IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aoz/wpaper/320.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Human Proctors and Anxiety Affect Exam Scores in Open-book Online Exams? A Field Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Ignacio Sarmiento Barbieri

    (Universidad de los Andes)

  • Eric Chiang

    (University of Nevada)

  • José Vázquez

    (University of Illinois)

Abstract

As online course offerings become increasingly prevalent in institutions of higher learning, online assessments offer several key advantages, including reduced administrative costs, the ability to use a variety of multimedia resources, and faster results. To reduce the potential for academic dishonesty in online assessments, various proctoring solutions exist,though their effectiveness has not been studied in depth. Using randomized controlled trials, thispaper analyzes the role of human proctors used in online assessments, a preventative measure used in testing centers and classroom settings where students complete assessments online but under supervision. Moreover, we study the effect of self-reported test anxiety on exam scores, which can be heightened in the presence of a proctor, creating a negative effect on student performance. Our analysis also investigates the effect of proctoring and anxiety by gender andgrade point average to further explore the impact that proctoring has on student performance

Suggested Citation

  • Ignacio Sarmiento Barbieri & Eric Chiang & José Vázquez, 2024. "Do Human Proctors and Anxiety Affect Exam Scores in Open-book Online Exams? A Field Experiment," Working Papers 320, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    • Handle: RePEc:aoz:wpaper:320
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rednie.eco.unc.edu.ar/files/DT/320.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bosshardt, William & Chiang, Eric P., 2018. "Evaluating the effect of online principles courses on long-term outcomes," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Mary Ellen Benedict & John Hoag, 2002. "Who's Afraid of Their Economics Classes? Why are Students Apprehensive about Introductory Economics Courses? An Empirical Investigation," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 46(2), pages 31-44, October.
    3. Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.
    4. repec:wly:soecon:v:82:3:y:2016:p:1021-1038 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Azar, Ofer H. & Applebaum, Mark, 2020. "Do children cheat to be honored? A natural experiment on dishonesty in a math competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 143-157.
    6. William Bosshardt & Eric P. Chiang, 2016. "Targeting Teaching Lecture Capture Learning: Do Students Perform Better Compared to Face‐to‐Face Classes?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(3), pages 1021-1038, January.
    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. Wuthisatian, Rattaphon, 2020. "Student exam performance in different proctored environments: Evidence from an online economics course," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    2. Artz, Benjamin & Johnson, Marianne & Robson, Denise & Siemers, Sarinda, 2022. "Live or lecture capture: Evidence from a classroom random control trial," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Rita A. Balaban & Donna B. Gilleskie & Uyen Tran, 2016. "A quantitative evaluation of the flipped classroom in a large lecture principles of economics course," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 269-287, October.
    4. Jacques Raynauld, 2005. "New Evidence on the Determinants of Absenteeism Using Linked Employer-Employee Data," Cahiers de recherche 05-06, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    5. Turturean, Monica, 2012. "Current issues of motivation, academic performance and internet use- implications for an education of excellence," MPRA Paper 39250, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Saima Yasmeen & Muhammad Tayyab Alam & Muhammad Mushtaq & Maqsud Alam Bukhari, 2015. "Comparative Study of the Availability and Use of Information Technology in the Subject of Education in Public and Private Universities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, October.
    7. Douglas McKee & Steven Zhu & George Orlov, 2023. "Econ-assessments.org: Automated Assessment of Economics Skills," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 4-14, January.
    8. Mann, John T. & Henneberry, Shida R., 2014. "Online versus Face-to-Face: Students’ Preferences for College Course Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(1), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Marigee Bacolod & Stephen Mehay & Elda Pema, 2018. "Who succeeds in distance learning? Evidence from quantile panel data estimation," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(4), pages 1129-1145, April.
    10. Michael S. Kofoed & Lucas Gebhart & Dallas Gilmore & Ryan Moschitto, 2024. "Zooming to Class? Experimental Evidence on College Students' Online Learning during COVID-19," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 324-340, September.
    11. Oskar Harmon & William Alpert & Joseph Histen, 2014. "Online Discussion and Learning Outcomes," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 20(1), pages 33-44, February.
    12. Carlos J. Asarta & Austin S. Jennings & Paul W. Grimes, 2017. "Economic Education Retrospective," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 62(1), pages 102-117, March.
    13. Leiv Opstad, 2023. "The Relationship Between Norwegian Business Students’ Attitudes Towards Mathematics And Success In Business Education," International Journal of Teaching and Education, European Research Center, vol. 11(1), pages 47-60, December.
    14. William Bosshardt & Eric P. Chiang, 2016. "Targeting Teaching Lecture Capture Learning: Do Students Perform Better Compared to Face‐to‐Face Classes?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(3), pages 1021-1038, January.
    15. Sam Allgood & William B. Walstad & John J. Siegfried, 2015. "Research on Teaching Economics to Undergraduates," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 285-325, June.
    16. Eric P. Bettinger & Lindsay Fox & Susanna Loeb & Eric S. Taylor, 2017. "Virtual Classrooms: How Online College Courses Affect Student Success," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2855-2875, September.
    17. Vazquez, Jose J. & Chiang, Eric P. & Sarmiento-Barbieri, Ignacio, 2021. "Can we stay one step ahead of cheaters? A field experiment in proctoring online open book exams," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    18. Xu, Di & Jaggars, Shanna Smith, 2013. "The impact of online learning on students’ course outcomes: Evidence from a large community and technical college system," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 46-57.
    19. Carolyn Chisadza & Matthew Clance & Thulani Mthembu & Nicky Nicholls & Eleni Yitbarek, 2021. "Online and face‐to‐face learning: Evidence from students’ performance during the Covid‐19 pandemic," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 33(S1), pages 114-125, April.
    20. Giuseppe Attanasi & Alessandro Bucciol & Simona Cicognani & Natalia Montinari, 2017. "The Italian North-South Divide in Perceived Dishonesty: A Matter of Trust?," Working Papers of BETA 2017-32, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Academic integrity; Proctoring methods; Test anxiety;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A20 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - General
    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aoz:wpaper:320. 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: Laura Inés D Amato (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/redniar.html .

    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.