English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The analysis of response time has received increasing attention during the last decades, since evidence from several studies supported the argument that there is a direct relationship between item response time and test performance. The aim of this study was to investigate whether item response latency affects person's ability parameters, in that it represents an adaptive or maladaptive practice. To examine the above research question data from 8,475 individuals completing the computerized version of the Postgraduate General Aptitude Test (PAGAT) were analyzed. To determine the extent to which response latency affects person's ability, we used a Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model, in which every item in a scale was linked to its corresponding covariate (i.e., item response latency). We ran the MIMIC model within the Item Response Theory (IRT) framework (2-PL model). The results supported the hypothesis that item response latency could provide valuable information for getting more accurate estimations for persons' ability levels. Results indicated that for individuals who invest more time on easy items, their likelihood of success does not improve, most likely because slow and fast responders have significantly different levels of ability (fast responders are of higher ability compared to slow responders). Consequently, investing more time for low ability individuals does not prove to be adaptive. The opposite was found for difficult items: individuals spending more time on difficult items increase their likelihood of success, more likely because they are high achievers (in difficult items individuals who spent more time were of significantly higher ability compared to fast responders). Thus, it appears that there is an interaction between the difficulty of the item and person abilities that explain the effects of response time on likelihood of success. We concluded that accommodating item response latency in a computerized assessment model, can inform test quality and test takers' behavior, and in that way, enhance score measurement accuracy.

An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency