The Effects of Rating Designs on Rater Classification Accuracy and Rater Measurement Precision in Large-Scale Mixed-Format Assessments.

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL
Applied Psychological Measurement Pub Date : 2023-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-12 DOI:10.1177/01466216231151705
Wenjing Guo, Stefanie A Wind
{"title":"The Effects of Rating Designs on Rater Classification Accuracy and Rater Measurement Precision in Large-Scale Mixed-Format Assessments.","authors":"Wenjing Guo, Stefanie A Wind","doi":"10.1177/01466216231151705","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In standalone performance assessments, researchers have explored the influence of different rating designs on the sensitivity of latent trait model indicators to different rater effects as well as the impacts of different rating designs on student achievement estimates. However, the literature provides little guidance on the degree to which different rating designs might affect rater classification accuracy (severe/lenient) and rater measurement precision in both standalone performance assessments and mixed-format assessments. Using results from an analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data, we conducted simulation studies to systematically explore the impacts of different rating designs on rater measurement precision and rater classification accuracy (severe/lenient) in mixed-format assessments. The results suggest that the complete rating design produced the highest rater classification accuracy and greatest rater measurement precision, followed by the multiple-choice (MC) + spiral link design and the MC link design. Considering that complete rating designs are not practical in most testing situations, the MC + spiral link design may be a useful choice because it balances cost and performance. We consider the implications of our findings for research and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":48300,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychological Measurement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9979195/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216231151705","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In standalone performance assessments, researchers have explored the influence of different rating designs on the sensitivity of latent trait model indicators to different rater effects as well as the impacts of different rating designs on student achievement estimates. However, the literature provides little guidance on the degree to which different rating designs might affect rater classification accuracy (severe/lenient) and rater measurement precision in both standalone performance assessments and mixed-format assessments. Using results from an analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data, we conducted simulation studies to systematically explore the impacts of different rating designs on rater measurement precision and rater classification accuracy (severe/lenient) in mixed-format assessments. The results suggest that the complete rating design produced the highest rater classification accuracy and greatest rater measurement precision, followed by the multiple-choice (MC) + spiral link design and the MC link design. Considering that complete rating designs are not practical in most testing situations, the MC + spiral link design may be a useful choice because it balances cost and performance. We consider the implications of our findings for research and practice.

在大规模混合格式评估中,评分设计对评分者分类准确性和评分者测量精确度的影响。
在独立的成绩评估中,研究人员探讨了不同评分设计对潜在特质模型指标对不同评分者效应的敏感性的影响,以及不同评分设计对学生成绩估计值的影响。然而,对于在独立的成绩评估和混合格式评估中,不同的评分设计会在多大程度上影响评分者分类的准确性(严重/宽松)和评分者测量的精确性,文献几乎没有提供指导。利用对美国国家教育进步评估(NAEP)数据的分析结果,我们进行了模拟研究,系统地探讨了在混合形式评估中,不同评分设计对评分者测量精度和评分者分类精度(严重/宽松)的影响。结果表明,完全评分设计产生了最高的评分者分类准确度和最高的评分者测量精确度,其次是多项选择(MC)+螺旋链接设计和MC链接设计。考虑到完整评分设计在大多数测试环境中并不实用,MC + 螺旋链接设计可能是一个有用的选择,因为它兼顾了成本和性能。我们考虑了研究结果对研究和实践的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Applied Psychological Measurement publishes empirical research on the application of techniques of psychological measurement to substantive problems in all areas of psychology and related disciplines.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信