少而不同:利用扩展隔离林检测有预见性的考生。

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL
Nate R Smith, Lisa A Keller, Richard A Feinberg, Chunyan Liu
{"title":"少而不同:利用扩展隔离林检测有预见性的考生。","authors":"Nate R Smith, Lisa A Keller, Richard A Feinberg, Chunyan Liu","doi":"10.1177/01466216251320403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Item preknowledge refers to the case where examinees have advanced knowledge of test material prior to taking the examination. When examinees have item preknowledge, the scores that result from those item responses are not true reflections of the examinee's proficiency. Further, this contamination in the data also has an impact on the item parameter estimates and therefore has an impact on scores for all examinees, regardless of whether they had prior knowledge. To ensure the validity of test scores, it is essential to identify both issues: compromised items (CIs) and examinees with preknowledge (EWPs). In some cases, the CIs are known, and the task is reduced to determining the EWPs. However, due to the potential threat to validity, it is critical for high-stakes testing programs to have a process for routinely monitoring for evidence of EWPs, often when CIs are unknown. Further, even knowing that specific items may have been compromised does not guarantee that any examinees had prior access to those items, or that those examinees that did have prior access know how to effectively use the preknowledge. Therefore, this paper attempts to use response behavior to identify item preknowledge without knowledge of which items may or may not have been compromised. While most research in this area has relied on traditional psychometric models, we investigate the utility of an unsupervised machine learning algorithm, extended isolation forest (EIF), to detect EWPs. Similar to previous research, the response behavior being analyzed is response time (RT) and response accuracy (RA).</p>","PeriodicalId":48300,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychological Measurement","volume":" ","pages":"01466216251320403"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843570/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Few and Different: Detecting Examinees With Preknowledge Using Extended Isolation Forests.\",\"authors\":\"Nate R Smith, Lisa A Keller, Richard A Feinberg, Chunyan Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01466216251320403\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Item preknowledge refers to the case where examinees have advanced knowledge of test material prior to taking the examination. When examinees have item preknowledge, the scores that result from those item responses are not true reflections of the examinee's proficiency. Further, this contamination in the data also has an impact on the item parameter estimates and therefore has an impact on scores for all examinees, regardless of whether they had prior knowledge. To ensure the validity of test scores, it is essential to identify both issues: compromised items (CIs) and examinees with preknowledge (EWPs). In some cases, the CIs are known, and the task is reduced to determining the EWPs. However, due to the potential threat to validity, it is critical for high-stakes testing programs to have a process for routinely monitoring for evidence of EWPs, often when CIs are unknown. Further, even knowing that specific items may have been compromised does not guarantee that any examinees had prior access to those items, or that those examinees that did have prior access know how to effectively use the preknowledge. Therefore, this paper attempts to use response behavior to identify item preknowledge without knowledge of which items may or may not have been compromised. While most research in this area has relied on traditional psychometric models, we investigate the utility of an unsupervised machine learning algorithm, extended isolation forest (EIF), to detect EWPs. Similar to previous research, the response behavior being analyzed is response time (RT) and response accuracy (RA).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"01466216251320403\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843570/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216251320403\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216251320403","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

项目预知是指考生在参加考试前对考试材料有预先了解的情况。当考生有项目预知时,这些项目反应的得分并不能真实反映考生的熟练程度。此外,数据中的这种污染也会影响项目参数的估计,因此会影响所有考生的分数,无论他们是否有先验知识。为了确保考试成绩的有效性,有必要确定两个问题:妥协项目(ci)和有预见性的考生(ewp)。在某些情况下,ci是已知的,并且任务简化为确定ewp。然而,由于对有效性的潜在威胁,对于高风险的测试项目来说,有一个常规监测ewp证据的过程是至关重要的,通常在ci未知的情况下。此外,即使知道特定的项目可能已经被泄露,也不能保证任何考生都能事先接触到这些项目,或者那些事先接触到这些项目的考生知道如何有效地利用这些预知。因此,本文试图在不知道哪些项目可能或可能没有受到损害的情况下,使用反应行为来识别项目预知。虽然这一领域的大多数研究都依赖于传统的心理测量模型,但我们研究了一种无监督机器学习算法——扩展隔离森林(EIF)——来检测ewp的效用。与以往的研究类似,我们分析的反应行为是反应时间(RT)和反应准确性(RA)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Few and Different: Detecting Examinees With Preknowledge Using Extended Isolation Forests.

Item preknowledge refers to the case where examinees have advanced knowledge of test material prior to taking the examination. When examinees have item preknowledge, the scores that result from those item responses are not true reflections of the examinee's proficiency. Further, this contamination in the data also has an impact on the item parameter estimates and therefore has an impact on scores for all examinees, regardless of whether they had prior knowledge. To ensure the validity of test scores, it is essential to identify both issues: compromised items (CIs) and examinees with preknowledge (EWPs). In some cases, the CIs are known, and the task is reduced to determining the EWPs. However, due to the potential threat to validity, it is critical for high-stakes testing programs to have a process for routinely monitoring for evidence of EWPs, often when CIs are unknown. Further, even knowing that specific items may have been compromised does not guarantee that any examinees had prior access to those items, or that those examinees that did have prior access know how to effectively use the preknowledge. Therefore, this paper attempts to use response behavior to identify item preknowledge without knowledge of which items may or may not have been compromised. While most research in this area has relied on traditional psychometric models, we investigate the utility of an unsupervised machine learning algorithm, extended isolation forest (EIF), to detect EWPs. Similar to previous research, the response behavior being analyzed is response time (RT) and response accuracy (RA).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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