IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v4y2014i4p2158244014556628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Apophenia on Multiple-Choice Exam Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen T. Paul
  • Samantha Monda
  • S. Maria Olausson
  • Brenna Reed-Daley

Abstract

There is a broad literature on the various issues related to effective exam construction applicable to both on-ground and online course delivery. These guidelines tend to support rather close contact between the instructor and the exam. However, to remain competitive, both textbook and course management providers have developed technologies to automate many aspects of exam construction. As test construction becomes automated, the possibility of inadvertently deviating from demonstrated or intuitive guidelines increases. Two experiments were conducted to examine the degree to which apophenia (perceiving patterns in random data) might negatively influence multiple-choice exam performance among college students. Experiment 1 indirectly demonstrated the extent to which certain answer patterns seemed to be tolerated among students (maximum of three repeated answers) in comparison with what might be expected from randomly generated exams from Blackboard. Experiment 2 directly examined the effects of answer patterns on exam performance. Participants’ performance declined as the underlying answer patterns became more obvious, and this effect appeared to be particularly strong for the upper level psychology students. The importance and implications of these findings with regard to automated test construction were discussed, and a recommendation is provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen T. Paul & Samantha Monda & S. Maria Olausson & Brenna Reed-Daley, 2014. "Effects of Apophenia on Multiple-Choice Exam Performance," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(4), pages 21582440145, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:4:y:2014:i:4:p:2158244014556628
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244014556628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244014556628
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244014556628?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlson, Kurt A. & Shu, Suzanne B., 2007. "The rule of three: How the third event signals the emergence of a streak," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 113-121, September.
    2. Bar-Hillel M. & Attali Y., 2002. "Seek Whence: Answer Sequences and Their Consequences in Key-Balanced Multiple-Choice Tests," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 56, pages 299-303, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Justin Cox & Adam L. Schwartz & Bonnie F. Van Ness & Robert A. Van Ness, 2021. "The Predictive Power of College Football Spreads: Regular Season Versus Bowl Games," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(3), pages 251-273, April.
    2. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2018. "Surprised by the Hot Hand Fallacy? A Truth in the Law of Small Numbers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 2019-2047, November.
    3. Krawinkler, Andreas & Breitenecker, Robert J. & Maresch, Daniela, 2022. "Heuristic decision-making in the green energy context:Bringing together simple rules and data-driven mathematical optimization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    4. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2019. "Surprised by the Hot Hand Fallacy? A Truth in the Law of Small Numbers," Papers 1902.01265, arXiv.org.
    5. Maya Bar-Hillel, 2015. "Position Effects in Choice from Simultaneous Displays: A Conundrum Solved," Discussion Paper Series dp678, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    6. Simcha Avugos & Ofer H. Azar & Nadav Gavish & Eran Sher & Michael Bar-Eli, 2019. "Goal center width, how to count sequences, and the gambler's fallacy in soccer penalty shootouts," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(1), pages 98-108, January.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:6:p:531-541 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Salaghe, Florina & Sundali, James & Nichols, Mark W. & Guerrero, Federico, 2020. "An empirical investigation of wagering behavior in a large sample of slot machine gamblers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 369-388.
    9. Miller, Joshua Benjamin & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2018. "A Cold Shower for the Hot Hand Fallacy: Robust Evidence that Belief in the Hot Hand is Justified," OSF Preprints pj79r, Center for Open Science.
    10. Sigrid Møyner Hohle & Karl Halvor Teigen, 2015. "Forecasting forecasts: The trend effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(5), pages 416-428, September.
    11. Hilary, Gilles & Hsu, Charles, 2011. "Endogenous overconfidence in managerial forecasts," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 300-313, April.
    12. Silverman, Jackie & Barasch, Alixandra P. & Small, Deborah A., 2023. "Hot streak! Inferences and predictions about goal adherence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    13. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2014. "A Cold Shower for the Hot Hand Fallacy," Working Papers 518, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    14. Sabine G. Scholl & Rainer Greifeneder, 2011. "Disentangling the effects of alternation rate and maximum run length on judgments of randomness," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(6), pages 531-541, August.
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:5:p:416-428 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Christopher T. Ball, 2012. "Not all streaks are the same: Individual differences in risk preferences during runs of gains and losses," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 452-461, July.
    17. Miller, Joshua B. & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2021. "Is it a fallacy to believe in the hot hand in the NBA three-point contest?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:4:p:452-461 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Murtha, Brian R., 2013. "Peaking at the right time: Perceptions, expectations, and effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 62-72.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:98-108 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:4:y:2014:i:4:p:2158244014556628. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.