東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Learning on anticipated multiple cho...

Colak, Burhan.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Learning on anticipated multiple choice or essay tests: An experimental design.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Learning on anticipated multiple choice or essay tests: An experimental design./
Author:	Colak, Burhan.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2015,
Description:	33 p.
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 54-04.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International54-04(E).
Subject:	Social psychology. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1526429
ISBN:	9781321780109

Learning on anticipated multiple choice or essay tests: An experimental design.
Colak, Burhan.

Learning on anticipated multiple choice or essay tests: An experimental design. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2015 - 33 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 54-04.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2015.

The effects of multiple-choice (MC) and essay tests format expectancy on test performance and study strategies were examined in two laboratory experiments. In Experiment 1, General Psychology students (N = 63) studied a summary of two textbook chapters for 25 mins for either a MC or essay test, with an incentive for high grades. A mixed-format test, including both MC and Essay formats, was then administered with an additional incentive for high grades on the unexpected test formats. Two weeks later, participants took a different mixed-format test on the same material. In Experiment 2, the procedure of Experiment 1 was replicated without the second session. In addition, between the study period and test, participants took a survey about study strategies and factors affecting performance. Results from both experiments showed that no test expectancy achieved superiority over the other in terms of test grades, but participants performed best on the test that they expected. That is, MC test results were better for MC expectancy group, and essay test results were better for the essay expectancy group. However, participants self-reported that essay tests require a harder preparation while MC test format is perceived as an easier test format than any other. Keywords: test expectancy, multiple choice test, essay test, learning, retention.

ISBN: 9781321780109Subjects--Topical Terms:

520219
Social psychology.

Learning on anticipated multiple choice or essay tests: An experimental design.
LDR:02265nmm a2200301 4500 001 2120123
005 20170705093022.5
008 180830s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321780109
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI1526429
035 $a AAI1526429
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Colak, Burhan. $3 3282029
245 1 0 $a Learning on anticipated multiple choice or essay tests: An experimental design.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2015
300 $a 33 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 54-04.
500 $a Adviser: Yana Weinstein.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2015.
520 $a The effects of multiple-choice (MC) and essay tests format expectancy on test performance and study strategies were examined in two laboratory experiments. In Experiment 1, General Psychology students (N = 63) studied a summary of two textbook chapters for 25 mins for either a MC or essay test, with an incentive for high grades. A mixed-format test, including both MC and Essay formats, was then administered with an additional incentive for high grades on the unexpected test formats. Two weeks later, participants took a different mixed-format test on the same material. In Experiment 2, the procedure of Experiment 1 was replicated without the second session. In addition, between the study period and test, participants took a survey about study strategies and factors affecting performance. Results from both experiments showed that no test expectancy achieved superiority over the other in terms of test grades, but participants performed best on the test that they expected. That is, MC test results were better for MC expectancy group, and essay test results were better for the essay expectancy group. However, participants self-reported that essay tests require a harder preparation while MC test format is perceived as an easier test format than any other. Keywords: test expectancy, multiple choice test, essay test, learning, retention.
590 $a School code: 0111.
650 4 $a Social psychology. $3 520219
650 4 $a Cognitive psychology. $3 523881
650 4 $a Experimental psychology. $3 2144733
690 $a 0451
690 $a 0633
690 $a 0623
710 2 $a University of Massachusetts Lowell. $3 1017839
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 54-04(E).
790 $a 0111
791 $a M.A.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1526429