An investigation of item, examinee, and country correlates of rapid guessing in PISA

IF 1 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Joseph A. Rios, J. Soland
{"title":"An investigation of item, examinee, and country correlates of rapid guessing in PISA","authors":"Joseph A. Rios, J. Soland","doi":"10.1080/15305058.2022.2036161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The objective of the present study was to investigate item-, examinee-, and country-level correlates of rapid guessing (RG) in the context of the 2018 PISA science assessment. Analyzing data from 267,148 examinees across 71 countries showed that over 50% of examinees engaged in RG on an average proportion of one in 10 items. Descriptive differences were noted between countries on the mean number of RG responses per examinee with discrepancies as large as 500%. Country-level differences in the odds of engaging in RG were associated with mean performance and regional membership. Furthermore, based on a two-level cross-classified hierarchical linear model, both item- and examinee-level correlates were found to moderate the likelihood of RG. Specifically, the inclusion of items with multimedia content was associated with a decrease in RG. A number of demographic and attitudinal examinee-level variables were also significant moderators, including sex, linguistic background, SES, and self-rated reading comprehension, motivation mastery, and fear of failure. The findings from this study imply that select subgroup comparisons within and across nations may be biased by differential test-taking effort. To mitigate RG in international assessments, future test developers may look to leverage technology-enhanced items.","PeriodicalId":46615,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Testing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Testing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2022.2036161","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Abstract The objective of the present study was to investigate item-, examinee-, and country-level correlates of rapid guessing (RG) in the context of the 2018 PISA science assessment. Analyzing data from 267,148 examinees across 71 countries showed that over 50% of examinees engaged in RG on an average proportion of one in 10 items. Descriptive differences were noted between countries on the mean number of RG responses per examinee with discrepancies as large as 500%. Country-level differences in the odds of engaging in RG were associated with mean performance and regional membership. Furthermore, based on a two-level cross-classified hierarchical linear model, both item- and examinee-level correlates were found to moderate the likelihood of RG. Specifically, the inclusion of items with multimedia content was associated with a decrease in RG. A number of demographic and attitudinal examinee-level variables were also significant moderators, including sex, linguistic background, SES, and self-rated reading comprehension, motivation mastery, and fear of failure. The findings from this study imply that select subgroup comparisons within and across nations may be biased by differential test-taking effort. To mitigate RG in international assessments, future test developers may look to leverage technology-enhanced items.
项目、考生和国家在PISA快速猜测中的相关性调查
本研究的目的是在2018年PISA科学评估的背景下,调查项目、考生和国家层面的快速猜测(RG)相关性。对71个国家267148名考生的数据分析显示,超过50%的考生参与了RG,平均比例为十分之一。在每个考生的平均RG回答数上,不同国家之间存在描述性差异,差异高达500%。参与RG的几率在国家层面上的差异与平均表现和地区成员资格有关。此外,基于两水平交叉分类层次线性模型,发现项目水平和考生水平的相关因素都调节了RG的可能性。具体来说,包含多媒体内容的项目与RG的减少有关。一些人口统计学和态度考生水平变量也有显著的调节作用,包括性别、语言背景、社会经济地位、自评阅读理解、动机掌握和对失败的恐惧。这项研究的结果表明,国家内部和国家之间的选择亚组比较可能因不同的考试努力而有偏见。为了减轻国际评估中的RG,未来的测试开发人员可能会考虑利用技术增强的项目。
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
International Journal of Testing
International Journal of Testing SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.80%
发文量
13
×
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