Cheating on multiple-choice examinations is a serious problem not easily overcome by using more test forms, more proctors, or larger testing rooms. A statistical procedure compares answers for pairs of students using those items on which both made errors. If the number of identical wrong answers is sufficiently greater than the number expected by chance and if the students were seated close together, then cheating is likely. Using this analysis with 90 examinations has suggested ways to discourage cheating and demonstrated some limitations of the procedure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AngoffW. H. (1974). The development of statistical indices for detecting cheaters. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69, 44–49.
2.
BairdJ. S.Jr. (1980). Current trends in college cheating. Psychology in the Schools, 17, 515–522.
3.
BarnettD. C.DaltonJ. C. (1981). Why college students cheat. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22, 545–551.
4.
BussW. G.NovickM. R. (1980). The detection of cheating on standardized tests: Statistical and legal analysis. Journal of Law and Education, 9, 1–64.
5.
CodyR. P. (1985). Statistical analysis of examinations to detect cheating. Journal of Medical Education, 60, 136–137.
6.
HoustonJ. P. (1976). Amount and loci of classroom answer copying, spaced seating, and alternate test forms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 729–735.
7.
HoustonJ. P. (1983). Alternate test forms as a means of reducing multiple-choice answer copying in the classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 572–575.
8.
KirkR. E. (1982). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
9.
McNemarQ. (1962). Psychological statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
10.
SierlesF.HendricksI.CircleS. (1980). Cheating in medical school. Journal of Medical Education, 55, 124–125.
