University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Assessment. 2020 Apr;27(3):572-584. doi: 10.1177/1073191118762049. Epub 2018 Mar 21.
The multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has been proposed as an alternative to the rating scale (RS) response format. However, it is unclear how changing the response format may affect the response process and test motivation of participants. In Study 1, we investigated the MFC response process using the think-aloud technique. In Study 2, we compared test motivation between the RS format and different versions of the MFC format (presenting 2, 3, 4, and 5 items simultaneously). The response process to MFC item blocks was similar to the RS response process but involved an additional step of weighing the items within a block against each other. The RS and MFC response format groups did not differ in their test motivation. Thus, from the test taker's perspective, the MFC format is somewhat more demanding to respond to, but this does not appear to decrease test motivation.
多维强迫选择（MFC）格式已被提议作为评分量表（RS）响应格式的替代方案。然而，目前尚不清楚改变响应格式如何影响参与者的响应过程和测试动机。在研究 1 中，我们使用出声思维技术研究了 MFC 的响应过程。在研究 2 中，我们比较了 RS 格式和 MFC 格式的不同版本（同时呈现 2、3、4 和 5 个项目）之间的测试动机。MFC 项目块的响应过程与 RS 响应过程相似，但涉及到在块内对项目进行相互权衡的额外步骤。RS 和 MFC 响应格式组在测试动机方面没有差异。因此，从应试者的角度来看，MFC 格式的响应要求略高，但这似乎不会降低测试动机。
