Answering Multiple-Choice Questions in Which Examinees Doubt What the True Answer Is among Different Options

Author:

Sánchez Lasheras FernandoORCID,Curbelo JoséORCID,Baladrón Romero Jaime,García Guerrero Alberto,Peñalver San Cristóbal Carmen,Villacampa Tomás,Jiménez Fonseca Paula

Abstract

This research explores the results that an examinee would obtain if taking a multiple-choice questions test in which they have doubts as to what the true answer is among different options. This problem is analyzed by making use of combinatorics and analytical and sampling methodologies. The Spanish exam through which doctors become medical specialists has been employed as an example. Although it is difficult to imagine that there are candidates who respond randomly to all the questions of such an exam, it is common that they may doubt over what the correct answer is in some questions. The exam consists of a total of 210 multiple-choice questions with 4 answer options. The cut-off mark is calculated as one-third of the average of the 10 best marks in the exam. According to the results obtained, it is possible to affirm that in the case of doubting over two or three of the four possible answers in certain group questions, answering all of them will in most cases lead to obtaining a positive result. Moreover, in the case of doubting between two answer options in all the questions of the MIR test, it would be possible to exceed the cut-off mark.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

General Mathematics,Engineering (miscellaneous),Computer Science (miscellaneous)

Reference24 articles.

1. Paludan, A. (1998). Chronicle of the Chinese Emperors: The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial China, Thames and Hudson.

2. Dennis, W. (1948). Readings in the History of Psychology, Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.

3. Classical Test Theory in Historical Perspective;Traub;Educ. Meas. Issues Pract.,2005

4. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

5. The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing;Marsh;Psychon. Bull. Rev.,2007

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