Effects of Test Length and Scoring Methods on Pass/Fail Classification Accuracy in Single-Choice Examinations: A Simulation Study.

IF 2.4 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Christiane Pink, Yola Meisel, Arvid Vetter, Philipp Kanzow
{"title":"Effects of Test Length and Scoring Methods on Pass/Fail Classification Accuracy in Single-Choice Examinations: A Simulation Study.","authors":"Christiane Pink, Yola Meisel, Arvid Vetter, Philipp Kanzow","doi":"10.2196/98358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Multiple-choice examinations are widely used in dental and medical education. To reduce the effects of random guessing, several scoring methods incorporating penalty scores have been proposed. However, it remains unclear whether such scoring methods improve the accuracy of pass/fail decisions when pass marks are appropriately calibrated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine pass/fail classification accuracy under three scoring methods (dichotomous scoring, formula scoring, and right-minus-wrong scoring) in summative examinations using single-choice Type A items with five answer options, and to evaluate the effects of test length and the distribution of the model parameter <i>k</i> (knowledge-based response probability).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Monte Carlo simulations and analytical derivations were used to evaluate examinations with varying test lengths of up to 300 items. Pass marks were calibrated to the same model-defined cutoff for all scoring methods. Classification accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and misclassification rates were analyzed across different distributions of <i>k</i>.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>With every item answered and pass marks calibrated to the same model-defined cutoff, the three scoring methods produced identical pass/fail classifications, as expected from their linear relationship. Classification accuracy increased with test length but was strongly influenced by the distribution of <i>k</i>. Under a uniform distribution, mean accuracy reached 0.90 after 24 items and 0.95 after 94 items, whereas substantially longer tests were required when <i>k</i> was concentrated near the cutoff. These item numbers are model- and distribution-dependent and should not be interpreted as recommended examination lengths. Misclassification was highest near the decision threshold.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Under the modeled conditions of complete responding, calibrated pass marks, and unchanged response behavior, the investigated scoring methods yielded identical pass/fail classifications. Classification accuracy increased with test length and depended strongly on the distribution of <i>k</i>, with greatest uncertainty near the pass/fail cutoff. These findings apply to the structural effects of the scoring transformations examined here and should not be generalized to behavioral effects of scoring rules in real examinations.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrial: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":14841,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Formative Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Formative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/98358","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Multiple-choice examinations are widely used in dental and medical education. To reduce the effects of random guessing, several scoring methods incorporating penalty scores have been proposed. However, it remains unclear whether such scoring methods improve the accuracy of pass/fail decisions when pass marks are appropriately calibrated.

Objective: To examine pass/fail classification accuracy under three scoring methods (dichotomous scoring, formula scoring, and right-minus-wrong scoring) in summative examinations using single-choice Type A items with five answer options, and to evaluate the effects of test length and the distribution of the model parameter k (knowledge-based response probability).

Methods: Monte Carlo simulations and analytical derivations were used to evaluate examinations with varying test lengths of up to 300 items. Pass marks were calibrated to the same model-defined cutoff for all scoring methods. Classification accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and misclassification rates were analyzed across different distributions of k.

Results: With every item answered and pass marks calibrated to the same model-defined cutoff, the three scoring methods produced identical pass/fail classifications, as expected from their linear relationship. Classification accuracy increased with test length but was strongly influenced by the distribution of k. Under a uniform distribution, mean accuracy reached 0.90 after 24 items and 0.95 after 94 items, whereas substantially longer tests were required when k was concentrated near the cutoff. These item numbers are model- and distribution-dependent and should not be interpreted as recommended examination lengths. Misclassification was highest near the decision threshold.

Conclusions: Under the modeled conditions of complete responding, calibrated pass marks, and unchanged response behavior, the investigated scoring methods yielded identical pass/fail classifications. Classification accuracy increased with test length and depended strongly on the distribution of k, with greatest uncertainty near the pass/fail cutoff. These findings apply to the structural effects of the scoring transformations examined here and should not be generalized to behavioral effects of scoring rules in real examinations.

Clinicaltrial:

考试长度和评分方法对单选题考试及格/不及格分类准确性的影响:一项模拟研究。
背景:多项选择考试广泛应用于牙科和医学教育。为了减少随机猜测的影响,提出了几种包含罚分的评分方法。然而,目前尚不清楚的是,当及格分数被适当校准时,这种评分方法是否能提高及格/不及格决定的准确性。目的:考察单选题A类五选项总结性考试中三种计分方法(二分计分、公式计分、正负计分)的及格/不及格分类准确率,并评价试题长度和模型参数k(基于知识的回答概率)分布的影响。方法:采用蒙特卡罗模拟法和解析推导法对300个项目的不同测试长度的考试进行评估。所有评分方法的及格分数都被校准到相同的模型定义的截止点。分析了k的不同分布的分类准确性、灵敏度、特异性和错误分类率。结果:每个项目的回答和合格分数校准到相同的模型定义的截止点,三种评分方法产生了相同的合格/不合格分类,正如他们的线性关系所期望的那样。分类精度随测试长度的增加而增加,但受k分布的强烈影响。在均匀分布下,24项后的平均准确率达到0.90,94项后的平均准确率达到0.95,而当k集中在截止点附近时,需要进行更长的测试。这些项目编号依赖于模型和分布,不应解释为推荐的检查长度。在决策阈值附近,错误分类是最高的。结论:在模拟的完全反应、校准的及格分数和不变的反应行为条件下,所研究的评分方法产生了相同的及格/不及格分类。分类精度随着测试长度的增加而增加,并且强烈依赖于k的分布,在通过/失败截止附近的不确定性最大。这些发现适用于这里检查的评分转换的结构效应,不应该推广到实际考试中评分规则的行为效应。临床试验:
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
JMIR Formative Research
JMIR Formative Research Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
579
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书