MEASUREMENT RESEARCH ASSOCIATES TEST INSIGHTSJune 2009
 Greetings   With computer-based tests, test takers have the ability to go back and review items.  This brief study investigates the relationship between the amount of time spent reviewing items and candidate test performance. Lidia Martinez Manager Test Development and Analysis
Time Usage and Candidate Performance
Computer based testing provides the opportunity to track the amount of time candidates spend responding to and reviewing each exam item.  The time usage of a test was studied to understand the relationship between the amount of time a candidate takes to review items and their final score.  For purposes of this study, scores are reported as percent correct without any consideration for calibrated item difficulty or test equating.  The question is the impact of the amount of time used for review on candidate scores.

This candidate population took a multiple choice examination and was divided into three groups based on the mean amount of time they used to review items.  Candidates in Group 1 used an average of 5 seconds or less per item to review.  Candidates in Group 2 used an average of 5 - 20 seconds per item to review and candidates in Group 3 used an average of more than 20 seconds per item to review.  These groups were compared by 1) mean time spent initially responding per item; 2) mean time spent reviewing per item; 3) total test percent correct.  All time is given in seconds.  An alpha level of .05 was used for all statistical tests.

An analysis of variance showed that there was a significant difference in the amount of time used to initially respond to items (p = .039).  A post hoc analysis using Tukey's HSD test revealed that Group 3's average time spent initially responding to items was significantly less than Group 1's average time (p = .030).

Descriptive Statistics for Time Used to Initially Respond to Items
 Group based on time used to review Mean Time per Item SD Min Max Group 1: Average Review Time ≤ 5 sec. 57.19 15.33 35.25 84.31 Group 2: 5 sec. < Avg. Rev. Time ≤ 20 sec. 54.39 13.04 31.25 75.33 Group 3: Average Review Time > 20 sec. 47.68 9.78 30.54 63.43 Total Population 54.22 13.87 30.54 84.31

An ANOVA showed that there was a significant difference in the amount of time used to review items (p < .001).  A post hoc analysis revealed all groups were significantly different from one another (all p values < .001).  Since the groups were divided based on amount of time taken to review, these results are not surprising.

Descriptive Statistics for Time Used to Review Items after Initial Response
 Group based on time used to review Mean Time per Item SD Min Max Group 1: Average Review Time ≤ 5 sec. 1.25 1.37 .00 4.71 Group 2: 5 sec. < Avg. Rev. Time ≤ 20 sec. 12.05 4.35 5.31 19.76 Group 3: Average Review Time > 20 sec. 27.45 6.79 20.57 44.26 Total Population 10.55 10.71 .00 44.26

An ANOVA showed that there was no significant difference in percent correct scores based on the amount of time spent reviewing items (p = .335). Based on this study, the amount of time spent reviewing items does not seem to have an effect on candidate test performance.

Descriptive Statistics for Candidate Total Percent Correct Scores
 Group based on time used to review Mean % Correct SD Min Max Group 1: Average Review Time ≤ 5 sec. 59% 8% 40% 75% Group 2: 5 sec. < Avg. Rev. Time ≤ 20 sec. 61% 7% 51% 74% Group 3: Average Review Time > 20 sec. 61% 8% 47% 74% Total Population 60% 8% 40% 75%

For this data sample, candidates who spent more time reviewing items, spent less time initially responding to items.  This could be due to the fact that if more time is taken initially to view items, there will be less time remaining after the first view of the exam to review items. While candidates who spent more time reviewing items earned slightly higher percent correct scores, this is not a trend, since there was only a 2% difference in group performance.  The mean percent correct for each group is statistically comparable.

 Measurement Research Associates, Inc. 505 North Lake Shore Dr., Suite 1304 Chicago, IL  60611 Phone: (312) 822-9648     Fax: (312) 822-9650 www.MeasurementResearch.com

Rasch Publications
Rasch Measurement Transactions (free, online) Rasch Measurement research papers (free, online) Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, Georg Rasch Applying the Rasch Model 3rd. Ed., Bond & Fox Best Test Design, Wright & Stone
Rating Scale Analysis, Wright & Masters Introduction to Rasch Measurement, E. Smith & R. Smith Introduction to Many-Facet Rasch Measurement, Thomas Eckes Invariant Measurement: Using Rasch Models in the Social, Behavioral, and Health Sciences, George Engelhard, Jr. Statistical Analyses for Language Testers, Rita Green
Rasch Models: Foundations, Recent Developments, and Applications, Fischer & Molenaar Journal of Applied Measurement Rasch models for measurement, David Andrich Constructing Measures, Mark Wilson Rasch Analysis in the Human Sciences, Boone, Stave, Yale
in Spanish: Análisis de Rasch para todos, Agustín Tristán Mediciones, Posicionamientos y Diagnósticos Competitivos, Juan Ramón Oreja Rodríguez

 FORUM Rasch Measurement Forum to discuss any Rasch-related topic

Coming Rasch-related Events
March 31, 2017, Fri. Conference: 11th UK Rasch Day, Warwick, UK, www.rasch.org.uk
April 2-3, 2017, Sun.-Mon. Conference: Validity Evidence for Measurement in Mathematics Education (V-M2Ed), San Antonio, TX, Information
April 26-30, 2017, Wed.-Sun. NCME, San Antonio, TX, www.ncme.org - April 29: Ben Wright book
April 27 - May 1, 2017, Thur.-Mon. AERA, San Antonio, TX, www.aera.net
May 26 - June 23, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
June 30 - July 29, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Further Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
July 31 - Aug. 3, 2017, Mon.-Thurs. Joint IMEKO TC1-TC7-TC13 Symposium 2017: Measurement Science challenges in Natural and Social Sciences, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, imeko-tc7-rio.org.br
Aug. 7-9, 2017, Mon-Wed. In-person workshop and research coloquium: Effect size of family and school indexes in writing competence using TERCE data (C. Pardo, A. Atorressi, Winsteps), Bariloche Argentina. Carlos Pardo, Universidad Catòlica de Colombia
Aug. 7-9, 2017, Mon-Wed. PROMS 2017: Pacific Rim Objective Measurement Symposium, Sabah, Borneo, Malaysia, proms.promsociety.org/2017/
Aug. 10, 2017, Thurs. In-person Winsteps Training Workshop (M. Linacre, Winsteps), Sydney, Australia. www.winsteps.com/sydneyws.htm
Aug. 11 - Sept. 8, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Many-Facet Rasch Measurement (E. Smith, Facets), www.statistics.com
Aug. 18-21, 2017, Fri.-Mon. IACAT 2017: International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing, Niigata, Japan, iacat.org
Sept. 15-16, 2017, Fri.-Sat. IOMC 2017: International Outcome Measurement Conference, Chicago, jampress.org/iomc2017.htm
Oct. 13 - Nov. 10, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
Jan. 5 - Feb. 2, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
Jan. 10-16, 2018, Wed.-Tues. In-person workshop: Advanced Course in Rasch Measurement Theory and the application of RUMM2030, Perth, Australia (D. Andrich), Announcement
Jan. 17-19, 2018, Wed.-Fri. Rasch Conference: Seventh International Conference on Probabilistic Models for Measurement, Matilda Bay Club, Perth, Australia, Website
May 25 - June 22, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
June 29 - July 27, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Further Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
Aug. 10 - Sept. 7, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Many-Facet Rasch Measurement (E. Smith, Facets), www.statistics.com
Oct. 12 - Nov. 9, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com