通过眼动追踪和语言协议研究阅读测试中不同项目格式的认知过程

IF 0.1 Q4 LINGUISTICS Studies in Language Assessment Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.58379/uixk2220
Hatice Akgün, A. Ünaldı
{"title":"通过眼动追踪和语言协议研究阅读测试中不同项目格式的认知过程","authors":"Hatice Akgün, A. Ünaldı","doi":"10.58379/uixk2220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study has investigated the differences in cognitive processes that test-takers undergo while answering reading comprehension questions in multiple-choice and open-ended short answer formats. For this purpose, data were collected from a group of undergraduate students in an English medium university through eye-tracking technology, immediate retrospective verbal protocols, and short semi-structured interviews. The results showed that the participants used careful reading skills more and comprehended the text more thoroughly in the open-ended format. However, in the MC format, they read less carefully and used more test-taking strategies. These findings contribute to the ongoing discussion on how item format can alter the cognitive processes in a reading comprehension test and confirm the effectiveness of eye-tracking in unveiling cognitive processes in combination with qualitative methods. This study has implications for reading test development.","PeriodicalId":29650,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Language Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating cognitive processes in different item formats in reading tests through eye-tracking and verbal protocols\",\"authors\":\"Hatice Akgün, A. Ünaldı\",\"doi\":\"10.58379/uixk2220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study has investigated the differences in cognitive processes that test-takers undergo while answering reading comprehension questions in multiple-choice and open-ended short answer formats. For this purpose, data were collected from a group of undergraduate students in an English medium university through eye-tracking technology, immediate retrospective verbal protocols, and short semi-structured interviews. The results showed that the participants used careful reading skills more and comprehended the text more thoroughly in the open-ended format. However, in the MC format, they read less carefully and used more test-taking strategies. These findings contribute to the ongoing discussion on how item format can alter the cognitive processes in a reading comprehension test and confirm the effectiveness of eye-tracking in unveiling cognitive processes in combination with qualitative methods. This study has implications for reading test development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Language Assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Language Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58379/uixk2220\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Language Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58379/uixk2220","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了在选择题和开放式简答题中,考生在回答阅读理解题时认知过程的差异。为此,本研究通过眼动追踪技术、即时回顾性口头协议和简短的半结构化访谈,从一所英语媒体大学的一组本科生中收集数据。结果表明,参与者更多地使用了仔细阅读技巧,对开放式文本的理解也更彻底。然而,在MC模式下,他们阅读时不那么仔细,使用了更多的应试策略。这些发现有助于对阅读理解测试中项目格式如何改变认知过程的讨论,并证实眼动追踪与定性方法相结合在揭示认知过程方面的有效性。本研究对阅读测试的发展具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Investigating cognitive processes in different item formats in reading tests through eye-tracking and verbal protocols
This study has investigated the differences in cognitive processes that test-takers undergo while answering reading comprehension questions in multiple-choice and open-ended short answer formats. For this purpose, data were collected from a group of undergraduate students in an English medium university through eye-tracking technology, immediate retrospective verbal protocols, and short semi-structured interviews. The results showed that the participants used careful reading skills more and comprehended the text more thoroughly in the open-ended format. However, in the MC format, they read less carefully and used more test-taking strategies. These findings contribute to the ongoing discussion on how item format can alter the cognitive processes in a reading comprehension test and confirm the effectiveness of eye-tracking in unveiling cognitive processes in combination with qualitative methods. This study has implications for reading test development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contextual variables in written assessment feedback in a university-level Spanish program The effect of in-class and one-on-one video feedback on EFL learners’ English public speaking competency and anxiety Gebril, A. (Ed.) Learning-Oriented Language Assessment: Putting Theory into Practice. Is the devil you know better? Testwiseness and eliciting evidence of interactional competence in familiar versus unfamiliar triadic speaking tasks The meaningfulness of two curriculum-based national tests of English as a foreign language
×
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