{"title":"文化是考试参与度的显著预测指标吗?一项国际大学水平批判性思维评估中不费力回答的差异分析","authors":"Joseph A. Rios, Hongwen Guo","doi":"10.1080/08957347.2020.1789141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to evaluate whether differential noneffortful responding (identified via response latencies) was present in four countries administered a low-stakes college-level critical thinking assessment. Results indicated significant differences (as large as .90 SD) between nearly all country pairings in the average number of noneffortful responses per test taker. Furthermore, noneffortful responding was found to be associated with a number of individual-level predictors, such as demographics (both gender and academic year), prior ability, and perceived difficulty of the test, though, these predictors were found to differ across countries. Ignoring the presence of noneffortful responses was associated with: (a) model fit deterioration as well as inflation of reliability, and (b) the inclusion of non-invariant items in the score linking anchor set. However, no meaningful differences in relative performance were noted once accounting for noneffortful responses. Implications for test development and improving the validity of score-based inferences from international assessments are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51609,"journal":{"name":"Applied Measurement in Education","volume":"33 1","pages":"263 - 279"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08957347.2020.1789141","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Culture Be a Salient Predictor of Test-Taking Engagement? An Analysis of Differential Noneffortful Responding on an International College-Level Assessment of Critical Thinking\",\"authors\":\"Joseph A. Rios, Hongwen Guo\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08957347.2020.1789141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to evaluate whether differential noneffortful responding (identified via response latencies) was present in four countries administered a low-stakes college-level critical thinking assessment. Results indicated significant differences (as large as .90 SD) between nearly all country pairings in the average number of noneffortful responses per test taker. Furthermore, noneffortful responding was found to be associated with a number of individual-level predictors, such as demographics (both gender and academic year), prior ability, and perceived difficulty of the test, though, these predictors were found to differ across countries. Ignoring the presence of noneffortful responses was associated with: (a) model fit deterioration as well as inflation of reliability, and (b) the inclusion of non-invariant items in the score linking anchor set. However, no meaningful differences in relative performance were noted once accounting for noneffortful responses. Implications for test development and improving the validity of score-based inferences from international assessments are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Measurement in Education\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"263 - 279\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08957347.2020.1789141\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Measurement in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2020.1789141\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Measurement in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2020.1789141","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}
Can Culture Be a Salient Predictor of Test-Taking Engagement? An Analysis of Differential Noneffortful Responding on an International College-Level Assessment of Critical Thinking
ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to evaluate whether differential noneffortful responding (identified via response latencies) was present in four countries administered a low-stakes college-level critical thinking assessment. Results indicated significant differences (as large as .90 SD) between nearly all country pairings in the average number of noneffortful responses per test taker. Furthermore, noneffortful responding was found to be associated with a number of individual-level predictors, such as demographics (both gender and academic year), prior ability, and perceived difficulty of the test, though, these predictors were found to differ across countries. Ignoring the presence of noneffortful responses was associated with: (a) model fit deterioration as well as inflation of reliability, and (b) the inclusion of non-invariant items in the score linking anchor set. However, no meaningful differences in relative performance were noted once accounting for noneffortful responses. Implications for test development and improving the validity of score-based inferences from international assessments are discussed.
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.