Differences in Time Usage as a Competing Hypothesis for Observed Group Differences in Accuracy with an Application to Observed Gender Differences in PISA Data

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Educational Measurement Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1111/jedm.12419
Radhika Kapoor, Erin Fahle, Klint Kanopka, David Klinowski, Ana Trindade Ribeiro, Benjamin W. Domingue
{"title":"Differences in Time Usage as a Competing Hypothesis for Observed Group Differences in Accuracy with an Application to Observed Gender Differences in PISA Data","authors":"Radhika Kapoor,&nbsp;Erin Fahle,&nbsp;Klint Kanopka,&nbsp;David Klinowski,&nbsp;Ana Trindade Ribeiro,&nbsp;Benjamin W. Domingue","doi":"10.1111/jedm.12419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Group differences in test scores are a key metric in education policy. Response time offers novel opportunities for understanding these differences, especially in low-stakes settings. Here, we describe how observed group differences in test accuracy can be attributed to group differences in latent response speed or group differences in latent capacity, where capacity is defined as expected accuracy for a given response speed. This article introduces a method for decomposing observed group differences in accuracy into these differences in speed versus differences in capacity. We first illustrate in simulation studies that this approach can reliably distinguish between group speed and capacity differences. We then use this approach to probe gender differences in science and reading fluency in PISA 2018 for 71 countries. In science, score differentials largely increase when males, who respond more rapidly, are the higher performing group and decrease when females, who respond more slowly, are the higher performing group. In reading fluency, score differentials decrease where females, who respond more rapidly, are the higher performing group. This method can be used to analyze group differences especially in low-stakes assessments where there are potential group differences in speed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Measurement","volume":"61 4","pages":"682-709"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jedm.12419","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Group differences in test scores are a key metric in education policy. Response time offers novel opportunities for understanding these differences, especially in low-stakes settings. Here, we describe how observed group differences in test accuracy can be attributed to group differences in latent response speed or group differences in latent capacity, where capacity is defined as expected accuracy for a given response speed. This article introduces a method for decomposing observed group differences in accuracy into these differences in speed versus differences in capacity. We first illustrate in simulation studies that this approach can reliably distinguish between group speed and capacity differences. We then use this approach to probe gender differences in science and reading fluency in PISA 2018 for 71 countries. In science, score differentials largely increase when males, who respond more rapidly, are the higher performing group and decrease when females, who respond more slowly, are the higher performing group. In reading fluency, score differentials decrease where females, who respond more rapidly, are the higher performing group. This method can be used to analyze group differences especially in low-stakes assessments where there are potential group differences in speed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The Journal of Educational Measurement (JEM) publishes original measurement research, provides reviews of measurement publications, and reports on innovative measurement applications. The topics addressed will interest those concerned with the practice of measurement in field settings, as well as be of interest to measurement theorists. In addition to presenting new contributions to measurement theory and practice, JEM also serves as a vehicle for improving educational measurement applications in a variety of settings.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information An Exploratory Study Using Innovative Graphical Network Analysis to Model Eye Movements in Spatial Reasoning Problem Solving Differences in Time Usage as a Competing Hypothesis for Observed Group Differences in Accuracy with an Application to Observed Gender Differences in PISA Data Correction to “Expanding the Lognormal Response Time Model Using Profile Similarity Metrics to Improve the Detection of Anomalous Testing Behavior” Subscores: A Practical Guide to Their Production and Consumption. Shelby Haberman, Sandip Sinharay, Richard Feinberg, and Howard Wainer. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2024, 176 pp. (paperback)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1