
  • Houston, J. P. (1976). Amount and loci of classroom answer copying, spaced seating, and alternate test forms: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 68(6) Dec 1976, 729-735.
  • Houston, J. P. (1976). The assessment and prevention of answer copying on undergraduate multiple-choice examinations: Research in Higher Education Vol 5(4) 1976, 301-311.
  • Houston, J. P. (1983). Alternate test forms as a means of reducing multiple-choice answer copying in the classroom: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 75(4) Aug 1983, 572-575.
  • Houston, J. P. (1986). Survey corroboration of experimental findings on classroom cheating behavior: College Student Journal Vol 20(2) Sum 1986, 168-173.
  • Hsu, J. S., Leonard, T., & Tsui, K.-w. (1991). Statistical inference for multiple choice tests: Psychometrika Vol 56(2) Jun 1991, 327-348.
  • Hsu, L. M. (1978). Determination of risk of mis-ranking a pair of examinees on a multiple-choice test: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 46(3, Pt 2) Jun 1978, 1265-1266.
  • Hsu, L. M. (1978). Determination of the minimum number of questions in a multiple-choice test: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 47(2) Oct 1978, 613-614.
  • Hsu, T.-c., Moss, P. A., & Khampalikit, C. (1984). The merits of multiple-answer items as evaluated by using six scoring formulas: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 52(3) Spr 1984, 152-158.
  • Hu, P.-h. G. (1988). A comparative study of three multiple-answer test formats: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hu, Y. (1992). Factors affecting the Rasch model in detecting aberrant persons: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Huang, Y. M. (2005). The impact of the "all-of-the-above" option and student ability in multiple choice testing. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Huck, S. W., & Bowers, N. D. (1972). Item difficulty level and sequence effects in multiple-choice achievement tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 9(2) Sum 1972, 105-111.
  • Hughes, H. H., & Trimble, W. E. (1965). The use of complex alternatives in multiple choice items: Educational and Psychological Measurement 25(1) 1965, 117-126.
  • Hutchinson, T. P. (1980). Partial knowledge and the theoretical basis of linear corrections for guessing: Contemporary Educational Psychology Vol 5(3) Jul 1980, 227-231.
  • Hutchinson, T. P. (1982). Some theories of performance in multiple choice tests, and their implications for variants of the task: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 35(1) May 1982, 71-89.
  • Hutchinson, T. P. (1986). Evidence about partial information from an answer-until-correct administration of a test of spatial reasoning: Contemporary Educational Psychology Vol 11(3) Jul 1986, 264-275.
  • Hutchinson, T. P., & Barton, D. C. (1987). A mechanical reasoning test with answer-until-correct directions confirms a quantitative description of partial information: Research in Science & Technological Education Vol 5(1) 1987, 93-101.
  • Hutsebaut, D., & Verhoeven, D. (1995). Studying dimensions of God representation: Choosing closed or open-ended research questions: International Journal for the Psychology of Religion Vol 5(1) 1995, 49-60.
  • Hynes, K., Givner, N., & Patil, K. (1978). Detection of test cheating behavior: Psychological Reports Vol 42(3, Pt 2) Jun 1978, 1070.
  • Ibabe, I., & Sporer, S. L. (2004). How You Ask Is What You Get: On the Influence of Question Form on Accuracy and Confidence: Applied Cognitive Psychology Vol 18(6) Sep 2004, 711-726.
  • Ingleby, J. D. (1973). The separation of bias and sensitivity in multiple-choice tasks: Perception Vol 2(3) 1973, 295-305.
  • Irvin, L. K., Halpern, A. S., & Landman, J. T. (1980). Assessment of retarded student achievement with standardized true/false and multiple-choice tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 17(1) Spr 1980, 51-58.
  • Ishihara, S., & Fujita, O. (1963). The effect of emotional stimuli on behavior in the multiple choice situation: Several aspects of behavior in the semicircular maze: Annual of Animal Psychology 13(1) 1963, 17-26.
  • Jain, U., & Agrawal, L. (1977). Generality of extreme response style: Journal of Psychological Researches Vol 21(1) Jan 1977, 67-72.
  • Jansen, M. G. (1985). The psychometric equivalence of two types of spelling tests: Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 10(5) Oct 1985, 239-244.
  • Jaradat, D., & Sawaged, S. (1986). The Subset Selection Technique for multiple-choice tests: An empirical inquiry: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 23(4) Win 1986, 369-376.
  • Jaradat, D., & Sawaqid, S. (1985). A study of the influence of three methods of grading multiple-choice tests on psychometric statistics for testing and the scores of examinees: Dirasat Vol 12(11) Nov 1985, 27-42.
  • Jaradat, D., & Tollefson, N. (1988). The impact of alternative scoring procedures for multiple-choice items on test reliability, validity, and grading: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(3) Fal 1988, 627-635.
  • Jernstedt, G. C. (1976). The relative effectiveness of individualized and traditional instruction methods: Journal of Educational Research Vol 69(6) Feb 1976, 211-218.
  • Jessell, J. C., & Sullins, W. L. (1975). The effect of keyed response sequencing of multiple choice items on performance and reliability: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(1) Spr 1975, 45-48.
  • Jochems, W., & Montens, F. (1987). Multiple-choice cloze tests as tests of general language proficiency: Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 12(3) Jun 1987, 133-143.
  • Johnson, F. R. (1977). The reliability and concurrent validity of multiple-choice tests derived by four distractor selection procedures: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Johnson, P. G. (2000). Measuring clinical judgment with multiple choice test items. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Johnson, W. R., Sieveking, N. A., & Clanton, E. S. (1974). Effects of alternative positioning of open-ended questions in multiple-choice questionnaires: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 59(6) Dec 1974, 776-778.
  • Johnston, J. J. (1978). Answer-changing behavior and grades: Teaching of Psychology Vol 5(1) Feb 1978, 44-45.
  • Jones, G. G. (1976). Assessment of partial knowledge: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Jones, P. D., & Kaufman, G. G. (1975). The differential formation of response sets by specific determiners: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 35(4) Win 1975, 821-833.
  • Kaciak, E., & Louviere, J. (1990). Multiple correspondence analysis of multiple choice experiment data: Journal of Marketing Research Vol 27(4) Nov 1990, 455-465.
  • Kalat, J. W. (1983). Possibilities for enhanced un-educated guessing on published introductory psychology multiple-choice test items: Teaching of Psychology Vol 10(4) Dec 1983, 231.
  • Kales, E. J. (1979). Evaluation of a modular self-paced introductory chemistry course: Improving the testing and measurement of achievement and attitude: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kamen, S. B. (1998). Examining the construct validity of readability: Usefulness of readability information for the validation of multiple choice tests. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Kane, M., & Moloney, J. (1978). The effect of guessing on item reliability under answer-until-correct scoring: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 2(1) Win 1978, 41-49.
  • Kansup, W., & Hakstian, A. R. (1975). A comparison of several methods of assessing partial knowledge in multiple-choice tests: I. Scoring procedures: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(4) Win 1975, 219-230.
  • Kasper, G., & Ross, S. J. (2007). Multiple questions in oral proficiency interviews: Journal of Pragmatics Vol 39(11) Nov 2007, 2045-2070.
  • Katz, S., Brown, J. M., Smith, F. G., & Greene, H. (1998). Using the computer to examine behavior on the SAT reading comprehension task: Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior Vol 35(2) 1998, 45-55.
  • Kazemi, E. (2002). Exploring test performance in mathematics: The questions children's anwers raise: The Journal of Mathematical Behavior Vol 21(2) 2002, 203-224.
  • Kelly, A. L. (1998). The use of constructed response testing in nursing education. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Kenyon, D. M. (1996). Linking multiple-choice test scores to verbally-defined proficiency levels: An application to Chinese reading proficiency. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Kim, I. K. (1975). A model for response distribution formation in multiple-choice achievement test items: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kim, J.-k. (1990). Ability estimation for conventional tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kim, J. K., & Nicewander, W. A. (1993). Ability estimation for conventional tests: Psychometrika Vol 58(4) Dec 1993, 587-599.
  • Kim, J.-S. (2005). A Latent-Change Scaling Model for Longitudinal Multiple Choice Data: Multivariate Behavioral Research Vol 40(1) Jan 2005, 53-82.
  • Kim, J.-S. (2006). Using the distractor categories of multiple-choice items to improve IRT linking: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 44(3) Sep 2006, 193-213.
  • Kim, Y. H., & Goetz, E. T. (1993). Strategic processing of test questions: The test marking responses of college students: Learning and Individual Differences Vol 5(3) Fal 1993, 211-218.
  • Klein, L. W. (1978). Position response set in multiple-choice tests for mildly mentally retarded high school students: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kleinke, D. J. (1998). A practitioner's response and call for help. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Klishis, M. J. (1982). An analysis of two different test item formats in an individually taught psychology course: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Knapp, T. R. (1977). The reliability of a dichotomous test-item: A "correlationless" approach: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 14(3) Fal 1977, 237-252.
  • Knowles, S. L., & Welch, C. A. (1992). A meta-analytic review of item discrimination and difficulty in multiple-choice items using "none-of-the-above." Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 52(3) Fal 1992, 571-577.
  • Koehler, R. A. (1974). Overconfidence on probabilistic tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 11(2) Sum 1974, 101-108.
  • Koele, P., de Boo, R., & Verschure, P. (1987). Scoring rules and probability testing: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society Vol 25(4) Jul 1987, 280-282.
  • Koele, P., & Van den Brink, W. P. (1985). The influence of examinee erring on expected item scores in achievement testing: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society Vol 23(2) Mar 1985, 130-131.
  • Kohan, S., de Mille, R., & Myers, J. H. (1972). Two comparisons of attitude measures: Journal of Advertising Research Vol 12(4) Aug 1972, 29-34.
  • Koida, N. U. (1965). Accuracy of programed test questions in machine instruction: Voprosy Psychologii No 6 1965, 116-118.
  • Kolstad, R. K., Briggs, L. D., Bryant, B. B., & Kolstad, R. A. (1983). Complex multiple-choice items fail to measure achievement: Journal of Research & Development in Education Vol 17(1) Fal 1983, 7-11.
  • Kolstad, R. K., Briggs, L. D., & Kolstad, R. A. (1985). Multiple-choice classroom achievement tests: Performance on items with five vs three choices: College Student Journal Vol 19(4) Win 1985, 427-431.
  • Kolstad, R. K., Creider, R. D., & Kolstad, R. A. (1987). Structural cueing on multiple-choice test items: Education Vol 107(3) Spr 1987, 315-320.
  • Kolstad, R. K., & Kolstad, R. A. (1984). The construction of machine-scored examinations: MTF clusters are preferable to CMC items: Scientia Paedagogica Experimentalis Vol 21(1) 1984, 45-54.
  • Kolstad, R. K., & Kolstad, R. A. (1985). Multiple-choice test items are unsuitable for measuring the learning of complex instructional objectives: Scientia Paedagogica Experimentalis Vol 22(1) 1985, 68-76.
  • Kolstad, R. K., & Kolstad, R. A. (1989). Strategies used to answer MC test items by examinees in top and bottom quartiles: Educational Research Quarterly Vol 13(4) 1989, 2-5.
  • Kolstad, R. K., & Kolstad, R. A. (1991). The effect of "none of these" on multiple-choice item performance: Journal of Research & Development in Education Vol 24(4) Sum 1991, 33-36.
  • Kolstad, R. K., Kolstad, R. A., & Wagner, M. J. (1985). Format-dependent selection of choices on MC and MTF test items: Journal of Research & Development in Education Vol 19(1) Fal 1985, 27-31.
  • Kolstad, R. K., Kolstad, R. A., & Wagner, M. J. (1985). Performance on 3-choice vs 5-choice MC items that measure different skills: Educational Research Quarterly Vol 10(2) 1985-1986, 4-8.
  • Kolstad, R. K., Wagner, M. J., Miller, E. G., & Kolstad, R. A. (1983). The failure of distractors on complex multiple-choice items to prevent guessing: Educational Research Quarterly Vol 8(2) 1983, 44-50.
  • Kottke, J. L. (2001). Students' reactions to written test item rebuttals: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 28(4) Dec 2001, 256-258.
  • Krauft, C. C., & Beggs, D. L. (1973). Test-taking procedure, risk taking, and multiple-choice test scores: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 41(4) Sum 1973, 74-77.
  • Kruglov, L. P. (1953). Qualitative differences in the vocabulary choices of children as revealed in a multiple-choice test: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 44(4) Apr 1953, 229-243.
  • Kulhavy, R. W., Dyer, J. W., & Silver, L. (1975). The effects of notetaking and test expectancy on the learning of text material: Journal of Educational Research Vol 68(10) Jul-Aug 1975, 363-365.
  • Kulikowich, J. M. (1991). Application of latent trait and multidimensional scaling models to cognitive domain-specific tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kurz, D. D. (1986). Positional response sets on multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Labrentz, E., Linkenhoker, F., & Aaron, P. G. (1976). Recognition and reproduction of Bender-Gestalt figures: A developmental study of the lag between perception and performance: Psychology in the Schools Vol 13(2) Apr 1976, 128-133.
  • LaDuca, A., Staples, W. I., Templeton, B., & Holzman, G. B. (1986). Item modelling procedure for constructing content-equivalent multiple choice questions: Medical Education Vol 20(1) Jan 1986, 53-56.
  • Landau, S., Russell, M., Gourgey, K., Erin, J. N., & Cowan, J. (2003). Use of the Talking Tactile Tablet in mathematics testing: Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness Vol 97(2) Feb 2003, No Pagination Specified.
  • Landrum, R. E., Cashin, J. R., & Theis, K. S. (1993). More evidence in favor of three-option multiple-choice tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(3) Fal 1993, 771-778.
  • Lang da Silveira, F., Moreira, M. A., & Axt, R. (1992). Internal structure of comprehension tests in physics: An example from mechanics: Ensenanza de las Ciencias Revista de investigacion y experiencias didacticas Vol 10(2) Jun 1992, 187-194.
  • Langer, J. A. (1985). Levels of questioning: An alternative view: Reading Research Quarterly Vol 20(5) Fal 1985, 586-602.
  • Langer, P., & Wood, C. G. (1965). Comparison of two multiplechoice Rorschach tests: Perceptual and Motor Skills 20(1) 1965, 143-150.
  • Latterell, C. M. (2001). Assessing NCTM standards-oriented and traditional students' problem-solving ability using multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Lauer, A. R. (1938). Measurement of cultural knowledge: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 29(4) Apr 1938, 287-294.
  • Laurier, M. D. (1992). Strengths and weaknesses of two types of tests of classification of French as a second language: With or without directions: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Lawshe, C. H., Jr., & Forster, M. H. (1947). Studies in projective techniques: I. The reliability of a multiple choice group Rorschach test: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 31(2) Apr 1947, 199-211.
  • Lee, S.-E. J. (1994). The effect of assessment approach on reported study strategy use. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Lee-Sammons, W. H., & Wollen, K. A. (1989). Computerized practice tests and effects on in-class exams: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 21(2) Apr 1989, 189-194.
  • Legant, J. (1963). A comparative study of scores of tests based on children's literature and mythology made by Indian, Spanish-American and Anglo children: New Mexico Society for the Study of Education: Educational Research Bulletin 1963, 13-14.
  • Lehto, J. E., Scheinin, P., Kupiainen, S., & Hautamaki, J. (2001). National survey of reading comprehension in Finland: Journal of Research in Reading Vol 24(1) Feb 2001, 99-110.
  • Lei, P.-W., Dunbar, S. B., & Kolen, M. J. (2004). A Comparison of Parametric and Nonparametric Approaches to Item Analysis for Multiple-Choice Tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 64(4) Aug 2004, 565-587.
  • Lemmink, K. A. P. M., & Visscher, C. (2005). Effect of Intermittent Exercise on Multiple-choice Reaction Times of Soccer Players: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 100(1) Feb 2005, 85-95.
  • Lemoine, C. (2001). Effects of using the questionnaire method: Bulletin de Psychologie Vol 54(3)(453) May-Jun 2001, 307-313.
  • Lerner, R. M., & Schroeder, C. (1975). Racial attitudes in young white children: A methodological analysis: Journal of Genetic Psychology Vol 127(1) Sep 1975, 3-12.
  • Lev, J. (1938). Evaluation of test items by the method of analysis of variance: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 29(8) Nov 1938, 623-630.
  • Levi, A. M. (2006). An analysis of multiple choices in MSL lineups, and a comparison with simultaneous and sequential ones: Psychology, Crime & Law Vol 12(3) Jun 2006, 273-285.
  • Levin, J. R., Ghatala, E. S., & Bender, B. G. (1978). A comparison of sentence-learning errors in children of different achievement levels: Contemporary Educational Psychology Vol 3(4) Oct 1978, 358-366.
  • Levine, A. S. (1950). Minnesota Psycho-Analogies Test: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 34(5) Oct 1950, 300-305.
  • Levine, M. V., & Rubin, D. B. (1979). Measuring the appropriateness of multiple-choice test scores: Journal of Educational Statistics Vol 4(4) Win 1979, 269-290.
  • Lewis, C. (2006). Note on unconditional and conditional hypothesis testing: A discussion of an issue raised by van der Linden and Sotaridona: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 31(3) 2006, 305-309.
  • Lijun, W., Haigen, G., & Shoukuan, M. (2006). An Application Research on A Fill-in-the-concept Map in Physics Tests: Psychological Science (China) Vol 29(4) Jul 2006, 941-943.
  • Lin, S.-H. S. (1994). Fitting item response theory models to the College Entrance Examination of Taiwan. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Little, E., & Creaser, J. (1966). Uncertain responses on multiple-choice examinations: Psychological Reports 18(3) 1966, 801-802.
  • Littlefield, B. J. (1979). The effect of corrected for guessing and partial information scoring procedures, and number of alternatives on reliability, validity, and difficulty in multiple choice test items: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Liu, J. (2000). The effect of performance-based assessment on eighth grade students mathematics achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Long, H. F. (1974). Relationships of option-choices to cultural backgrounds in a group mental ability test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Longstreth, L. E. (1978). Level I-Level II abilities as they affect performance of three races in the college classroom: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 70(3) Jun 1978, 289-297.
  • Lord, F. M. (1944). Reliability of multiple-choice tests as a function of number of choices per item: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 35(3) Mar 1944, 175-180.
  • Lord, F. M. (1975). Formula scoring and number-right scoring: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(1) Spr 1975, 7-11.
  • Lord, F. M. (1977). Optimal number of choices per item: A comparison of four approaches: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 14(1) Spr 1977, 33-38.
  • Lord, F. M. (1983). Maximum likelihood estimation of item response parameters when some responses are omitted: Psychometrika Vol 48(3) Sep 1983, 477-482.
  • Love, T. E. (1995). Distractors and item response theory. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Lueptow, L. B., Early, K., & Garland, T. N. (1976). The validity of student evaluations of objective test items: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 36(4) Win 1976, 939-944.
  • Lukhele, R., Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (1994). On the relative value of multiple-choice, constructed response, and examinee-selected items on two achievement tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 31(3) Fal 1994, 234-250.
  • Lumsden, E. A. (1977). A simple and reliable method for assessing partial knowledge with objective tests: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 4(1) Win 1977, 7-21.
  • Lynch, D. O., & Smith, B. C. (1975). Item response changes: Effects on test scores: Measurement & Evaluation in Guidance Vol 7(4) Jan 1975, 220-224.
  • MacCann, R. G. (2004). Reliability as a function of the number of item options derived from the "knowledge or random guessing" model: Psychometrika Vol 69(1) Mar 2004, 147-157.
  • Madril, E. (1959). The use of IBM mark-sense cards as multiple-choice paper-and-pencil test answer forms: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 43(5) Oct 1959, 296-301.
  • Maguire, T., Skakun, E., & Harley, C. (1992). Setting standards for multiple-choice items in clinical reasoning: Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 15(4) Dec 1992, 434-452.
  • Maihoff, N. A. (1987). A comparison of alternate-choice and true-false item forms used in classroom examinations: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Malamud, R. F., & Malamud, D. I. (1945). The validity of the amplified multiple choice Rorschach as a screening device: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 9(5) Sep 1945, 224-227.
  • Maraun, M. D., Slaney, K., & Jalava, J. (2005). Dual Scaling for the Analysis of Categorical Data: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 85(2) 2005, 209-217.
  • Marcinkiewicz, H. R., & Clariana, R. B. (1997). The performance effects of headings within multiple-choice tests: British Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 67(1) Mar 1997, 111-117.
  • Marcus, A. (1963). The effect of correct response location on the difficulty level of multiple-choice questions: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 47(1) Feb 1963, 48-51.
  • Marsh, E. J., Roediger, H. L., III, Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2007). The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing: Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Vol 14(2) Apr 2007, 194-199.
  • Marston, A. R., & Marston, M. R. (1965). The effect of student participation in the construction of a multiple-choice achievement examination: Journal of Educational Research 59(3) 1965, 105-107.
  • Martin, J. E. (1993). The effect of providing choices on the validity of a situational interview for resident advisors: Applied H R M Research Vol 4(1) Sum 1993, 69-78.
  • Martin, V. L. (1996). The utility of elaborative interrogation for university students studying expository text in preparation for matching and multiple-choice tests. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Martinez, M. E. (1991). A comparison of multiple-choice and constructed figural response items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 28(2) Sum 1991, 131-145.
  • Martinez, M. E. (1993). Problem-solving correlates of new assessment forms in architecture: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 6(3) 1993, 167-180.
  • Massey, A. J. (1977). Candidate fatigue and performance on GCE objective tests: British Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 47(2) Jun 1977, 203-208.
  • Mathews, C. O. (1929). Erroneous first impressions on objective tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 20(4) Apr 1929, 280-286.
  • Matter, M. K. (1986). The relationship between achievement test response changes, ethnicity, and family income: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Maw, C. E. (1979). Item response patterns and group differences: An application of the log linear model: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • McManus, I. C., Lissauer, T., & Williams, S. E. (2005). Detecting cheating in written medical examinations by statistical analysis of similarity of answers: Pilot study: BMJ: British Medical Journal Vol 330(7499) May 2005, 1064-1066.
  • McMorris, R. F., DeMers, L. P., & Schwarz, S. P. (1987). Attitudes, behaviors, and reasons for changing responses following answer-changing instruction: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 24(2) Sum 1987, 131-143.
  • McNamara, W. J., & Weitzman, E. (1945). The effect of choice placement on the difficulty of multiple-choice questions: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 36(2) Feb 1945, 103-113.
  • McTeer, W. (1931). A new device for serial order learning: Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol 14(4) Aug 1931, 446-452.
  • Medina, M. S. (2007). The influence of the format for case response on thinking about a case. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Meijer, J. (2001). Learning potential and anxious tendency: Test anxiety as a bias factor in educational testing: Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal Vol 14(3) 2001, 337-362.
  • Meland, K. (2000). Essay vs. multiple choice examinations: A comparison of metacognitive statements generated during exam preparation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Melican, G. J., Mills, C. N., & Plake, B. S. (1989). Accuracy of item performance predictions based on the Nedelsky standard setting method: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(2) Sum 1989, 467-478.
  • Mellenbergh, G. J. (1972). A comparison between different kinds of achievement test items: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden Vol 27(3) Mar 1972, 157-158.
  • Melzer, C. W., Koeslag, J. H., & Schach, S. S. (1981). Correction of item-test correlations and attempts at improving reproducibility in item-analysis: An experimental approach: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 41(4) Win 1981, 979-991.
  • Mentzer, T. L. (1982). Response biases in multiple-choice test item files: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(2) Sum 1982, 437-448.
  • Messick, S., & Kogan, N. (1965). Category width and quantitative aptitude: Perceptual and Motor Skills 20(2) 1965, 493-497.
  • Michelsen, U. A., & Cordes, M. (2005). A practicable procedure to determine the "knowledge rate" and "guess rate" in multiple-choice tests with best answers: Diagnostica Vol 51(3) 2005, 156-166.
  • Michelsen, U. A., & Muller, J. (1988). Limitation of the frequency of single events in testing for equal distribution: An instrument for analyzing distractors: Diagnostica Vol 34(2) 1988, 119-135.
  • Miles, J. (1973). Eliminating the guessing factor in the multiple choice test: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 33(3) Fal 1973, 637-651.
  • Miller, I., & Minor, F. J. (1963). Influence of multiple-choice answer form design on answer-marking performance: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 47(6) Dec 1963, 374-379.
  • Millman, J., & Setijadi. (1966). A comparison of the performance of American and Indonesian students on three types of test items: Journal of Educational Research 59(6) 1966, 273-275.
  • Miner, J. B. (1978). The Miner Sentence Completion Scale: A reappraisal: Academy of Management Journal Vol 21(2) Jun 1978, 283-294.
  • Mitchell, A. (2004). Review of MCQs in Psychiatry: International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice Vol 8(1) Mar 2004, 66-66.
  • Mix, R. (1981). On the relative effectiveness of positive and negative feedback: Automated control processes in the case of multiple-choice tasks: Psychologische Beitrage Vol 23(3-4) 1981, 566-578.
  • Molenaar, W. (1977). On Bayesian formula scores for random guessing in multiple choice tests: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 30(1) May 1977, 79-89.
  • Moreno, R., Martinez, R. J., & Muniz, J. (2006). New Guidelines for Developing Multiple-Choice Items: Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Vol 2(2) 2006, 65-72.
  • Morrison, D. G., & Brockway, G. (1979). A modified beta binomial model with applications to multiple choice and taste tests: Psychometrika Vol 44(4) Dec 1979, 427-442.
  • Morton, M. A., Hoyt, W. G., & Burke, L. K. (1955). A new type of test answer sheet: American Psychologist Vol 10(9) Sep 1955, 572.
  • Mosak, H. H. (1951). Performance on the Harrower-Erickson Multiple Choice Test of patients with spinal cord injuries: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 15(4) Aug 1951, 346-349.
  • Motshabi, D. N. (1999). Item response changing as a function of item difficulty and item discrimination in multiple choice tests: Implications for computerized adaptive testing.(graduate record examination). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • My Druc Tram, J., & Varnhagen, C. K. (1998). Questions in a research setting: Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 44(4) Win 1998, 408-415.
  • Nash, M. M., & Schwaller, R. L. (1985). A multiple-choice, group screening format for the Quick Test: Psychological Reports Vol 57(3, Pt 2) Dec 1985, 1297-1298.
  • Ndalichako, J. L., & Rogers, W. T. (1997). Comparison of finite state score theory, classical test theory, and item response theory in scoring multiple-choice tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 57(4) Aug 1997, 580-589.
  • Neely, D. L., Springston, F. J., & McCann, S. J. H. (1994). Does item order affect performance on multiple-choice exams? : Teaching of Psychology Vol 21(1) Feb 1994, 44-45.
  • Neely, D. L., Springston, F. J., & McCann, S. J. H. (2002). Does item order affect performance on multiple choice exams? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Nettles, S. S. (1988). Psychometric characteristics of complex multiple choice items: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Nevo, B., Arronson, H., & Israeli, S. (1984). Multiple-choicing the Maze Test: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 58(3) Jun 1984, 923-928.
  • Nevo, B., Shor, E., & Ramraz, R. (1975). ITANA-III: A FORTRAN IV program for multiple-choice tests and item analysis: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 35(3) Fal 1975, 683-684.
  • Nevo, B., & Spector, A. (1979). Personal tempo in taking tests of the multiple-choice type: Journal of Educational Research Vol 73(2) Nov-Dec 1979, 75-78.
  • Nevo, B. F., & Ben-Tuvia, S. (1976). Using information from wrong responses for cross-cultural comparison in Israel: Journal of Social Psychology Vol 98(1) Feb 1976, 3-8.
  • Nield, A. F., & Wintre, M. G. (1986). Multiple-choice questions with an option to comment: Student attitudes and use: Teaching of Psychology Vol 13(4) Dec 1986, 196-199.
  • Nield, A. F., & Wintre, M. G. (2002). Multiple-choice questions with an option to comment: Student attitudes and use. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Nishisato, S., & Sheu, W.-j. (1980). Piecewise method of reciprocal averages for dual scaling of multiple-choice data: Psychometrika Vol 45(4) Dec 1980, 467-478.
  • Nixon, J. C. (1973). Investigation of the response foils of the Modified Rhyme Hearing Test: Journal of Speech & Hearing Research Vol 16(4) Dec 1973, 658-666.
  • No authorship, i. (1950). Review of Aptitudes Associates Test of Sales Aptitude: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 14(2) Apr 1950, 162.
  • No authorship, i. (1960). Bruce Vocabulary Inventory: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 24(1) Feb 1960, 100.
  • No authorship, i. (1960). Review of Test of Social Insight: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 24(1) Feb 1960, 100.
  • No authorship, i. (2002). Continuing education quiz: Cognitive and Behavioral Practice Vol 9(3) Sum 2002, 260.
  • Noe, M. J. (1976). A FORTRAN IV program for multiple-choice tests with predetermined minimal acceptable performance levels: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 36(3) Fal 1976, 753-755.
  • Noggle, N. L. (1980). An experimental response and scoring method for multiple-choice achievement tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Noizet, G., & Fabre, J.-M. (1975). Docimological research into multiple choice questionnaires (M.C.Q.): Research perspectives: Scientia Paedagogica Experimentalis Vol 12(1) 1975, 38-62.
  • Norman, G. R., Smith, E. K., Powles, A. C., Rooney, P. J., & et al. (1987). Factors underlying performance on written tests of knowledge: Medical Education Vol 21(4) Jul 1987, 297-304.
  • Norris, S. P. (1988). Controlling for background beliefs when developing multiple-choice critical thinking tests: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 7(3) Fal 1988, 5-11.
  • Norris, S. P. (1991). Informal reasoning assessment: Using verbal reports of thinking to improve multiple-choice test validity. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Norris, S. P. (1992). A demonstration of the use of verbal reports of thinking in multiple-choice critical thinking test design: Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 38(3) Sep 1992, 155-176.
  • Nozaki, A. (1984). Some remarks on multiple-choice questions in competitive examinations: Behaviormetrika No 16 Jul 1984, 13-19.
  • O' de Almeida, N. (1987). Confidence testing in evaluations of dissertations and performance: Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia Vol 39(3) Jul-Sep 1987, 85-95.
  • Oaster, T. R. (1989). Number of alternatives per choice point and stability of Likert-type scales: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 68(2) Apr 1989, 549-550.
  • Obe, E. O. (1973). Test reliability and risk taking for the elimination technique of evaluating partial knowledge on multiple choice tests: West African Journal of Educational & Vocational Measurement Vol 1(2) Sep 1973, 43-49.
  • Odegard, T. N., & Koen, J. D. (2007). "None of the above" as a correct and incorrect alternative on a multiple-choice test: Implications for the testing effect: Memory Vol 15(8) Dec 2007, 873-885.
  • Okpala, A. O., & Gillis-Olion, M. (1995). Individualized learning: Macroeconomics principles: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 22(1) Mar 1995, 40-44.
  • Olsen, H. D., & Barickowski, R. S. (1976). Adapting to multiple choice tests of differing item arrangement: Child Study Journal Vol 6(2) 1976, 91-98.
  • Olsen, R. V., Turmo, A., & Lie, S. (2001). Learning about students' knowledge and thinking in science through large-scale quantitative studies: European Journal of Psychology of Education Vol 16(3) Sep 2001, 403-420.
  • O'Neill, G. W. (1975). An analysis of test item type as a determinant of student academic performance and study behavior: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • O'Neill, G. W., & Johnston, J. M. (1976). An analysis of test item types as a determinant of student academic performance and study behavior: Journal of Personalized Instruction Vol 1(2) Sep 1976, 123-127.
  • O'Neill, M., Rasor, R. A., & Bartz, W. R. (1976). Immediate retention of objective test answers as a function of feedback complexity: Journal of Educational Research Vol 70(2) Nov-Dec 1976, 72-74.
  • Oosterhof, A. C., & Coats, P. K. (1984). Comparison of difficulties and reliabilities of quantitative word problems in completion and multiple-choice item formats: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 8(3) Sum 1984, 287-294.
  • Oosterhof, A. C., & Glasnapp, D. R. (1974). Comparative reliabilities and difficulties of the multiple-choice and true-false formats: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 42(3) Spr 1974, 62-64.
  • O'Reilly, R. P., & Streeter, R. E. (1977). Report on the development and validation of a system for measuring literal comprehension in a multiple-choice cloze format: Preliminary factor analytic results: Journal of Reading Behavior Vol 9(1) Spr 1977, 45-69.
  • Owen, S. V., & Froman, R. D. (1987). What's wrong with three-option multiple choice items? : Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 47(2) Sum 1987, 513-522.
  • Palumbo, D. B., & Reed, W. M. (1988). A microcomputer-based evaluation subsystem for the textual component of an instructional system: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 4(2) 1988, 167-183.
  • Pamphlett, R., & Farnill, D. (1995). Effect of anxiety on performance in multiple choice examination: Medical Education Vol 29(4) Jul 1995, 297-302.
  • Panackal, A. A., & Heft, C. S. (1978). Cloze technique and multiple choice technique: Reliability and validity: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 38(4) Win 1978, 917-932.
  • Papotti, M. (1996). The construction of an experimental task for metaphor comprehension: A picture multiple-choice task. Padova, Italy: Cooperativa Libraria Editrice Universita di Padova.
  • Parham, S. E. (1997). The relationships between test-taking strategies and cognitive ability test performance. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Paris, J. (1986). Testing of competence: The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry / La Revue canadienne de psychiatrie Vol 31(4) May 1986, 378-379.
  • Pascale, P. J. (1974). Changing initial answers on multiple-choice achievement tests: Measurement & Evaluation in Guidance Vol 6(4) Jan 1974, 236-238.
  • Peeck, J., & Knippenberg, W. J. (1977). Test expectancy and test performance: Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 2(6) Nov 1977, 270-274.
  • Peterson, C., & Grant, M. (2001). Forced-choice: Are forensic interviewers asking the right questions? : Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des Sciences du comportement Vol 33(2) Apr 2001, 118-127.
  • Pettigrew, C. G., Tuma, J. M., Pickering, J. W., & Whelton, J. (1983). Simulation of psychosis on a multiple-choice projective test: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 57(2) Oct 1983, 463-469.
  • Pettijohn, T. F., II, & Sacco, M. F. (2007). Multiple-choice exam question order influences on student performance, completion time and perceptions: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 34(3) Sep 2007, 142-149.
  • Phillips, E. L. (1951). Attitudes toward self and others: a brief questionnaire report: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 15(1) Feb 1951, 79-81.
  • Phye, G., Gugliemella, J., & Sola, J. (1976). Effects of delayed retention on multiple-choice test performance: Contemporary Educational Psychology Vol 1(1) Jan 1976, 26-36.
  • Pinglia, R. S. (1992). A comparative study of true-false, alternate choice, and multiple-choice item formats: Indian Journal of Psychometry & Education Vol 23(1) Jan 1992, 49-56.
  • Pitoniak, M. J. (2003). Standard setting methods for complex licensure examinations. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Plake, B. S. (1988). Application of readability indices to multiple-choice items on certification/licensure examinations: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(2) Sum 1988, 543-551.
  • Plake, B. S., & Huntley, R. M. (1984). Can relevant grammatical cues result in invalid test items? : Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 44(3) Fal 1984, 687-696.
  • Plake, B. S., Wise, S. L., & Harvey, A. L. (1988). Test-taking behavior under formula and number-right scoring conditions: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society Vol 26(4) Jul 1988, 316-318.
  • Poizner, S. B., Nicewander, W. A., & Gettys, C. F. (1978). Alternative response and scoring methods for multiple-choice items: An empirical study of probabilistic and ordinal response modes: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 2(1) Win 1978, 83-96.
  • Pomplun, M., & Omar, M. D. H. (1997). Multiple-mark items: An alternative objective item format? : Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 57(6) Dec 1997, 949-962.
  • Poppen, R. L., Pribram, K. H., & Robinson, R. S. (1965). Effects of frontal lobotomy in man on the performance of a multiple choice task: Experimental Neurology 11(2) 1965, 217-229.
  • Potthoff, E. F., & Barnett, N. E. (1932). A comparison of marks based upon weighted and unweighted items in a new-type examination: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 23(2) Feb 1932, 92-98.
  • Powell, J. C., & Isbister, A. G. (1974). A comparison between right and wrong answers on a multiple choice test: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 34(3) Fal 1974, 499-509.
  • Powell, J. C., & Shklov, N. (1992). Obtaining information about learners' thinking strategies from wrong answers on multiple-choice tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 52(4) Win 1992, 847-865.
  • Powell, J. L. (1989). An examination of comprehension processes used by readers as they engage in different forms of assessment: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1988). Delusions about performance on multiple-choice comprehension tests: Reading Research Quarterly Vol 23(4) Fal 1988, 454-464.
  • Prestera, G. E., Clariana, R., & Peck, A. (2005). Memory-Context Effects of Screen Color in Multiple-Choice and Fill-in Tests: Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Vol 14(4) 2005, 415-436.
  • Preston, R. C. (1965). The multiple-choice test as an instrument in perpetuating false concepts: Educational and Psychological Measurement 25(1) 1965, 111-116.
  • Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. R. (1999). The effect of instructions on multiple-choice test scores: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 15(2) 1999, 143-150.
  • Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. R. (1999). The role of instructions in the variability of sex-related differences in multiple-choice tests: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 27(6) Dec 1999, 1067-1077.
  • Pyrczak, F. (1972). Objective evaluation of the quality of multiple-choice test items designed to measure comprehension of reading passages: Reading Research Quarterly Vol 8(1) Fal 1972, 62-71.
  • Pyrczak, F. (1973). Objective evaluation of the quality of multiple-choice test items: Dissertation Abstracts International Vol.
  • Quasha, W. H., & Likert, R. (1937). The revised Minnesota paper form board test: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 28(3) Mar 1937, 197-204.
  • Quereshi, M. Y. (1974). Performance on multiple-choice tests and penalty for guessing: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 42(3) Spr 1974, 74-77.
  • Raffeld, P. (1975). The effects of Guttman weights on the reliability and predictive validity of objective tests when omissions are not differentially weighted: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 12(3) Fal 1975, 179-185.
  • Ramos, R. A., & Stern, J. (1973). Item behavior associated with changes in the number of alternatives in multiple choice items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 10(4) Win 1973, 305-310.
  • Reddon, J. R., Schopflocher, D., Gill, D. M., & Stefanyk, W. O. (1989). Speech Sounds Perception Test: Nonrandom response locations form a logical fallacy in structure: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 69(1) Aug 1989, 235-240.
  • Rees, P. J. (1986). Do medical students learn multiple choice examinations? : Medical Education Vol 20(2) Mar 1986, 123-125.
  • Reid, F. (1977). An alternative scoring formula for multiple-choice and true-false tests: Journal of Educational Research Vol 70(6) Jul-Aug 1977, 335-339.
  • Reile, P. J., & Briggs, L. J. (1952). Should students change their initial answers on objective-type tests? More evidence regarding an old problem: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 43(2) Feb 1952, 110-115.
  • Remmers, H. H., & Adkins, R. M. (1942). Reliability of multiple-choice measuring instruments, a function of the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, VI: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 33(5) May 1942, 385-390.
  • Remmers, H. H., & Ewart, E. (1941). Reliability of multiple-choice measuring instruments as a function of the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, III: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 32(1) Jan 1941, 61-66.
  • Remmers, H. H., & House, J. M. (1941). Reliability of multiple-choice measuring instruments as a function of the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, IV: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 32(5) May 1941, 372-376.
  • Remmers, H. H., Karslake, R., & Gage, N. L. (1940). Reliability of multiple-choice measuring instruments as a function of the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, I: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 31(8) Nov 1940, 583-590.
  • Remmers, H. H., Marschat, L. E., Brown, A., & Chapman, I. (1923). An Experimental Study of the Relative Difficulty of True-False, Multiple-Choice, and Incomplete-Sentence Types of Examination Questions: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 14(6) Sep 1923, 367-372.
  • Remmers, H. H., & Sageser, H. W. (1941). Reliability of multiple-choice measuring instruments as a function of the Spearman-Brown formula, V: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 32(6) Sep 1941, 445-451.
  • Reteguiz, J.-A. (2006). Relationship Between Anxiety and Standardized Patient Test Performance in the Medicine Clerkship: Journal of General Internal Medicine Vol 21(5) May 2006, 415-418.
  • Revuelta, J. (2004). Analysis of distractor difficulty in multiple-choice items: Psychometrika Vol 69(2) Jun 2004, 217-234.
  • Revuelta, J. (2005). An Item Response Model for Nominal Data Based on the Rising Selection Ratios Criterion: Psychometrika Vol 70(2) Jun 2005, 305-324.
  • Rexroad, C. N. (1925). A continuous multiple choice reaction apparatus: Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol 8(5) Oct 1925, 325-336.
  • Rexroad, C. N. (1926). Verbalization in multiple choice reactions: Psychological Review Vol 33(6) Nov 1926, 451-458.
  • Reynolds, W. M. (1976). The effects of multiple-choice formats on test reliability and a search for response styles, in mildly mentally retarded adolescents: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Reynolds, W. M. (1979). The utility of multiple-choice test formats with mildly retarded adolescents: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 39(2) Sum 1979, 325-331.
  • Rheaume, D. (1984). The degree of certainty with which a student chooses a response: A factor to consider in the context of a measure of academic achievement: Apprentissage et Socialisation Vol 7(1) Mar 1984, 41-47.
  • Rich, K. A. (1996). The effect of dynamic linked multiple representations on students' conceptions of and communication of functions and derivatives. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Richardson, J., & Hersh, L. R. (1974). Response selection in paired-associate learning: Memory & Cognition Vol 2(2) Apr 1974, 391-394.
  • Ricketts, C., & Wilks, S. J. (2002). Improving student performance through computer-based assessment: Insights from recent research: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 27(5) Oct 2002, 463-479.
  • Ring, E. (1975). A source of errors during presentation of pictures as test stimuli: Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie Vol 22(1) 1975, 89-93.
  • Roback, A. A. (1921). Subjective Tests vs. Objective Tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 12(8) Nov 1921, 439-444.
  • Roberts, D. M. (1987). Limitations of the score-difference method in detecting cheating in recognition test situations: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 24(1) Spr 1987, 77-81.
  • Roberts, L. M. (1996). Facilitated communication: Investigating validity using a multiple choice game. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Rodriguez, M. C. (2003). Construct equivalence of multiple-choice and constructed-response items: A random effects synthesis of correlations: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(2) Sum 2003, 163-184.
  • Rodriguez, M. C. (2005). Three Options Are Optimal for Multiple-Choice Items: A Meta-Analysis of 80 Years of Research: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 24(2) Sum 2005, 3-13.
  • Roediger, H. L., III, & Marsh, E. J. (2005). The Positive and Negative Consequences of Multiple-Choice Testing: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition Vol 31(5) Sep 2005, 1155-1159.
  • Rogers, J. B. (1997). Single-response and multiple-choice response formats on a sixth-grade mathematics test: Evidence of construct validity. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Rogers, W. T., & Bateson, D. J. (1994). Verification of a model of test-taking behavior of high school seniors: Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 40(2) Jun 1994, 195-211.
  • Rogers, W. T., & Harley, D. (1999). An empirical comparison of three- and four-choice items and tests: Susceptibility to testwiseness and internal consistency reliability: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 59(2) Apr 1999, 234-247.
  • Rogers, W. T., & Ndalichako, J. (2000). 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 Vol 60(1) Feb 2000, 5-19.
  • Rosa, K., Swygert, K. A., Nelson, L., & Thissen, D. (2001). Item response theory applied to combinations of multiple-choice and constructed-response items--scale scores for patterns of summed scores. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Rosenbach, J. H., & Mowder, B. A. (1982). Assessing concrete-abstract performance in two response models: Psychology in the Schools Vol 19(2) Apr 1982, 246-249.
  • Rosenfeld, P., & Anderson, D. D. (1985). The effects of humorous multiple-choice alternatives on test performance: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 12(1) Mar 1985, 3-5.
  • Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1991). Further issues in effect size estimation for one-sample multiple-choice-type data: Psychological Bulletin Vol 109(2) Mar 1991, 351-352.
  • Ross, J. A., & Maynes, F. J. (1983). Development of a test of experimental problem-solving skills: Journal of Research in Science Teaching Vol 20(1) Jan 1983, 63-75.
  • Rossi, J. S., McCrady, B. S., & Paolino, T. J. (1978). A and B but not C: Discriminating power of grouped alternatives: Psychological Reports Vol 42(3, Pt 2) Jun 1978, 1346.
  • Rothrock, J. E., & Michael, W. B. (1976). The comparative validities of traditional item-selection and item-sampling procedures in evaluation of student and class progress toward course objectives in freshman psychology: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 36(4) Win 1976, 925-932.
  • Ruble, R. (1974). Changing Answers: Professional Psychology Vol 5(1) Feb 1974, 2.
  • Ruch, G. M., & Degraff, M. H. (1926). Corrections for chance and "Guess" vs. "Do not guess" instructions in multiple response tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 17(6) Sep 1926, 368-375.
  • Rump, C. M. (2001). Who Wants to See a $Million Error? : INFORMS Transactions on Education Vol 1(3) May 2001, 102-111.
  • Rupp, A. A., Ferne, T., & Choi, H. (2006). How assessing reading comprehension with multiple-choice questions shapes the construct: A cognitive processing perspective: Language Testing Vol 23(4) Oct 2006, 441-474.
  • Rust, J. O. (1973). The influence of knowledge of results and goal setting on performance with a multiple choice academic test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Ryan, A. M., & Greguras, G. J. (1998). Life is not multiple choice: Reactions to the alternatives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Ryan, K. E., & Fan, M. (1996). Examining gender DIF on a multiple-choice test of mathematics: A confirmatory approach: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 15(4) Win 1996, 15-20, 38.
  • Sadler, P. M. (2000). The relevance of multiple-choice testing in assessing science understanding. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Samelson, F. (1987). Was early mental testing (a) racist inspired, (b) objective science, (c) a technology for democracy, (d) the origin of multiple-choice exams, (e) none of the above? (Mark the RIGHT answer). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  • Savitz, F. R. (1985). Effects of easy examination questions placed at the beginning of science multiple-choice examinations: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 12(1) Mar 1985, 6-10.
  • Scharf, E. M., & Baldwin, L. P. (2007). Assessing multiple choice question (MCQ) tests - a mathematical perspective: Active Learning in Higher Education Vol 8(1) Mar 2007, 31-47.
  • Schechter, E. I. (1977). Nonintentional ESP: A review and replication: Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research Vol 71(4) Oct 1977, 337-374.
  • Scheidemann, N. V. (1933). Multiplying the possibilities of the multiple choice form of objective question: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 17(3) Jun 1933, 337-340.
  • Schrock, T. J. (1980). The effects of item stem format on the mean score, internal consistency, and mean completion time for a multiple choice test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Schutz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., Schutz, J. A., & Proctor, A. (2008). Preventing multiple-choice tests from impeding educational advancement after acquired brain injury: Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools Vol 39(1) Jan 2008, 104-109.
  • Schuwirth, L. W. T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Donkers, H. H. L. M. (1996). A closer look at cueing effects in multiple-choice questions: Medical Education Vol 30(1) Jan 1996, 44-49.
  • Schuwirth, L. W. T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Stoffers, H. E. J. H., & Peperkamp, A. G. W. (1996). Computerized long-menu questions as an alternative to open-ended questions in computerized assessment: Medical Education Vol 30(1) Jan 1996, 50-55.
  • Schwarz, B. (1983). About the quality of substantially equivalent short answer- and multiple choice-items and test forms: Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht Vol 30(3) 1983, 200-209.
  • Searle, L. V. (1942). Scoring formulae for a modified type of multiple-choice question: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 26(5) Oct 1942, 702-710.
  • Sekely, W. S., & Blakney, V. L. (1994). The effect of response position on trade magazine readership and usage: Journal of Advertising Research Vol 34(6) Nov-Dec 1994, 53-60.
  • Serena, M. S. (1977). A comparative study of norm- and criterion-referenced measures with an examination of the effects of manipulating instructional objectives and methods of study as they relate to student multiple-choice quiz performance: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Serlin, R. C., & Kaiser, H. F. (1978). A method for increasing the reliability of a short multiple-choice test: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 38(2) Sum 1978, 337-340.
  • Shaffer, J. P. (1991). Comment on "Effect size estimation for one-sample multiple-choice-type data: Design, analysis, and meta-analysis" by Rosenthal and Rubin (1989): Psychological Bulletin Vol 109(2) Mar 1991, 348-350.
  • Shaha, S. H. (1984). Matching-tests: Reduced anxiety and increased test effectiveness: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 44(4) Win 1984, 869-881.
  • Shatz, M. A. (1985). Students' guessing strategies: Do they work? : Psychological Reports Vol 57(3, Pt 2) Dec 1985, 1167-1168.
  • Shatz, M. A., & Best, J. B. (1987). Students' reasons for changing answers on objective tests: Teaching of Psychology Vol 14(4) Dec 1987, 241-242.
  • Shaughnessy, J. J. (1979). Confidence-judgment accuracy as a predictor of test performance: Journal of Research in Personality Vol 13(4) Dec 1979, 505-514.
  • Shaw, J. (2006). The assessment of critical thinking skills in anatomy and physiology students who practice writing higher order multiple choice questions. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Shigemasu, K., & Fujimori, S. (1986). Parameter estimation in a new multiple choice item response model: Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics Vol 13(2) Mar 1986, 1-7.
  • Shimizu, T. (1966). The assumption of the equal probability of chance success: Japanese Journal of Psychology 36(6) 1966, 295-302.
  • Shmelyov, A. G. (1996). TESTAN: An integrated modular system for personality assessment and test development on MS-DOS personal computers: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 28(1) Feb 1996, 89-92.
  • Shouval, R., Duek, E., & Ginton, A. (1975). A multiple-choice version of the sentence completion method: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 39(1) Feb 1975, 41-49.
  • Sidick, J. T., Barrett, G. V., & Doverspike, D. (1994). Three-alternative multiple choice tests: An attractive option: Personnel Psychology Vol 47(4) Win 1994, 829-835.
  • Sitton, L. R., Adams, I. G., & Anderson, H. N. (1980). Personality correlates of students' patterns of changing answers on multiple-choice tests: Psychological Reports Vol 47(2) Oct 1980, 655-660.
  • Skakun, E. N. (1995). Strategy choices in responding to multiple choice items. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Skakun, E. N., Maguire, T. O., & Cook, D. A. (1994). Strategy choices in multiple-choice items: Academic Medicine Vol 69(10, Suppl) Oct 1994, S7-S9.
  • Skinner, N. F. (1983). Switching answers on multiple-choice questions: Shrewdness or shibboleth? : Teaching of Psychology Vol 10(4) Dec 1983, 220-222.
  • Skinner, N. F. (1999). When the going gets tough, the tough get going: Effects of item difficulty on multiple-choice test performance: North American Journal of Psychology Vol 1(1) 1999, 79-82.
  • Skinner, N. F. (2004). Differential Test Performance From Differently Colored Paper: White Paper Works Best: Teaching of Psychology Vol 31(2) Spr 2004, 111-113.
  • Skurnik, L. S. (1973). Examination folklore: Short answer and multiple-choice questions: West African Journal of Educational & Vocational Measurement Vol 1(2) Sep 1973, 6-12.
  • Smith, D. E. (1947). The Syracuse Case Study Tests: Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Vol 1(4) Dec 1947, 210-213.
  • Smith, E. V., Jr. (1996). Multiple true-false items: Scoring protocols, reliability, and validity. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Smith, E. V., Jr. (2006). Review of Developing and Validating Multiple-Choice Test Items (3rd ed.): Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(1) Jan 2006, 69-71.
  • Smith, J. D. (1977). The relationships of content area and ability with multiple-choice test response alterations: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Smith, J. K. (1982). Converging on correct answers: A peculiarity of multiple choice items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 19(3) Fal 1982, 211-220.
  • Smith, K. (1957). Double-Choice Examination Questions: American Psychologist Vol 12(4) Apr 1957, 228-229.
  • Smith, M., White, K. P., & Coop, R. H. (1979). The effect of item type on the consequences of changing answers on multiple choice tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 16(3) Fal 1979, 203-208.
  • Sotaridona, L., van der Linden, W. J., & Meijer, R. R. (2006). Detecting Answer Copying Using the Kappa Statistic: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(5) Sep 2006, 412-431.
  • Sotaridona, L. S., & Meijer, R. R. (2003). Two new statistics to detect answer copying: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(1) Spr 2003, 53-69.
  • Srivastava, A. B., & Sharma, K. K. (1975). On the estimation of true scores and reliability of test when choice is allowed in answering of questions: Indian Journal of Psychometry & Education Vol 6(1-2) 1975, 7-15.
  • Stagner, R., Chalmers, W. E., & Derber, M. (1958). Guttman-type scales for union and management attitudes toward each other: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 42(5) Oct 1958, 293-300.
  • Stalnaker, J. M., & Stalnaker, R. C. (1935). Chance vs. selected distractors in a vocabulary test: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 26(3) Mar 1935, 161-168.
  • Staver, J. R. (1986). The effects of problem format, number of independent variables, and their interaction on student performance on a control of variables reasoning problem: Journal of Research in Science Teaching Vol 23(6) Sep 1986, 533-542.
  • Stevens, P. A. (1998). Using concept maps for assessing adult learners in training situations. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Stock, W. A., Kulhavy, R. W., Pridemore, D. R., & Krug, D. (1992). Responding to feedback after multiple-choice answers: The influence of response confidence: The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology Vol 45A(4) Nov 1992, 649-667.
  • Stoffer, G. R., Davis, K. E., & Brown, J. B. (1977). The consequences of changing initial answers on objective tests: A stable effect and a stable misconception: Journal of Educational Research Vol 70(5) May-Jun 1977, 272-277.
  • Stone, C. A., & Yeh, C.-C. (2006). Assessing the Dimensionality and Factor Structure of Multiple-Choice Exams: An Empirical Comparison of Methods Using the Multistate Bar Examination: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 66(2) Apr 2006, 193-214.
  • Strang, H. R. (1977). The effects of technical and unfamiliar options on guessing on multiple-choice test items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 14(3) Fal 1977, 253-260.
  • Strang, H. R. (1980). Effect of technically worded options on multiple-choice test performance: Journal of Educational Research Vol 73(5) May-Jun 1980, 262-265.
  • Strang, H. R., & Rust, J. O. (1973). The effects of immediate knowledge of results and task definition on multiple-choice answering: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 42(1) Fal 1973, 77-80.
  • Straton, R. G., & Catts, R. M. (1980). A comparison of two, three and four-choice item tests given a fixed total number of choices: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 40(2) Sum 1980, 357-365.
  • Stricker, L. J. (1988). Measuring social status with occupational information: A simple method: Journal of Applied Social Psychology Vol 18(5) Apr 1988, 423-437.
  • Stupans, I. (2006). Multiple choice questions: Can they examine application of knowledge? : Pharmacy Education Vol 6(1) Mar 2006, 59-63.
  • Sturges, P. T. (1978). Delay of informative feedback in computer-assisted testing: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 70(3) Jun 1978, 378-387.
  • Sulmont-Rosse, C., Issanchou, S., & Koster, E. P. (2005). Odor Naming Methodology: Correct Identification with Multiple-choice versus Repeatable Identification in a Free Task: Chemical Senses Vol 30(1) Jan 2005, 23-27.
  • Sunne, D. (1919). Tests of discrimination and multiple choice for vocational diagnosis: Psychological Bulletin Vol 16(8) Aug 1919, 262-267.
  • Sustik, J. M. (1979). The effects of heuristic-algorithmic instructions and conceptual level preference upon computer based problem solving using multiple choice-list response modes: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Sutton, J. P. (1982). Influencing answer-changing behavior: Changing beliefs about the consequences of answer changing through consultation: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Suzuki, S. (2000). Choice between single-response and multichoice tasks in humans: Psychological Record Vol 50(1) Win 2000, 105-116.
  • Swanson, D. B., Holtzman, K. Z., Allbee, K., & Clauser, B. E. (2006). Psychometric Characteristics and Response Times for Content-Parallel Extended-Matching and One-Best-Answer Items in Relation to Number of Options: Academic Medicine Vol 81(10,Suppl) Oct 2006, S52-S55.
  • Swineford, F., & Miller, P. M. (1953). Effects of directions regarding guessing on item statistics of a multiple-choice vocabulary test: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 44(3) Mar 1953, 129-139.
  • Swordes, A. (1952). Effect of changing the number of item responses from five to four in the same test: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 36(5) Oct 1952, 342-343.
  • Takane, Y. (1996). An item response model for multidimensional analysis of multiple-choice data: Behaviormetrika Vol 23(2) Jul 1996, 153-167.
  • Tate, R. (2000). Performance of a proposed method for the linking of mixed format tests with constructed response and multiple choice items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 37(4) Win 2000, 329-346.
  • Tate, R. L. (1999). A cautionary note on IRT-based linking of tests with polytomous items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 36(4) Win 1999, 336-346.
  • Tate, R. L. (2003). Equating for Long-Term Scale Maintenance of Mixed Format Tests Containing Multiple Choice and Constructed Response Items: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 63(6) Dec 2003, 893-914.
  • Taylor, A. K. (2005). Violating Conventional Wisdom in Multiple Choice Test Construction: College Student Journal Vol 39(1) Mar 2005, 141-148.
  • Taylor, P. H. (1966). A study of the effects of instructions in a multiple-choice mathematics test: British Journal of Educational Psychology 36(1) 1966, 1-6.
  • Teague, J. E., & Michael, W. B. (1994). Preferences of science teachers for multiple-choice achievement test items at different levels in Bloom's taxonomy in relation to their cognitive learning styles: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 54(4) Win 1994, 941-948.
  • Thayer, N. J. (1983). A comparison of multiple-choice test response modes and scoring methods: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Thissen, D., Pommerich, M., Billeaud, K., & Williams, V. S. L. (1995). Item response theory for scores on tests including polytomous items with ordered responses: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 19(1) Mar 1995, 39-49.
  • Thissen, D., & Steinberg, L. (1984). A response model for multiple choice items: Psychometrika Vol 49(4) Dec 1984, 501-519.
  • Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Fitzpatrick, A. R. (1989). Multiple-choice models: The distractors are also part of the item: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 26(2) Sum 1989, 161-176.
  • Thissen, D., Wainer, H., & Wang, X.-B. (1994). Are tests comprising both multiple-choice and free-response items necessarily less unidimensional than multiple-choice tests? An analysis of two tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 31(2) Sum 1994, 113-123.
  • Thomas, P. R., & Bain, J. D. (1984). Contextual dependence of learning approaches: The effects of assessments: Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research & Applications Vol 3(4) Oct-Dec 1984, 227-240.
  • Thompson, B., & Melancon, J. G. (1990). Measurement characteristics of the Finding Embedded Figures Test: A comparison across three samples and two response formats: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 50(2) Sum 1990, 333-342.
  • Thompson, M. E., & Thompson, J. P. (1964). Alternation and repetition in a multiple-choice situation: Psychological Reports 14(2) 1964, 505-506.
  • Tilton, J. W. (1939). The effect of "right" and "wrong" upon the learning of nonsense syllables in multiple choice arrangement: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 30(2) Feb 1939, 95-115.
  • Tirado Segura, F., & Backoff Escudero, E. (1993). The psychopedagogical value of errors: A misused resource in evaluation practices: Revista Mexicana de Psicologia Vol 10(2) Dec 1993, 175-181.
  • Tollefson, N. (1987). A comparison of the item difficulty and item discrimination of multiple-choice items using the "none of the above" and one correct response options: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 47(2) Sum 1987, 377-383.
  • Torabi-Parizi, R., & Campbell, N. J. (1982). Classroom test writing: Effects of item format on test quality: The Elementary School Journal Vol 83(2) Nov 1982, 155-160.
  • Towns, M. H., & Robinson, W. R. (1993). Student use of test-wiseness strategies in solving multiple-choice chemistry examinations: Journal of Research in Science Teaching Vol 30(7) Sep 1993, 709-722.
  • Townsend, M. A., Moore, D. W., Tuck, B. F., & Wilton, K. M. (1990). Headings within multiple-choice tests as facilitators of test performance: British Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 60(2) Jun 1990, 153-160.
  • Traub, R. E., & Fisher, C. W. (1977). On the equivalence of constructed-response and multiple-choice tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 1(3) Sum 1977, 355-369.
  • Traub, R. E., & Hambleton, D. K. (1972). The effect of scoring instructions and degree of speededness on the validity and reliability of multiple-choice tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 32(3) Fal 1972, 737-758.
  • Traub, R. E., & Hambleton, R. K. (1973). Note of correction on the article entitled "The effect of scoring instructions and degree of speededness on the validity and reliability of multiple-choice tests." Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 33(4) Win 1973, 877-878.
  • Travers, R. M. W. (1942). A note on the value of customary measures of item validity: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 26(5) Oct 1942, 625-632.
  • Trevisan, M. S. (1991). Reliability and validity of multiple choice examinations as a function of the number of options per item and student ability: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Trevisan, M. S., Sax, G., & Michael, W. B. (1991). The effects of the number of options per item and student ability on test validity and reliability: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 51(4) Win 1991, 829-837.
  • Trevisan, M. S., Sax, G., & Michael, W. B. (1994). Estimating the optimum number of options per item using an incremental option paradigm: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 54(1) Spr 1994, 86-91.
  • Trewin, S. A. (2007). Robert Yerkes' multiple-choice apparatus, 1913-1939: American Journal of Psychology Vol 120(4) Win 2007, 645-660.
  • Trinkaus, J. (1991). Changing multiple-choice test answers: An informal look: Psychological Reports Vol 69(3, Pt 1) Dec 1991, 769-770.
  • Tripp, A. M. (1983). A comparison of the effect of conventional and complex multiple-choice options on item difficulty and discrimination: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Truxillo, D. M., & Hunthausen, J. M. (1999). Reactions of African-American and White applicants to written and video-based police selection tests: Journal of Social Behavior & Personality Vol 14(1) Mar 1999, 101-112.
  • Tuck, J. P. (1978). Examinees' control of item difficulty sequence: Psychological Reports Vol 42(3, Pt 2) Jun 1978, 1109-1110.
  • Tuinman, J. J. (1972). Inspection of passages as a function of passage-dependency of the test items: Journal of Reading Behavior Vol 5(3) Sum 1972-1973, 186-191.
  • Turnbull, W. W. (1946). A normalized graphic method of item analysis: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 37(3) Mar 1946, 129-141.
  • Tversky, A. (1964). On the optimal number of alternatives at a choice point: Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1(2) 1964, 386-391.
  • Urbach, N. M. (1976). Some situational effects on moral judgment measured by a multiple-choice test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • van Barneveld, C. (2003). The Effects of Examinee Motivation on Multiple-Choice Item Parameter Estimates: Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 49(3) Fal 2003, 277-289.
  • van Batenburg, T., & Laros, J. A. (2002). Graphical analysis of test items: Educational Research and Evaluation Vol 8(3) Sep 2002, 319-333.
  • Van den Bergh, H. (1987). A study of the relationship between performance on open-ended and multiple-choice questions: Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 12(5) Oct 1987, 304-312.
  • Van den Bergh, H. (1990). On the construct validity of multiple-choice items for reading comprehension: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 14(1) Mar 1990, 1-12.
  • Van den Brink, W. P. (1977). The influence of "scouting." Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 2(6) Nov 1977, 253-261.
  • Van den Brink, W. P., & Koele, P. (1980). Item sampling, guessing and decision-making in achievement testing: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 33(1) May 1980, 104-108.
  • van der Linden, W. J., & Sotaridona, L. (2004). A Statistical Test for Detecting Answer Copying on Multiple-Choice Tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 41(4) Win 2004, 361-377.
  • van der Linden, W. J., & Sotaridona, L. (2006). Detecting answer copying when the regular response process follows a known response model: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 31(3) 2006, 283-304.
  • Van Naerssen, R. F., Sandbergen, S., & Bruynis, E. (1966). Is the utility-curve for exam scores an ogive? : Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden 21(6) 1966, 358-363.
  • Van Susteren, T. J. (1987). The comparative reliability and validity of alternate-choice and multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Veale, J. R., & Foreman, D. I. (1983). Assessing cultural bias using foil response data: Cultural variation: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 20(3) Fal 1983, 249-258.
  • Veenhoven, R. (2005). Happiness in Multiple Choice Society: Journal of Happiness Studies Vol 6(1) 2005, 93-96.
  • Velicer, W. F., DiClemente, C. C., & Corriveau, D. P. (1984). Item format and the structure of the Personal Orientation Inventory: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 8(4) Fal 1984, 409-419.
  • Velicer, W. F., Govia, J. M., Cherico, N. P., & Corriveau, D. P. (1985). Item format and the structure of the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory: Aggressive Behavior Vol 11(1) 1985, 65-82.
  • Veloski, J. J., Rabinowitz, H. K., & Robeson, M. R. (1993). A solution to the cueing effects of multiple choice questions: The Un-Q format: Medical Education Vol 27(4) Jul 1993, 371-375.
  • Violato, C. (1991). Item difficulty and discrimination as a function of stem completeness: Psychological Reports Vol 69(3, Pt 1) Dec 1991, 739-743.
  • Violato, C., & Harasym, P. H. (1987). Effects of structural characteristics of stem format of multiple-choice items on item difficulty and discrimination: Psychological Reports Vol 60(3, Pt 2) Jun 1987, 1259-1262.
  • Violato, C., & Marini, A. E. (1989). Effects of stem orientation and completeness of multiple-choice items on item difficulty and discrimination: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(1) Spr 1989, 287-295.
  • von Davier, A. A., & Wilson, C. (2007). IRT true-score test equating: A guide through assumptions and applications: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 67(6) Dec 2007, 940-957.
  • von Schrader, S., & Ansley, T. (2006). Sex Differences in the Tendency to Omit Items on Multiple-Choice Tests: 1980-2000: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(1) 2006, 41-65.
  • Voss, J. F. (1974). Acquisition and nonspecific transfer effects in prose learning as a function of question form: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 66(5) Oct 1974, 736-740.
  • Votaw, D. F. (1936). The effect of do-not-guess directions upon the validity of true-false or multiple choice tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 27(9) Dec 1936, 698-703.
  • Votaw, D. F., & Danforth, L. (1939). The effect of method of response upon the validity of multiple-choice tests: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 30(8) Nov 1939, 624-627.
  • Wagner, B. M. (1972). The effect of Venn diagrams as visual transformational mediators on rule learning by college students: Dissertation Abstracts International Vol.
  • Wainer, H., & Thissen, D. (1993). Combining multiple-choice and constructed-response test scores: Toward a Marxist theory of test construction: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 6(2) 1993, 103-118.
  • Walker, D. M., & Thompson, J. S. (2001). A note on multiple choice exams with respect to students' risk preference and confidence: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 26(3) Jun 2001, 260-267.
  • Wallace, M. A. (2004). Multiple-choice exams: Student explanations for answer choices. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Wallace, M. A., & Williams, R. L. (2003). Multiple-choice exams: Explanations for student choices: Teaching of Psychology Vol 30(2) May 2003, 136-138.
  • Wallen, R., & Rieveschl, G., Jr. (1942). An improved self-marking answer sheet: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 33(9) Dec 1942, 702-704.
  • Wang, J., & Calhoun, G. (1997). A useful function for assessing the effect of guessing on true-false and multiple-choice tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 57(1) Feb 1997, 179-185.
  • Wang, W.-C. (2000). Factorial modeling of differential distractor functioning in multiple-choice items: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 1(3) 2000, 238-256.
  • Ward, R. P., & Prytula, R. E. (1976). Multiple-choice feedback by categorization of errors: Psychological Reports Vol 38(1) Feb 1976, 223-227.
  • Ward, W. C. (1982). A comparison of free-response and multiple-choice forms of verbal aptitude tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 6(1) Win 1982, 1-11.
  • Ward, W. C., Frederiksen, N., & Carlson, S. B. (1980). Construct validity of free-response and machine-scorable forms of a test: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 17(1) Spr 1980, 11-29.
  • Waters, B. K. (1976). The measurement of partial knowledge: A comparison between two empirical option-weighting methods and rights-only scoring: Journal of Educational Research Vol 69(7) Mar 1976, 256-260.
  • Watts, T. M. (1979). Indices of cheating on multiple-choice tests: Simulation and evaluation: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Weil-Barais, A. (1976). Modalities of questioning and learning: Bulletin de Psychologie Vol 30(17) Jul-Aug 1976-1977, 837-841.
  • Weil-Barais, A., & Cauzinille, E. (1975). Choice response modes in programmed instruction: Psychologie Francaise Vol 20(4) Dec 1975, 151-164.
  • Weiner, M., & Tobias, S. (1963). Chance factors in the interpretation of group administered multiple-choice tests: Personnel & Guidance Journal 41(5) 1963, 435-437.
  • Weiten, W. (1982). Relative effectiveness of single and double multiple-choice questions in educational measurement: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 51(1) Fal 1982, 46-50.
  • Weithorn, C. J., & Kagen, E. (1979). Training first graders of high-activity level to improve performance through verbal self-direction: Journal of Learning Disabilities Vol 12(2) Feb 1979, 82-88.
  • Weitzman, R. A. (1984). Test-retest reliability of a formula-scored multiple-choice test: Psychological Reports Vol 54(2) Apr 1984, 419-425.
  • Weitzman, R. A. (1996). The Rasch model plus guessing: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 56(5) Oct 1996, 779-790.
  • Welch, C., & Hoover, H. D. (1993). Procedures for extending item bias detection techniques to polytomously scored items: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 6(1) 1993, 1-19.
  • Wembridge, E. R., & Gabel, P. (1919). Multiple choice experiment applied to school children: Psychological Review Vol 26(4) Jul 1919, 294-299.
  • Wesman, A. G. (1947). Active versus blank responses to multiple-choice items: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 38(2) Feb 1947, 89-95.
  • Wesman, A. G., & Bennett, G. K. (1946). The use of 'none of these' as an option in test construction: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 37(9) Dec 1946, 541-549.
  • Wester, A. (1995). The importance of the item format with respect to gender differences in test performance: A study of open-format items in the DTM test: Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research Vol 39(4) Dec 1995, 335-346.
  • Westers, P., & Kelderman, H. (1992). Examining differential item functioning due to item difficulty and alternative attractiveness: Psychometrika Vol 57(1) Mar 1992, 107-118.
  • Whetton, C., & Childs, R. (1981). The effects of item by item feedback given during an ability test: British Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 51(3) Nov 1981, 336-346.
  • White, A. P., & Zammarelli, J. E. (1981). Convergence principles: Information in the answer sets of some multiple-choice intelligence tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 5(1) Win 1981, 21-27.
  • White-Blackburn, G., Blackburn, T. C., & Lutzker, J. R. (1980). The effects of objective versus subjective quiz items in a PSI course: Teaching of Psychology Vol 7(3) Oct 1980, 150-152.
  • Wilcox, R. M., & Krasnoff, A. G. (1966). Social desirability and multiple choice Rorschach responses: Journal of Clinical Psychology 22(1) 1966, 61-65.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1980). An approach to measuring the achievement or proficiency of an examinee: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 4(2) Spr 1980, 241-251.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1981). Analyzing the distractors of multiple-choice test items or partitioning multinominal cell probabilities with respect to a standard: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 41(4) Win 1981, 1051-1068.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1982). Bounds on the k out of n reliability of a test, and an exact test for hierarchically related items: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 6(3) Sum 1982, 327-336.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1982). Determining the length of multiple choice criterion-referenced tests when an answer-until-correct scoring procedure is used: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(3) Fal 1982, 789-794.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1982). Using results on k out of n system reliability to study and characterize tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(1) Spr 1982, 153-165.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1983). An approximation of the K out N reliability of a test, and a scoring procedure for determining which items an examinee knows: Psychometrika Vol 48(2) Jun 1983, 211-222.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1983). How do examinees behave when taking multiple-choice tests? : Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 7(2) Spr 1983, 239-240.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1985). Estimating the validity of a multiple-choice test item having k correct alternatives: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 9(3) Sep 1985, 311-316.
  • Wilcox, R. R. (1987). Confidence intervals for true scores under an answer-until-correct scoring procedure: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 24(3) Fal 1987, 263-269.
  • Wilcox, R. R., & Wilcox, K. T. (1988). Models of decisionmaking processes for multiple-choice test items: An analysis of spatial ability: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 25(2) Sum 1988, 125-136.
  • Wilcox, R. R., Wilcox, K. T., & Chung, J. (1988). A note on decisionmaking processes for multiple-choice test items: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 25(3) Fal 1988, 247-250.
  • Wilde, W. D. (1973). A facet design to measure reading comprehension: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Wiley, A. (1999). An investigation into two models for equating examinations with multiple item formats. (anchor testing). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Wilhite, S. C. (1986). The relationship of headings, questions, and locus of control to multiple-choice test performance: Journal of Reading Behavior Vol 18(1) 1986, 23-40.
  • Wilkinson, T. J., & Frampton, C. M. (2004). Comprehensive undergraduate medical assessments improve prediction of clinical performance: Medical Education Vol 38(10) Oct 2004, 1111-1116.
  • Willey, C. F. (1964). Objective scoring of the completion test: Third letter recording: Psychological Reports 15(1) 1964, 118.
  • William, D. C., Paul, J., & Ogilvie, J. C. (1957). Mass media, learning, and retention: Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Vol 11(3) Sep 1957, 157-163.
  • Williams, J. B. (2006). Assertion-reason multiple-choice testing as a tool for deep learning: A qualitative analysis: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 31(3) Jun 2006, 287-301.
  • Williams, J. P. (1965). Effectiveness of constructed-response and multiple-choice programing modes as a function of test mode: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 56(3) Jun 1965, 111-117.
  • Williams, M. (1998). Multiple-choice examination answer changing and rationales. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Williams, R. L., & Clark, L. (2004). College students' ratings of student effort, student ability and teacher input as correlates of student performance on multiple-choice exams: Educational Research Vol 46(3) Dec 2004, 229-239.
  • Williams, R. L., Oliver, R., Allin, J. L., Winn, B., & Booher, C. S. (2003). Psychological critical thinking as a course predictor and outcome variable: Teaching of Psychology Vol 30(3) Sum 2003, 220-223.
  • Willoughby, T. L. (1980). Reliability and validity of a priori estimates of item characteristics for an examination of health science information: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 40(4) Win 1980, 1141-1146.
  • Willson, V. L. (1982). Maximizing reliability in multiple choice questions: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 42(1) Spr 1982, 69-72.
  • Wilmink, F. W., & Nevels, K. (1982). A Bayesian approach for estimating the knowledge of the item pool in multiple choice tests: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 35(1) May 1982, 90-101.
  • Wilson, M., Suriyawongse, S., & Moore, A. (1988). The effects of ceiling rules on the internal consistency reliability of a mathematics achievement test: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(1) Spr 1988, 213-217.
  • Windmueller, G., & et al. (1986). Unpacking metaphors and allegories: Human Development Vol 29(4) Jul-Aug 1986, 236-240.
  • Wolkow, M. (1979). The effects of violating selected item-writing principles on the difficulty and reliability of multiple-choice tests for health profession students: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Wormser, R. G., & Hager, U. (1978). Comparing two methods of testing: Multiple-choice vs free essay: Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht Vol 25(3) 1978, 152-158.
  • Wright, P., Aldrich, A., & Wilcox, P. (1977). Some effects of coding answers for optical mark reading on the accuracy of answering multiple-choice questions: Human Factors Vol 19(1) Feb 1977, 83-87.
  • Yang, J., Verheul, I. C., Verhelst, N., & Van Essen, E. (1985). Opinions about multiple choice- and open questions-tests and differences in study activities as a result of test expectation: Report of a questionnaire: Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch Vol 10(4) Aug 1985, 179-188.
  • Yang, W.-L. (2004). Sensitivity of Linkings between AP Multiple-Choice Scores and Composite Scores to Geographical Region: An Illustration of Checking for Population Invariance: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 41(1) Spr 2004, 33-41.
  • Yao, L., & Schwarz, R. D. (2006). A Multidimensional Partial Credit Model With Associated Item and Test Statistics: An Application to Mixed-Format Tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(6) Nov 2006, 469-492.
  • Yasutake, J. Y. (1974). Short and long term retention of written materials as a function of the pacing and mode of adjunct questions: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Yen, W. M. (1981). Using simulation results to choose a latent trait model: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 5(2) Spr 1981, 245-262.
  • Yen, W. M., Burket, G. R., & Sykes, R. C. (1991). Nonunique solutions to the likelihood equation for the three-parameter logistic model: Psychometrika Vol 56(1) Mar 1991, 39-54.
  • Yerkes, R. M. (1917). Methods of exhibiting reactive tendencies characteristic of ontogenetic and phylogenetic stages: Journal of Animal Behavior Vol 7(1) Jan-Feb 1917, 11-28.
  • Yerkes, R. M. (1921). A New Method of Studying the Ideational Behavior of Mentally Defective and Deranged as Compared with Normal Individuals: Journal of Comparative Psychology Vol 1(5) Oct 1921, 369-394.
  • Yerkes, R. M., & Coburn, C. A. (1915). A study of the behavior of the pig Sus Scrofa by the multiple choice method: Journal of Animal Behavior Vol 5(3) May-Jun 1915, 185-225.
  • Yi'an, W. (1998). What do tests of listening comprehension test? A retrospection study of EFL test-takers performing a multiple-choice task: Language Testing Vol 15(1) Mar 1998, 21-44.
  • Yore, L. D., Craig, M. T., & Maguire, T. O. (1998). Index of science reading awareness: An interactive-constructive model, test verification, and grades 4-8 results: Journal of Research in Science Teaching Vol 35(1) Jan 1998, 27-51.
  • Zahran, A. E. (1982). The impact of multiple-choice item styles, judge experience and item taxonomy level on minimum passing standards and interscorer agreement: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Zechmeister, E. B., McKillip, J., Pasko, S., & Bespalec, D. (1975). Visual memory for place on the page: Journal of General Psychology Vol 92(1) Jan 1975, 43-52.
  • Zeidner, M. (1987). Essay versus multiple-choice type classroom exams: The student's perspective: Journal of Educational Research Vol 80(6) Jul-Aug 1987, 352-358.
  • Zeidner, M. (1993). Essay versus multiple-choice type classroom exams: The student's perspective. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Zhu, D. (1995). Gender and ethnic differences in tendencies to omit responses on multiple-choice tests and impact of omits on test scores and score ranks. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Zimmer, A. C. (1984). Risk-taking while answering multiple choice tests: A study on the use of item formats: Diagnostica Vol 30(4) 1984, 267-281.
  • Zimmerman, D. W. (1985). Variability of deviation IQ's based on multiple-choice test scores: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 45(4) Win 1985, 745-751.
  • Zimmerman, D. W., & Williams, R. A. (1987). A note on short multiple-choice tests: Indian Journal of Psychometry & Education Vol 18(1) Jan 1987, 29-36.
  • Zimmerman, D. W., & Williams, R. H. (1965). Effect of chance success due to guessing on error of measurement in multiple-choice tests: Psychological Reports 16(3, Pt 2) 1965, 1193-1196.
  • Zimmerman, D. W., & Williams, R. H. (1982). Element of chance and comparative reliability of matching tests and multiple-choice tests: Psychological Reports Vol 50(3, Pt 1) Jun 1982, 975-980.
  • Zimmerman, D. W., & Williams, R. H. (2003). A New Look at the Influence of Guessing on the Reliability of Multiple-Choice Tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(5) Sep 2003, 357-371.
  • Zimmerman, D. W., Williams, R. H., & Symons, D. L. (1984). Empirical estimates of the comparative reliability of matching tests and multiple-choice tests: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 52(3) Spr 1984, 179-182.
  • Zimmermann, D. W., & Williams, R. H. (1965). Chance success due to guessing and non-independence of true scores and error scores in multiple-choice tests: Computer trials with prepared distributions: Psychological Reports 17(1) 1965, 159-165.
  • Zin, T. T. (1992). Comparing 12 finite state models of examinee performance on multiple-choice tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Zirkle, G. A. (1946). An analytic study of the multiple choice analogies test item: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 37(7) Oct 1946, 427-435.
  • Zuckerman, S. B. (1948). A research suggestion in large-scale Rorschach: Journal of Consulting Psychology Vol 12(5) Sep 1948, 300-302.



This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki