Teachers of psychology and their students have been advised to allocate 1 min for each multiple-choice item on tests. Is this a realistic and useful rule? How much time do students actually take to complete multiple-choice tests and how do individual differences and item characteristics affect it? This article reports the results of four studies involving low and high stakes multiple-choice tests delivered online in proctored and unproctored environments. I provide test taking time data so that instructors can make better choices and give better advice to students about allocating time for tests. These results also suggest that students take about the same amount of time to answer multiple-choice questions as did students nearly a century ago.
BirdC. (1931). Effective study habits. New York, NY: Century.
2.
BridgmanB.ClineF.HessingerJ. (2003). Effect of extra time on GRE quantitative and verbal scores(GRE Board Professional Report No. 00-03P). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
3.
BrothenT. (1998). Transforming instruction with technology for developmental students. Journal of Developmental Education, 21, 2–8.
4.
BrothenT.WambachC. (2001). Effective student use of computer-based quizzes. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 292–294. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP2804_10
5.
BrothenT.WambachC. (2003). Universal instructional design in a computer-based PSI psychology course. In HigbeeJ. L. (Ed.), Curriculum Transformation and Disability: Implementing Universal Design in Higher Education (pp.127–145). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy.
6.
BrothenT.WambachC. (2004). The value of time limits on Internet quizzes. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 62–64. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3101_12
7.
BrothenT.WambachC.HansenG. (2002). Accommodating students with disabilities: PSI as an example of universal instructional design. Teaching of Psychology, 29, 239–240. doi: 2002-15317-021
8.
CeciS. J.WilliamsW. M. (1999). Accommodating learning disabilities can bestow unfair advantages. Chronicle of Higher Education, 45, B4
9.
CronbachL. (1984). Essentials of psychological testing. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
10.
EllsworthR. A.DunnellP.DuellO. K. (1990). Multiple-choice test items: What are textbook authors telling teachers?Journal of Educational Research, 83, 289–293.
11.
FriedmanR. (2002). Immediate feedback, no return test procedure for introductory courses. In GriggsR. A. (Ed.), Handbook for teaching introductory psychology: With an emphasis on assessment (Vol. 3, pp 132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12.
GilbertS. D. (1983). How to take tests. New York, NY: Morrow.
13.
HaladynaT. M.DowningS. M.RodriguezM. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15, 309–334. doi:10.1207/S15324818AME1503_5
14.
HestonJ. C. (1953). How to take a test. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.
MyersD. (2004). Psychology (7th ed.). New York, NY: Worth.
19.
PatersonD. G. (1924). Preparation and use of new-type examinations; A manual for teachers. Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World book company.
20.
PaulC. A.RoesenkoetterJ. S. (1980). The relationship between the time taken to complete an examination and the test score received. Teaching of Psychology, 7, 108–109.
21.
RennerC. H.RennerM. J. (1999). How to create a good exam. In PerlmanB.McCannL. I.McFaddenS. H. (Eds.), Lessons learned: Practical advice for the teaching of psychology (pp. 43–47). Washington, DC: American Psychological Society.
22.
RuchG. M. (1924). The improvement of the written examination. Chicago, IL: Scott, Foresman.
23.
SechrestL.KihlstromJ. F.BootzinR. (1999). How to develop multiple-choice tests. In PerlmanB.McCannL. I.McFaddenS. H. (Eds.), Lessons learned: Practical advice for the teaching of psychology (pp. 43–47). Washington, DC: American Psychological Society.
24.
ShermanT. M.WildmanT. M. (1982). Proven strategies for successful test taking. Columbus, OH: C.E. Merrill.
25.
TarabanR.RynearsonK.StalcupK. A. (2001). Time as a variable in learning on the World-Wide Web. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 33, 217–225. doi:10.3758/BF03195368
