An Examination of Individual Ability Estimation and Classification Accuracy Under Rapid Guessing Misidentifications

IF 1.1 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Applied Measurement in Education Pub Date : 2022-10-02 DOI:10.1080/08957347.2022.2155653
Joseph A. Rios
{"title":"An Examination of Individual Ability Estimation and Classification Accuracy Under Rapid Guessing Misidentifications","authors":"Joseph A. Rios","doi":"10.1080/08957347.2022.2155653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT To mitigate the deleterious effects of rapid guessing (RG) on ability estimates, several rescoring procedures have been proposed. Underlying many of these procedures is the assumption that RG is accurately identified. At present, there have been minimal investigations examining the utility of rescoring approaches when RG is misclassified, and individual scores are reported. To address this limitation, the present simulation study investigates the effect of RG misclassifications on individual examinee ability estimate bias and classification accuracy when using effort-moderated (EM) scoring. This objective is accomplished by manipulating simulee ability level, RG rate, as well as misclassification type and percentage. Results showed that EM scoring significantly improved ability inferences for examinees engaging in RG; however, the effectiveness of this approach was largely dependent on misclassification type. Specifically, across ability levels, bias tended to be on average lower when falsely classifying effortful responses as RG. Although EM scoring improved bias, it was susceptible to elevated false-positive classifications of ability under high RG.","PeriodicalId":51609,"journal":{"name":"Applied Measurement in Education","volume":"35 1","pages":"300 - 312"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Measurement in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2022.2155653","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT To mitigate the deleterious effects of rapid guessing (RG) on ability estimates, several rescoring procedures have been proposed. Underlying many of these procedures is the assumption that RG is accurately identified. At present, there have been minimal investigations examining the utility of rescoring approaches when RG is misclassified, and individual scores are reported. To address this limitation, the present simulation study investigates the effect of RG misclassifications on individual examinee ability estimate bias and classification accuracy when using effort-moderated (EM) scoring. This objective is accomplished by manipulating simulee ability level, RG rate, as well as misclassification type and percentage. Results showed that EM scoring significantly improved ability inferences for examinees engaging in RG; however, the effectiveness of this approach was largely dependent on misclassification type. Specifically, across ability levels, bias tended to be on average lower when falsely classifying effortful responses as RG. Although EM scoring improved bias, it was susceptible to elevated false-positive classifications of ability under high RG.
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
快速猜错识别下的个人能力估计与分类准确度检验
摘要:为了减轻快速猜测(RG)对能力估计的有害影响,提出了几种评分方法。许多这些程序的基础是假设RG是准确识别的。目前,在RG被错误分类时,对评分方法的效用进行了最少的调查,并且报告了个人分数。为了解决这一限制,本模拟研究探讨了在使用努力调节(EM)评分时,RG错误分类对个体考生能力估计偏差和分类准确性的影响。这一目标是通过操纵模拟能力水平、RG率以及错误分类类型和百分比来实现的。结果表明,EM评分显著提高了参与RG的考生的能力推断;然而,这种方法的有效性在很大程度上取决于误分类类型。具体来说,在不同的能力水平上,当错误地将努力反应归类为RG时,偏见往往平均较低。虽然EM评分改善了偏倚,但在高RG下,它容易引起能力假阳性分类的增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
13.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Because interaction between the domains of research and application is critical to the evaluation and improvement of new educational measurement practices, Applied Measurement in Education" prime objective is to improve communication between academicians and practitioners. To help bridge the gap between theory and practice, articles in this journal describe original research studies, innovative strategies for solving educational measurement problems, and integrative reviews of current approaches to contemporary measurement issues. Peer Review Policy: All review papers in this journal have undergone editorial screening and peer review.
期刊最新文献
New Tests of Rater Drift in Trend Scoring Automated Scoring of Short-Answer Questions: A Progress Report Item and Test Characteristic Curves of Rank-2PL Models for Multidimensional Forced-Choice Questionnaires Impact of violating unidimensionality on Rasch calibration for mixed-format tests Can Adaptive Testing Improve Test-Taking Experience? A Case Study on Educational Survey Assessment
×
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