{"title":"使用序列挖掘技术理解交互任务中的错误行为模式","authors":"Esther Ulitzsch, Qiwei He, S. Pohl","doi":"10.3102/10769986211010467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interactive tasks designed to elicit real-life problem-solving behavior are rapidly becoming more widely used in educational assessment. Incorrect responses to such tasks can occur for a variety of different reasons such as low proficiency levels, low metacognitive strategies, or motivational issues. We demonstrate how behavioral patterns associated with incorrect responses can, in part, be understood, supporting insights into the different sources of failure on a task. To this end, we make use of sequence mining techniques that leverage the information contained in time-stamped action sequences commonly logged in assessments with interactive tasks for (a) investigating what distinguishes incorrect behavioral patterns from correct ones and (b) identifying subgroups of examinees with similar incorrect behavioral patterns. Analyzing a task from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies 2012 assessment, we find incorrect behavioral patterns to be more heterogeneous than correct ones. We identify multiple subgroups of incorrect behavioral patterns, which point toward different levels of effort and lack of different subskills needed for solving the task. Albeit focusing on a single task, meaningful patterns of major differences in how examinees approach a given task that generalize across multiple tasks are uncovered. Implications for the construction and analysis of interactive tasks as well as the design of interventions for complex problem-solving skills are derived.","PeriodicalId":48001,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics","volume":"47 1","pages":"3 - 35"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Sequence Mining Techniques for Understanding Incorrect Behavioral Patterns on Interactive Tasks\",\"authors\":\"Esther Ulitzsch, Qiwei He, S. Pohl\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/10769986211010467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Interactive tasks designed to elicit real-life problem-solving behavior are rapidly becoming more widely used in educational assessment. Incorrect responses to such tasks can occur for a variety of different reasons such as low proficiency levels, low metacognitive strategies, or motivational issues. We demonstrate how behavioral patterns associated with incorrect responses can, in part, be understood, supporting insights into the different sources of failure on a task. To this end, we make use of sequence mining techniques that leverage the information contained in time-stamped action sequences commonly logged in assessments with interactive tasks for (a) investigating what distinguishes incorrect behavioral patterns from correct ones and (b) identifying subgroups of examinees with similar incorrect behavioral patterns. Analyzing a task from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies 2012 assessment, we find incorrect behavioral patterns to be more heterogeneous than correct ones. We identify multiple subgroups of incorrect behavioral patterns, which point toward different levels of effort and lack of different subskills needed for solving the task. Albeit focusing on a single task, meaningful patterns of major differences in how examinees approach a given task that generalize across multiple tasks are uncovered. Implications for the construction and analysis of interactive tasks as well as the design of interventions for complex problem-solving skills are derived.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"3 - 35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986211010467\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986211010467","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Using Sequence Mining Techniques for Understanding Incorrect Behavioral Patterns on Interactive Tasks
Interactive tasks designed to elicit real-life problem-solving behavior are rapidly becoming more widely used in educational assessment. Incorrect responses to such tasks can occur for a variety of different reasons such as low proficiency levels, low metacognitive strategies, or motivational issues. We demonstrate how behavioral patterns associated with incorrect responses can, in part, be understood, supporting insights into the different sources of failure on a task. To this end, we make use of sequence mining techniques that leverage the information contained in time-stamped action sequences commonly logged in assessments with interactive tasks for (a) investigating what distinguishes incorrect behavioral patterns from correct ones and (b) identifying subgroups of examinees with similar incorrect behavioral patterns. Analyzing a task from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies 2012 assessment, we find incorrect behavioral patterns to be more heterogeneous than correct ones. We identify multiple subgroups of incorrect behavioral patterns, which point toward different levels of effort and lack of different subskills needed for solving the task. Albeit focusing on a single task, meaningful patterns of major differences in how examinees approach a given task that generalize across multiple tasks are uncovered. Implications for the construction and analysis of interactive tasks as well as the design of interventions for complex problem-solving skills are derived.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, sponsored jointly by the American Educational Research Association and the American Statistical Association, publishes articles that are original and provide methods that are useful to those studying problems and issues in educational or behavioral research. Typical papers introduce new methods of analysis. Critical reviews of current practice, tutorial presentations of less well known methods, and novel applications of already-known methods are also of interest. Papers discussing statistical techniques without specific educational or behavioral interest or focusing on substantive results without developing new statistical methods or models or making novel use of existing methods have lower priority. Simulation studies, either to demonstrate properties of an existing method or to compare several existing methods (without providing a new method), also have low priority. The Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics provides an outlet for papers that are original and provide methods that are useful to those studying problems and issues in educational or behavioral research. Typical papers introduce new methods of analysis, provide properties of these methods, and an example of use in education or behavioral research. Critical reviews of current practice, tutorial presentations of less well known methods, and novel applications of already-known methods are also sometimes accepted. Papers discussing statistical techniques without specific educational or behavioral interest or focusing on substantive results without developing new statistical methods or models or making novel use of existing methods have lower priority. Simulation studies, either to demonstrate properties of an existing method or to compare several existing methods (without providing a new method), also have low priority.