So far away: threshold copying distances for multiple-choice answers in different exam room settings.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Andrew Carkeet, Vy T Dinh, Leo Ho, Bernice Lee, Yosef K Asfha, Hui Yee Reiko Tang, Ying Xuan Toh
{"title":"So far away: threshold copying distances for multiple-choice answers in different exam room settings.","authors":"Andrew Carkeet, Vy T Dinh, Leo Ho, Bernice Lee, Yosef K Asfha, Hui Yee Reiko Tang, Ying Xuan Toh","doi":"10.1080/08164622.2024.2445068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Paper-based multiple-choice exams are commonly used to assess students. Answer sheets for these exams have a configuration which affords a potential opportunity for cheating.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>A proportion of students report cheating on assessments. This research assessed maximum distances at which multiple-choice answer sheets could be copied in different rooms and for different viewing conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were 10 healthy observers. Stimuli were generated on a University standard multiple-choice answer template with 40 answer responses recorded for each sheet. Responses were recorded at a range of test distances. Method of constant stimuli and probit analysis was used to estimate the threshold copying distance at which 62.5% of responses were correctly identified. With the copied sheets flat on a desk, testing took place in a tiered lecture theatre, a flat exam room, and with the exam positioned at different angles of regard: straight-ahead, at 45 degrees to straight ahead (oblique), and sideways.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Threshold distances were greater in the tiered lecture theatre than the flat exam room and were greater in the straight-ahead position than the oblique position, in turn greater than the sideways viewing position. In the straight-ahead position in the tiered lecture theatre, exam answer sheets could be copied from 7.12 m; and in a flat room, from 3.34 m. For the sideways viewing condition threshold copying distances were 2.58 m (tiered lecture), and 2.36 m (flat room).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Multiple-choice answer sheets can be copied from relatively large distances, a potential opportunity for academic dishonesty. Tiered lecture rooms should not be used as venues for multiple-choice exams. Multiple-choice answer sheets can be redesigned to reduce the risk of copying. These results will be of practical and theoretical interest to educators, administrators and students.</p>","PeriodicalId":10214,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Optometry","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Optometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08164622.2024.2445068","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Clinical relevance: Paper-based multiple-choice exams are commonly used to assess students. Answer sheets for these exams have a configuration which affords a potential opportunity for cheating.

Background: A proportion of students report cheating on assessments. This research assessed maximum distances at which multiple-choice answer sheets could be copied in different rooms and for different viewing conditions.

Methods: Participants were 10 healthy observers. Stimuli were generated on a University standard multiple-choice answer template with 40 answer responses recorded for each sheet. Responses were recorded at a range of test distances. Method of constant stimuli and probit analysis was used to estimate the threshold copying distance at which 62.5% of responses were correctly identified. With the copied sheets flat on a desk, testing took place in a tiered lecture theatre, a flat exam room, and with the exam positioned at different angles of regard: straight-ahead, at 45 degrees to straight ahead (oblique), and sideways.

Results: Threshold distances were greater in the tiered lecture theatre than the flat exam room and were greater in the straight-ahead position than the oblique position, in turn greater than the sideways viewing position. In the straight-ahead position in the tiered lecture theatre, exam answer sheets could be copied from 7.12 m; and in a flat room, from 3.34 m. For the sideways viewing condition threshold copying distances were 2.58 m (tiered lecture), and 2.36 m (flat room).

Conclusion: Multiple-choice answer sheets can be copied from relatively large distances, a potential opportunity for academic dishonesty. Tiered lecture rooms should not be used as venues for multiple-choice exams. Multiple-choice answer sheets can be redesigned to reduce the risk of copying. These results will be of practical and theoretical interest to educators, administrators and students.

如此遥远:在不同的考场设置中,多项选择题答案的极限抄写距离。
临床相关性:基于纸的多项选择考试通常用于评估学生。这些考试的答题纸有一个配置,为作弊提供了潜在的机会。背景:一部分学生报告在评估中作弊。这项研究评估了在不同房间和不同观看条件下抄多选题答题纸的最大距离。方法:参与者为10名健康观察者。刺激是在大学标准的多项选择答案模板上产生的,每张模板上记录了40个答案。在测试距离范围内记录反应。采用恒定刺激和概率分析的方法估计了62.5%的反应被正确识别的阈值复制距离。考生将抄写好的试卷平放在桌子上,考试在分层的演讲厅、平坦的考场进行,考试的角度不同:正前方、45度到正前方(倾斜)和侧面。结果:阶梯阶梯教室的阈值距离大于平面考场,直视位置的阈值距离大于斜视位置,而斜视位置的阈值距离又大于侧视位置。在阶梯阶梯教室的正前方位置,从7.12米开始可以抄试卷;在一间公寓里,从3.34米起。侧视条件下的阈值复制距离分别为2.58 m(分层教室)和2.36 m(平教室)。结论:选择题答卷可以从相对较远的距离复制,这是学术不诚实的潜在机会。分层教室不应用作多项选择题考试的场所。多项选择题的答题卡可以重新设计,以减少抄袭的风险。这些结果将对教育工作者、管理人员和学生具有实践和理论意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Experimental Optometry is a peer reviewed journal listed by ISI and abstracted by PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Citation Index and Current Contents. It publishes original research papers and reviews in clinical optometry and vision science. Debate and discussion of controversial scientific and clinical issues is encouraged and letters to the Editor and short communications expressing points of view on matters within the Journal''s areas of interest are welcome. The Journal is published six times annually.
×
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