The effects of immediate forewarning of test difficulty on test performance

Whereas prior research has demonstrated that warning students of an exam's difficulty well in advance of the exam enhances performance, the current research demonstrated the effect of such forewarning immediately before examination administration. Moments before taking an examination in a laboratory environment, participants were either (a) informed that the examination would be difficult, (b) informed that the examination would be easy, or (c) not given any information about the exam's ostensible difficulty. Participants of low trait anxiety performed better when told the exam would be difficult than when told that the exam would be easy. Conversely, participants of high trait anxiety performed worse when told the exam would be difficult than they did when told the exam would be easy or when provided with no such information. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

The multidimensionality of test anxiety: A test of different models

Abstract

Confirmatory factor analysis was employed to test the multidimensional structure of test anxiety. Starting with the traditional two-factor model, it was of interest whether additional dimensions could still be represented by a single higher-order factor of test anxiety or whether the additional dimensions represented correlates of test anxiety. The Revised Test Anxiety (RTA) scale and the German Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI-G) were combined collecting data from a binational sample of 218 American and 218 German university students. Considering the statistical and theoretical aspects of model fit, they indicated that a model consisting of three primary factors (worry, emotionality, and lack of confidence) fit the data best. While distraction and self-efficacy may be regarded as correlates of test anxiety, lack of confidence was substantiated as a component of test anxiety. Implications for the conceptualization of the content domain and hence area of test anxiety were discussed.     

An automated test development of parallel tests from a seed test

Binary programming models are presented to generate parallel tests from an itembank. The parallel tests are created to match item for item an existing seed test and match user supplied taxonomic specifications. The taxonomic specifications may be either obtained from the seed test or from some other user requirement. An algorithm is presented along with computational results to indicate the overall efficiency of the process. Empirical findings based on an itembank for the Arithmetic Reasoning section of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery are given.The Office of Naval Research, Program in Cognitive Science, N00014-87-C-0696 partially supported the work of Douglas H. Jones. The Rutgers Research Resource Committee of the Graduate School of Management partially supported the work of Douglas H. Jones and Ing-Long Wu. A Thomas and Betts research fellowship partially supported the work of Ing-Long Wu. The Human Resources Laboratory, United States Air Force, partially supported the work of Ronald Armstrong. The authors benefited from conversations with Dr. Wayne Shore, Operational Technologies, San Antonio, Texas. The order of authors' names is alphabetical and denotes equal authorship.     

Predetermination of test weights

Derivations are presented relating the length of a test to its weight in a composite. Tests of varying length are constructed so that their weights will be of predetermined magnitudes, and the results compared with expectations. Weighting schemes involving standard deviations of raw scores and of true scores are compared. An important secondary derivation is presented from which it is possible to estimate test reliability knowing only the relative length of a test, its shortened form, and the standard deviation of each.     

Expectancy of an open-book test decreases performance on a delayed closed-book test

Two experiments examined the influence of practice with, and the expectancy of, open-book tests (students viewed studied material while taking the test) versus closed-book tests (students completed the test without viewing the studied material) on delayed retention and transfer. Using GRE materials specifically designed for open-book testing, participants studied passages and then took initial open- or closed-book tests. Open-book testing led to better initial performance than closed-book testing, but on a delayed criterial (closed-book) test both types of testing produced similar retention after a two-day delay in Experiment 1. In Experiment 2 participants were informed in advance about the type of delayed criterial test to expect (open- or closed-book). Expecting an open-book test (relative to a closed-book test) decreased participants' time spent studying and their delayed test performance on closed-book comprehension and transfer tests, demonstrating that test expectancy can influence long-term learning. Expectancy of open-book tests may impair long-term retention and transfer compared to closed-book tests, despite superior initial performance on open-book tests and students' preference for open-book tests.     

Using the Bender-Gestalt test to predict graphomotor dimensions of the Draw-A-Person test

The investigators examined four correlated aspects of the Bender-Gestalt and the Draw-A-Person tests. Subjects were 41 boys and 14 girls classified as seriously emotionally disturbed or seriously behavior disordered by their school system in southwest Georgia. Each subject's Bender-Gestalt and human figure drawings were placed on a digitizing pad and encoded to provide information relative to the width, height, average point of location on the fourth quadrant abscissa and ordinate of each drawing. The widths of Bender Figures 2 and 8 correlated significantly with the widths of human drawings; the heights of Figures A, 5, and 7 were significantly correlated with the heights of the human drawings. Bender Figure 1 was significantly correlated with average points of location on the abscissa of human figure drawings (distance from the left margin of the page), but correlations between the average points of location from the top of the page were nonsignificant. Comparison of these results with data from other samples might refine diagnosis.     

The relationship between factorial composition of test items and measures of test reliability

For continuous distributions associated with dichotomous item scores, the proportion of common-factor variance in the test,H ², may be expressed as a function of intercorrelations among items.H ² is somewhat larger than the coefficienta except when the items have only one common factor and its loadings are restricted in value. The dichotomous item scores themselves are shown not to have a factor structure, precluding direct interpretation of the Kuder-Richardson coefficient,r _K-R, in terms of factorial properties. The value ofr _K-R is equal to that of a coefficient of equivalence,H ² , when the mean item variance associated with common factors equals the mean interitem covariance. An empirical study with synthetic test data from populations of varying factorial structure showed that the four parameters mentioned may be adequately estimated from dichotomous data.This study was supported in part by an Air Force project (Contract Number AF18(600-170), monitored by the Crew Research Laboratory, Air Force Personnel and Training Research Center, Randolph Air Force Base, Randolph Field, Texas. Permission is granted for reproduction, translation, publication, use and disposal in whole and in part by or for the United States Government. Further support was given by the Northwestern University Graduate School. The computational assistance of Mr. Norman Miller is acknowledged. Professor Meyer Dwass provided mathematical advice both directly and indirectly relevant to the paper.     

To test or not to test: A clinical dilemma

This paper argues that clinicians are sometimes justified in not testing diagnoses or in not subjecting them to a full battery of tests. In deciding whether to conduct a test, a clinician may consider and weigh several different factors, including her confidence in her initial diagnosis, the specificity and sensitivity of the test, the consequences of making a false diagnosis, the pain, harm, and inconvenience caused by the test, and the costs of the test to the patient and society. This view suggests that diagnoses are fundamentally different from scientific hypotheses in that they are not always subjected to the same evidential standards.     

A two-sample test

In certain investigations involving an experimental group and a control group, the effect of the experimental treatment may be expected to manifest itself by increasing the scores of some subjects but by decreasing the scores of other subjects. Examples arise in the area of defensive behavior. Customary tests of differences between means are inappropriate for assessing the existence of effect of the experimental treatment in such cases. A test based on the ranks of the observations is proposed; it will be sensitive to extreme scores (either large or small or both) for experimentals.     

Group desensitization of test anxiety

Following an orientation session in which test-anxious students were instructed in the theory and method of desensitization, 18 ISU undergraduates applied for a desensitization and counseling program for test-taking anxiety. All students committed themselves to attend 7 weekly meetings and to practice daily the relaxation exercises at home. Nine of these 18 subjects were assigned to the treatment group and 9 to the wait-list control group on the basis of a free class hour at program time. Treatment consisted of 7 desensitization and counseling sessions. The treatment and control groups did not differ significantly in initial Grade Point Average or scores on the A.C.T. Test. Both groups improved their G.P.A. in the program quarter but only the treatment group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement (p< 0.05). It is concluded that counseling and group desensitization in this 7-session model is an effective and efficient technique to modify anxiety responses to test taking situations.