Option weighting is an alternative to increasing test length as a means of improving the reliability of a test. The effects on test reliability of option weighting procedures, including two procedures not previously reported, were compared in two empiri cal studies using four independent sets of items. In all cases Guttman weights and Biserial weights (based on the Brogden Biserial or Cleman's Lambda coefficient) were superior to Number Right and Correction for Guessing weights. Overall, Biserial weights appeared to be superior to Gutt man weights.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brogden, H.E.A new coefficient: Application to biserial correlation and to estimation of selection efficiency. Psychometrika,1949,14, 169-175.
2.
Clemans, W.V.An index of item-criterion relationship. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1958, 18, 167-172.
3.
Davis, F.B.Estimation and use of scoring weights for each choice in multiple-choice test items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1959, 19, 291-298.
4.
Davis, F.B., & Fifer, G.The effect on test reliability and validity of scoring aptitude and achievement tests with weights for each choice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1959, 19, 159-170.
5.
Echternacht, G.J.A comparison of various item option weighting schemes (Research Bulletin 73-6 . Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1973.
6.
Guttman, L.The quantification of a class of attributes : A theory and method of scale construction. In P. Horst (Ed.), The prediction of personal adjustment. New York: Social Science Research Council, 1941.
7.
Hendrickson, G.F.The effect of differential option weighting on multiple-choice objective tests . Journal of Educational Measurement, 1971 , 8, 291-296. (a)
8.
Hendrickson, G.F.The effect of differential option weighting on multiple-choice objective tests (Report No. 93. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University, Center for the Study of Social Organization of Schools , 1971. (b)
9.
Hendrickson, G.F., & Stanley, J.C.An assessment of the effect of differentially weighting the options of a multiple-choice objective test. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Minneapolis , March 6, 1970.
10.
Reilly, R.R.Empirical option weighting with a correction for guessing (Research Bulletin 72-59. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1972.
11.
Reilly, R.R., & Jackson, R.Effects of empirical option weighting on reliability and validity of the GRE (Research Bulletin 72-38. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1972.
12.
Stanley, J.C., & Wang, M.D.Weighting test items and test-item options, an overview of the analytical and empirical literature. Paper presented at the Mathematical Psychological Meetings at Stanford University, Palo Alto, August 28, 1968. (a)
13.
Stanley, J.C., & Wang, M.D.Differential weighting, a survey of methods and empirical studies. Baltimore : The Johns Hopkins University, 1968. (b)
14.
Stanley, J.C., & Wang, M.D.Weighting test items and test-item options, an overview of the analytical and empirical literature. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 1970, 30, 21-25.
15.
Wang, M.D., & Stanley, J.C.Differential weighting: A review of methods and empirical studies. Review of Educational Research, 1970, 40, 663-705.
