Test-Taker Behaviour under Uncertainty: Joint Behavioural Modelling of Guessing, Risk Aversion, and Score Validity in Negatively Marked Multiple-Choice Mathematics Tests
Article Sidebar
Page Numbers:
213-229
Digital Object Identifier:
10.58578/ijemt.v4i2.9365
Viewed: 0 times
Downloaded: 0 times
LYAS Publisher cordially invites qualified professionals to serve as Editors or Reviewers. Your expertise will make an important contribution to maintaining and strengthening the academic quality of our publications. Interested applicants are kindly requested to complete the application form at the following link: Editors & Reviewers
Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information about the submission process or if you have any additional questions.
Authors:Hassan Muhammad1*, Muhammad Abubakar Kole2, Philip Issa Tsado3, Ahmed Rufai Tete4
Copyright :Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Although negative marking is intended to discourage random guessing in multiple-choice mathematics assessments, it may systematically influence test-takers’ decisions under uncertainty and thereby affect score interpretation. This study examines how guessing behaviour and risk aversion jointly relate to item-level decision-making and overall performance in negatively marked multiple-choice mathematics tests. Quantitative observational data were obtained from 885 senior secondary school students. Logistic regression models were used to estimate item-level guessing decisions, while linear regression models incorporating interaction terms examined cumulative performance outcomes. Higher expected score gains were significantly associated with an increased probability of guessing, whereas greater risk aversion was associated with reduced guessing and increased omission behaviour. A statistically significant guessing-by-risk-aversion interaction (reported as b = 0.29, p < .001) was interpreted as indicating that the performance benefits associated with guessing diminished as risk aversion increased. These findings demonstrate that scores from negatively marked multiple-choice mathematics assessments may reflect behavioural decision strategies in addition to mathematical competence, thereby introducing construct-irrelevant variance into score interpretation. The study contributes to assessment research by clarifying the joint role of guessing and risk aversion in testing behaviour and underscores the need for assessment designers and score users to evaluate cautiously the validity of negatively marked scores, particularly in high-stakes mathematics testing contexts.
Citation Metrics:
Downloads
Citation Metrics & Similar Scopus Articles
-
Kong Z. (2027)Zwitterionic Ionogels Resolving the Trade-Off Between Mechanical Strength and Autonomous Self-Healing for IontronicsNano Micro Letters, 19(1)
-
Sun M. (2027)Bolstered Interfacial Field Chemistry for Deep Fast-Charging Aqueous Zinc Metal BatteriesNano Micro Letters, 19(1)
-
Jiang Y. (2027)Rheologically Engineered 3D-Printed Highly Loaded Magneto-Dielectric Absorbers for Device-Level Electromagnetic CompatibilityNano Micro Letters, 19(1)
Article Details
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
References
Akyol, Ş. P., Key, J., & Krishna, K. (2016). Hit or miss? Test taking behavior in multiple choice exams (NBER Working Paper No. 22401). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w22401
Akyol, P., Key, J., & Krishna, K. (2022). Hit or miss? Test taking behavior in multiple choice exams. Annals of Economics and Statistics, (147), 3–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/48684785
Awang Besar, M. N., Abd Aziz, K. H., & Abdul Halim, H. (2025). The validity of multiple-true-false and one-best-answer in the final professional undergraduate medical examination. Education in Medicine Journal, 17(2), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2025.17.2.2
Bhekiswayo, N. M. (2023). Balancing mathematics assessment tasks to accommodate problem-solving in Grade 7 classes [Master’s dissertation, University of the Free State]. KovsieScholar. https://hdl.handle.net/11660/12635
Budescu, D. V., & Bo, Y. (2015). Analyzing test-taking behavior: Decision theory meets psychometric theory. Psychometrika, 80(4), 1105–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-014-9425-x
Coniam, D., Lee, T., & Lampropoulou, L. (2021). Identifying guessing in English language tests via Rasch fit statistics: An exploratory study. English Language Teaching, 14(5), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v14n5p23
Direr, A. (2020). Efficient scoring of multiple-choice tests [Preprint]. HAL Open Science. https://hal.science/hal-02262181v2
Iriberri, N., & Rey-Biel, P. (2021). Brave boys and play-it-safe girls: Gender differences in willingness to guess in a large-scale natural field experiment. European Economic Review, 131, Article 103603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103603
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). American Council on Education/Macmillan.
Rios, J. A., & Deng, J. (2021). Does the choice of response time threshold procedure substantially affect inferences concerning the identification and exclusion of rapid guessing responses? A meta-analysis. Large-scale Assessments in Education, 9, Article 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-021-00110-8
Romm, A. T., Schöer, V., & Kika, J. C. (2019). A test taker’s gamble: The effect of average grade to date on guessing behaviour in a multiple choice test with a negative marking rule. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 22(1), Article a2542. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v22i1.2542
Stanger-Hall, K. F. (2012). Multiple-choice exams: An obstacle for higher-level thinking in introductory science classes. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(3), 294–306. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-11-0100
Stenlund, T., Lyrén, P.-E., & Eklöf, H. (2018). The successful test taker: Exploring test-taking behavior profiles through cluster analysis. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(2), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-017-0332-2
Vanderoost, J., Janssen, R., Eggermont, J., Callens, R., & De Laet, T. (2018). Elimination testing with adapted scoring reduces guessing and anxiety in multiple-choice assessments, but does not increase grade average in comparison with negative marking. PLOS ONE, 13(10), Article e0203931. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203931
Wei, X., Zhang, S., & Zhang, J. (2024). Identifying student profiles in a digital mental rotation task: Insights from the 2017 NAEP math assessment. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1423602. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1423602