Does Using None-of-the-Above (NOTA) Hurt Students’ Confidence?

Author:

Little Jeri L.1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, California State University, East Bay, 25800 Carlos Bee Blvd., Hayward, CA 94542, USA

Abstract

Students claim that multiple-choice questions can be tricky, particularly those with competitive incorrect choices or choices like none-of-the-above (NOTA). Additionally, assessment researchers suggest that using NOTA is problematic for assessment. In experiments conducted online (with trivia questions) and in the classroom (with course-related questions), I investigated the effects of including NOTA as a multiple-choice choice alternative on students’ confidence and performance. In four experiments, participants answered two types of questions: basic multiple-choice questions (basic condition) and equivalent questions in which one incorrect choice was replaced with NOTA (NOTA condition). Immediately after answering each question, participants rated their confidence in their answer to that question (item-by-item confidence). At the end of the experiments, participants made aggregate confidence judgments for the two types of questions and provided additional comments about the use of NOTA as an alternative. Surprisingly, I found no significant differences in item-by-item confidence or performance between the two conditions in any of the experiments. However, across all four experiments, when making aggregate judgments, participants provided lower confidence estimates in the NOTA condition than in the basic condition. Although people often report that NOTA questions hurt their confidence, the present results suggest that they might not—at least not on a question-by-question basis.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Cognitive Neuroscience,Developmental and Educational Psychology,Education,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Reference40 articles.

1. Heuristic cues for meta-reasoning judgments: Review and methodology;Ackerman;Psihologijske Teme,2019

2. The persistence of the fluency–confidence association in problem solving;Ackerman;Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2012

3. Memory predictions are based on ease of processing;Begg;Journal of Memory and Language,1989

4. The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index;Benjamin;Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,1998

5. Bjork, Elizabeth L., and Bjork, Robert A. (2011). Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society, Worth Publishing.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3