Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37608234›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Modeling item revisiting behavior in computer-based testing: Exploring the effect of item revisitations as collateral information.

Jiwei Zhang, Chun Wang, Jing Lu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Jiwei ZhangFaculty of Education, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7454-1673
Chun WangCollege of Education, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2695-9781
Jing LuKey Laboratory of Applied Statistics of MOE, School of Mathematics and Statistics, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin, China. luj282@nenu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8333-9146

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Item revisiting behavior is one of the most frequently occurring test-taking strategies, and it can decrease test anxiety and improve test validity. Examinees either confirm the initial answers due to persistence of their beliefs or change to different answers after careful rethought on each part of the questions. Item revisiting sequences as collateral information reveal the examinees' underlying psychological processes, such as motivation, effort, and engagement, which supports policy makers in taking further steps to facilitate instructions for the examinees. Item revisiting behavior is commonly correlated with the latent traits of examinees, and it needs to be properly analyzed in order to make valid statistical inference. In this paper, we proposed a novel item revisiting model, in which a monotonicity assumption is considered based on the observation that examinees are more likely to revisit the current item if more revisiting behavior occurs previously. Three simulation studies were conducted: (1) to evaluate the performance of the proposed Bayesian estimation algorithm for the new model; (2) to show that ignoring item revisiting sequences induces biased parameter estimates; (3) to assess the model fit of the proposed model with the ignorable and nonignorable item revisiting behavior assumptions. The results indicate that item revisiting behavior can be effectively utilized in conjunction with responses and response times to improve parameter estimation precision. A real data example is provided to illustrate the application of the proposed model.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremAlgorithmsComputer SimulationEducational MeasurementHumansModels, StatisticalItem response theoryItem revisiting behaviorResponse time data

Identifiers

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.