Premium
DIFFERENTIAL WEIGHTING BY JUDGED DEGREE 1 OF CORRECTNESS
Author(s) -
PATNAIK DURGADAS,
TRAUB ROSS E.
Publication year - 1973
Publication title -
journal of educational measurement
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.917
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1745-3984
pISSN - 0022-0655
DOI - 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1973.tb00805.x
Subject(s) - weighting , reliability (semiconductor) , mathematics , statistics , correctness , correlation , test (biology) , set (abstract data type) , fraction (chemistry) , psychology , computer science , algorithm , medicine , paleontology , power (physics) , chemistry , physics , geometry , organic chemistry , quantum mechanics , biology , radiology , programming language
Two conventional scores and a weighted score on a group test of general intelligence were compared for reliability and predictive validity. One conventional score consisted of the number of correct answers an examinee gave in responding to 69 multiple‐choice questions; the other was the formula score obtained by subtracting from the number of correct answers a fraction of the number of wrong answers. A weighted score was obtained by assigning weights to all the response alternatives of all the questions and adding the weights associated with the responses, both correct and incorrect, made by the examinee. The weights were derived from degree‐of‐correctness judgments of the set of response alternatives to each question. Reliability was estimated using a split‐half procedure; predictive validity was estimated from the correlation between test scores and mean school achievement. Both conventional scores were found to be significantly less reliable but significantly more valid than the weighted scores. (The formula scores were neither significantly less reliable nor significantly more valid than number‐correct scores.)