Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35991826›Full record

ArticleApplied psychological measurement2022

Two New Models for Item Preknowledge.

Kylie Gorney, James A Wollack

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kylie GorneyUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8924-0726
James A WollackUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate preknowledge detection methods, researchers often conduct simulation studies in which they use models to generate the data. In this article, we propose two new models to represent item preknowledge. Contrary to existing models, we allow the impact of preknowledge to vary across persons and items in order to better represent situations that are encountered in practice. We use three real data sets to evaluate the fit of the new models with respect to two types of preknowledge: items only, and items and the correct answer key. Results show that the two new models provide the best fit compared to several other existing preknowledge models. Furthermore, model parameter estimates were found to vary substantially depending on the type of preknowledge being considered, indicating that answer key disclosure has a profound impact on testing behavior.

Indexed as

aberrant behaviorcheatingitem compromiseitem preknowledgetest security

Identifiers

PMID35991826
PMCPMC9382093
OpenAlexW4283260112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.