Suppr超能文献

多项选择题:关于最佳选项数量的文献综述

Multiple choice questions: a literature review on the optimal number of options.

作者信息

Vyas Rashmi, Supe Avinash

机构信息

Department of Physiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632002, Tamil Nadu, India.

出版信息

Natl Med J India. 2008 May-Jun;21(3):130-3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Single, best response, multiple choice questions (MCQs) with 4 options (3 distractors and 1 correct answer) or 5 options (4 distractors) have been widely used as an assessment tool in medical education in India and globally. Writing plausible distractors is time consuming and the most difficult part of preparing MCQs. If the number of options can be reduced to 3, it will make preparing MCQs less difficult and time consuming, thus reducing the likelihood of flaws in writing MCQs. We reviewed the literature to find out if the number of options in MCQ test items could be reduced to 3 without affecting the quality of the test.

METHODS

A systematic database search was done using the following question as a framework: How many options are optimal for multiple choice questions? Theoretical, analytical and empirical studies, which addressed this issue, were included in the review.

RESULTS

There was no significant change in the psychometric properties of the 3 options test when compared with 4 and 5 options. MCQs with 3 options improved the efficiency of the test as well as its administration compared with 4- or 5-option MCQs. MCQs with 3 options had a higher efficiency because fewer distractors needed to be prepared, took up less space and required less reading time, decreased the time required to develop the items and the time to administer, and more items could be administered in a given time thus increasing the content sampled.

CONCLUSION

Our review of the literature suggests that MCQs with 3 options provide a similar quality of test as that with 4- or 5-option MCQs. We suggest that MCQs with 3 options should be preferred.

摘要

背景

单项最佳答案、有4个选项(3个干扰项和1个正确答案)或5个选项(4个干扰项)的多项选择题(MCQs)在印度及全球医学教育中被广泛用作评估工具。编写看似合理的干扰项既耗时又困难,是准备多项选择题最具挑战性的部分。如果选项数量能减少到3个,将使准备多项选择题的难度和耗时降低,从而减少编写多项选择题时出现缺陷的可能性。我们查阅了相关文献,以确定多项选择题测试项目的选项数量能否减少到3个而不影响测试质量。

方法

以以下问题为框架进行系统的数据库搜索:多项选择题的最佳选项数量是多少?涉及此问题的理论、分析和实证研究均纳入本综述。

结果

与4个和5个选项的测试相比,3个选项测试的心理测量学特性没有显著变化。与4个或5个选项的多项选择题相比,3个选项的多项选择题提高了测试效率及其管理效率。3个选项的多项选择题效率更高,因为需要准备的干扰项更少,占用空间更小,阅读时间更短,减少了编写题目所需的时间和测试管理时间,并且在给定时间内可以管理更多题目,从而增加了抽样内容。

结论

我们对文献的综述表明,3个选项的多项选择题与4个或5个选项的多项选择题具有相似的测试质量。我们建议优先选择3个选项的多项选择题。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验