| dc.contributor.author | Sharon B. Poizner | |
| dc.contributor.author | W. Alan Nicewander | |
| dc.contributor.author | Charles F. Gettys | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-01-14T19:52:56Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-03-30T15:36:35Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-01-14T19:52:56Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-03-30T15:36:35Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 1978-01-01 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Poizner, S. B., Nicewander, W. A., & Gettys, C. F. (1978). Alternative Response and Scoring Methods for Multiple-Choice Items: An Empirical Study of Probabilistic and Ordinal Response Modes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2(1), 83-96. doi: 10.1177/014662167800200109 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11244/24974 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Binary, probability, and ordinal scoring proce dures for multiple-choice items were examined. In a situation where true scores were experimentally controlled by the manipulation of partial informa tion, it was found that both the probability and or dinal scoring systems were more reliable than the binary scoring method. A second experiment using vocabulary items and standard reliability estimation procedures also showed higher reliability for the two partial information scoring methods relative to binary scoring. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Applied Psychological Measurement | |
| dc.rights | Attribution 3.0 United States | |
| dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/ | |
| dc.subject | | en_US |
| dc.title | Alternative Response and Scoring Methods for Multiple-Choice Items: An Empirical Study of Probabilistic and Ordinal Response Modes | en_US |
| dc.type | Research Article | en_US |
| dc.description.peerreview | Yes | en_US |
| dc.description.peerreviewnotes | https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guidelines | en_US |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/014662167800200109 | en_US |
| dc.rights.requestable | false | en_US |
