Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39247276›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Investigating response behavior through TF-IDF and Word2vec text analysis: A case study of PISA 2012 problem-solving process data.

Jing Zhou, Zhanliang Ye, Sheng Zhang, Zhao Geng, Ning Han, Tao Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 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

6 authors.

Jing ZhouCollaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Towards Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, No. 19, XinJieKouWai St., HaiDian District, Beijing, 100875, PR China Beijing, China.
Zhanliang YeCollaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Towards Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, No. 19, XinJieKouWai St., HaiDian District, Beijing, 100875, PR China Beijing, China.
Sheng ZhangCollaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Towards Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, No. 19, XinJieKouWai St., HaiDian District, Beijing, 100875, PR China Beijing, China.
Zhao GengCollaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Towards Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, No. 19, XinJieKouWai St., HaiDian District, Beijing, 100875, PR China Beijing, China.
Ning HanCollaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Towards Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, No. 19, XinJieKouWai St., HaiDian District, Beijing, 100875, PR China Beijing, China.
Tao YangCollaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Towards Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, No. 19, XinJieKouWai St., HaiDian District, Beijing, 100875, PR China Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The process data in computer-based problem-solving evaluation is rich in valuable implicit information. However, its diverse and irregular structure poses challenges for effective feature extraction, leading to varying degrees of information loss in existing methods. Process-response behavior exhibits similarities to textual data in terms of the key units and contextual relationships. Despite the scarcity of relevant research, exploring text analysis methods for feature recognition in process data is significant. This study investigated the efficacy of Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) and Word to Vector (Word2vec) in extracting response behavior features and compared the predictive, analytical, and clustering effects of classical machine learning methods (supervised and unsupervised) on response behavior. An analysis of the PISA 2012 computer-based problem-solving dataset revealed that TF-IDF effectively extracted key response behaviors, whereas Word2vec captured effective features from sequenced response behaviors. In addition, in supervised machine learning using both methods, the random forest model based on TF-IDF performed the best, followed by the SVM model based on Word2vec. Word2vec-based models outperformed TF-IDF-based ones in the F1-score, accuracy, and recall (except for precision) across the logistic regression, k-nearest neighbor, and support vector machine algorithms. In unsupervised machine learning, the k-means algorithm effectively clustered different response behavior patterns extracted by these methods. The findings underscore the theoretical and methodological transferability of these text analysis methods in educational and psychological assessment contexts. This study offers valuable insights for research and practice in similar domains by yielding rich feature representations, supplementing fine-grained assessment evidence, fostering personalized learning, and introducing novel insights for educational assessment.

Indexed as

Feature extractionMachine learningProblem-solvingProcess dataTF-IDFWord2vec

Identifiers

PMID39247276
PMCPMC11379602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.