Validation of response processes in medical assessment using an explanatory item response model

Author:

Vattanavanit Veerapong,Ngudgratoke Sungworn,Khaninphasut Purimpratch

Abstract

Abstract Background Response process validation is a crucial source of test validity. The expected cognitive load scale was created based on the reflection of the mental effort by which borderline students solve an item defined by experts. The stem length affects the students’ extraneous cognitive load. The purposes of this study were to develop an exam for medical students and corroborate the response process validity by analyzing the correlation between the expected cognitive load, stem length, and the difficulty. Methods This was a correlational study. Five medical teachers as the experts and 183 third-year medical students were enrolled from the Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand. The instruments used were a medical physiology exam and a three-level expected cognitive load evaluation form judged by medical teachers. Data were analyzed using an explanatory item response model. Results The test consists of 20 items and 21 possible scores. The median score was 8, with a quartile deviation of 1.5. Nine items had long stems (more than two lines). Sixteen items were judged as high (level 2 or 3) expected cognitive load. When adding the expected cognitive load in a Rasch model, the expected cognitive load significantly correlated with item difficulty. In the Rasch model that included both the expected cognitive load and stem length, a long stem had a greater effect on item difficulty than low expected cognitive load. However, the Rasch model showed the best fit. Conclusions The long stem had a stronger correlation with test difficulty than expected cognitive load, which indirectly implied response process validity. We suggest incorporating stem length and expected cognitive load to create an appropriate distribution of the difficulty of the entire test.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Education,General Medicine

Reference30 articles.

1. American Educational Research Association. American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education: Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association; 2014.

2. Wolcott MD, Lobczowski NG, Zeeman JM, McLaughlin JE. Situational judgment test validity: an exploratory model of the participant response process using cognitive and think-aloud interviews. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):506.

3. Padilla JL, Benítez I. Validity evidence based on response processes. Psicothema. 2014;26(1):136–44.

4. Magliano JP, Graesser AC. Computer-based assessment of student-constructed responses. Behav Res Methods. 2012;44(3):608–21.

5. Kroehne U, Hahnel C, Goldhammer F. Invariance of the response processes between gender and modes in an assessment of reading. Front Appl Math Stat 2019;5.

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