Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39164563›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Linking essay-writing tests using many-facet models and neural automated essay scoring.

Masaki Uto, Kota Aramaki

Abstract read
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. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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.

Masaki UtoThe University of Electro-Communications, Tokyo, Japan. uto@ai.lab.uec.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-9330-5158
Kota AramakiThe University of Electro-Communications, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 19H05663,21H00898,23K17585
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For essay-writing tests, challenges arise when scores assigned to essays are influenced by the characteristics of raters, such as rater severity and consistency. Item response theory (IRT) models incorporating rater parameters have been developed to tackle this issue, exemplified by the many-facet Rasch models. These IRT models enable the estimation of examinees' abilities while accounting for the impact of rater characteristics, thereby enhancing the accuracy of ability measurement. However, difficulties can arise when different groups of examinees are evaluated by different sets of raters. In such cases, test linking is essential for unifying the scale of model parameters estimated for individual examinee-rater groups. Traditional test-linking methods typically require administrators to design groups in which either examinees or raters are partially shared. However, this is often impractical in real-world testing scenarios. To address this, we introduce a novel method for linking the parameters of IRT models with rater parameters that uses neural automated essay scoring technology. Our experimental results indicate that our method successfully accomplishes test linking with accuracy comparable to that of linear linking using few common examinees.

Indexed as

WritingEducational MeasurementHumansModels, StatisticalPsychometricsAutomated essay scoringEducational measurementIRT linkingItem response theoryMany-facet Rasch modelsWriting assessment

Identifiers

PMID39164563
PMCPMC11525454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.