• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
Investigation of Response Changes in the GRE Revised General Test.GRE 修订版通用考试中反应变化的调查。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2015 Dec;75(6):1002-1020. doi: 10.1177/0013164415573988. Epub 2015 Mar 2.
2
The Impact of Repeated Exposure to Items.反复接触物品的影响。
Teach Learn Med. 2015;27(4):404-9. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2015.1077131.
3
Computer-adaptive testing: the impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and test takers' reactions.计算机自适应测试:测试特征对感知表现和考生反应的影响。
J Appl Psychol. 2002 Apr;87(2):320-32. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.320.
4
Effort in Low-Stakes Assessments: What Does It Take to Perform as Well as in a High-Stakes Setting?低风险评估中的努力:要取得与高风险环境中同样好的表现需要什么?
Educ Psychol Meas. 2016 Dec;76(6):1045-1058. doi: 10.1177/0013164416634789. Epub 2016 Mar 4.
5
Within-session score gains for repeat examinees on a standardized patient examination.标准化患者检查中,重复受检者的会话内分数提高。
Acad Med. 2013 May;88(5):688-92. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828af039.
6
Modeling Item Revisit Behavior: The Hierarchical Speed-Accuracy-Revisits Model.建模项目复查行为:分层速度-准确性-复查模型。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2021 Apr;81(2):363-387. doi: 10.1177/0013164420950556. Epub 2020 Aug 31.
7
Typical physics Ph.D. admissions criteria limit access to underrepresented groups but fail to predict doctoral completion.典型的物理博士招生标准限制了代表性不足群体的入学机会,但未能预测博士学位的完成情况。
Sci Adv. 2019 Jan 23;5(1):eaat7550. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aat7550. eCollection 2019 Jan.
8
Application of computerized adaptive testing in medical education.计算机自适应测试在医学教育中的应用。
Korean J Med Educ. 2009 Jun;21(2):97-102. doi: 10.3946/kjme.2009.21.2.97. Epub 2009 Jun 30.
9
Is a Computerized Adaptive Test More Motivating Than a Fixed-Item Test?计算机自适应测试比固定项目测试更具激励性吗?
Appl Psychol Meas. 2017 Oct;41(7):495-511. doi: 10.1177/0146621617707556. Epub 2017 May 15.
10
Answer changing in multiple choice assessment change that answer when in doubt--and spread the word!在多项选择题评估中改变答案——有疑问时就改变那个答案——并传播这个消息!
BMC Med Educ. 2007 Aug 24;7:28. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-7-28.

引用本文的文献

1
Modeling item revisiting behavior in computer-based testing: Exploring the effect of item revisitations as collateral information.基于计算机的测试中的项目重访行为建模:探索项目重访作为附带信息的影响。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Aug;56(5):4661-4681. doi: 10.3758/s13428-023-02209-y. Epub 2023 Aug 22.
2
Using process features to investigate scientific problem-solving in large-scale assessments.利用过程特征研究大规模评估中的科学问题解决能力。
Front Psychol. 2023 Apr 18;14:1131019. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1131019. eCollection 2023.
3
The Use of Theory of Linear Mixed-Effects Models to Detect Fraudulent Erasures at an Aggregate Level.使用线性混合效应模型理论在总体层面检测欺诈性删除数据行为。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2022 Feb;82(1):177-200. doi: 10.1177/0013164421994893. Epub 2021 Mar 29.
4
Investigation of answer changes on the USMLE® Step 2 Clinical Knowledge examination.考察 USMLE® Step 2 临床知识考试中的答案变化。
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Oct 23;19(1):389. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1816-3.
5
Statistical Foundations for Computerized Adaptive Testing with Response Revision.基于响应修正的计算机自适应测试的统计基础。
Psychometrika. 2019 Jun;84(2):375-394. doi: 10.1007/s11336-019-09662-9. Epub 2019 Feb 25.

本文引用的文献

1
Counterfactual thinking and the first instinct fallacy.反事实思维与首因谬误。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 May;88(5):725-35. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.725.
2
Not all errors are created equal: metacognition and changing answers on multiple-choice tests.
Can J Exp Psychol. 2005 Mar;59(1):28-34. doi: 10.1037/h0087457.
3
Changing answers on multiple-choice examinations taken by baccalaureate nursing students.
J Nurs Educ. 2001 Mar;40(3):142-4. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-20010301-11.
4
Medical students' reasons for changing answers on multiple-choice tests.医学生在多项选择题测试中更改答案的原因。
Acad Med. 1997 Oct;72(10 Suppl 1):S97-9. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199710001-00033.
5
Student perceptions of changing answers on multiple choice examinations.学生对在多项选择题考试中更改答案的看法。
J Nurs Educ. 1996 Feb;35(2):88-90. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-19960201-09.
6
The relationship between changing answers and performance on multiple-choice nursing examinations.多项选择题护理考试中答案更改与成绩之间的关系。
J Nurs Educ. 1990 Oct;29(8):337-40. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-19901001-04.

GRE 修订版通用考试中反应变化的调查。

Investigation of Response Changes in the GRE Revised General Test.

作者信息

Liu Ou Lydia, Bridgeman Brent, Gu Lixiong, Xu Jun, Kong Nan

机构信息

Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ, USA.

出版信息

Educ Psychol Meas. 2015 Dec;75(6):1002-1020. doi: 10.1177/0013164415573988. Epub 2015 Mar 2.

DOI:10.1177/0013164415573988
PMID:29795850
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5965601/
Abstract

Research on examinees' response changes on multiple-choice tests over the past 80 years has yielded some consistent findings, including that most examinees make score gains by changing answers. This study expands the research on response changes by focusing on a high-stakes admissions test-the Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning measures of the GRE revised General Test. We analyzed data from 8,538 examinees for Quantitative and 9,140 for Verbal sections who took the GRE revised General Test in 12 countries. The analyses yielded findings consistent with prior research. In addition, as examinees' ability increases, the benefit of response changing increases. The study yielded significant implications for both test agencies and test takers. Computer adaptive tests often do not allow the test takers to review and revise. Findings from this study confirm the benefit of such features.

摘要

过去80年里关于考生在多项选择题测试中答案变化的研究得出了一些一致的结果,包括大多数考生通过更改答案提高了分数。本研究通过聚焦一项高风险入学考试——GRE修订版普通考试的文字推理和数量推理部分,扩展了对答案变化的研究。我们分析了来自12个国家参加GRE修订版普通考试的8538名数量部分考生和9140名文字部分考生的数据。分析结果与先前的研究一致。此外,随着考生能力的提高,更改答案的益处也会增加。该研究对考试机构和考生都有重要意义。计算机自适应测试通常不允许考生复查和修改答案。本研究的结果证实了这些特点的益处。