ArticleApplied psychological measurement2023
The Effects of Rating Designs on Rater Classification Accuracy and Rater Measurement Precision in Large-Scale Mixed-Format Assessments.
Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In standalone performance assessments, researchers have explored the influence of different rating designs on the sensitivity of latent trait model indicators to different rater effects as well as the impacts of different rating designs on student achievement estimates. However, the literature provides little guidance on the degree to which different rating designs might affect rater classification accuracy (severe/lenient) and rater measurement precision in both standalone performance assessments and mixed-format assessments. Using results from an analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data, we conducted simulation studies to systematically explore the impacts of different rating designs on rater measurement precision and rater classification accuracy (severe/lenient) in mixed-format assessments. The results suggest that the complete rating design produced the highest rater classification accuracy and greatest rater measurement precision, followed by the multiple-choice (MC) + spiral link design and the MC link design. Considering that complete rating designs are not practical in most testing situations, the MC + spiral link design may be a useful choice because it balances cost and performance. We consider the implications of our findings for research and practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.