Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harasym, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Lorscheider, F. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Harasym, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Lorscheider, F. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Negation in Stems of Single-Response Multiple-Choice Items

An Overestimation of Student Ability

P. H. Harasym

M. L. Doran

R. Brant

F. L. Lorscheider

University of Calgary, Alberta

There is accumulating evidence that negation (e.g., not, except) should be used sparingly or avoided in the stems of multiple-choice items. In these items, examinees are required to select the one alternative that isfalse from among those that are true. The same items can also be given as positively worded multiple-response items in which the student is directed to identify those alternatives that are true. The present study compared the responses of examinees on single-response, negatively worded (SRNW) items and on multiple-response, positively worded (MRPW) items. The experimental design allowed students to respond to both SRNW and MRPW formats that employed identical item alternatives. The findings of this study provide further evidence that the use of negation in stems shouldbe limited and that the SRNW item should often be converted to an MRPW item. This recommendation is based on the inherent cuing (i.e., the artificial elevation of student scores) observed within SRNW items that significantly lowers item reliability and greatly distorts information about examinee performance.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 16, No. 3, 342-357 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879301600307
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?