Assessment Of Distracters In Multiple-Choice Tests

Author(s):
Maryam Sadat Kaveh TabatabaeeMaryam Sadat Kaveh Tabatabaee1,*, Akbar DerakhshanAkbar Derakhshan2
1Faculty Member of Nursing-Midwifery School, Mashad University of Medical Sciences.
2Director of Education Development Center, Mashad Universtty of Medical Sciences.
*Corresponding Author: Educational development center, Mashad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. Tel (+98)-21-511-84122081 Email: [email protected]

Journal of Medical Education for Future Demands:Vol. 2, issue 1; e104980
Published online:Apr 05, 2009
Article type:Research Article
Received:Apr 04, 2009
Accepted:Apr 05, 2009
How to Cite:Kaveh Tabatabaee MS, Derakhshan A. Assessment Of Distracters In Multiple-Choice Tests. J Med Edu. 2002;2(1):e104980. doi: https://doi.org/10.22037/jme.v2i1.891

Abstract

Background The aim of using distracters in multiple-choice questions (MCQs) is to distract those who don't know the correct answer of the question. The MCQs must be designed in a way that the students who have  reached  the  pre-determined  educational  objectives,  have a  better chance  in finding  the  correc1 answer than those who have not. Therefore, a question has an appropriate efficacy when more /ow-grade students are attracted to the distracters than high-grade students.Purpose  Considering  the  important  role  of  distracters  in differentiating  between low  and  high-grade students, this research studies the distracters in the multiple-choice tests (MCTs) given in Mashad Medical School in the first semester of 1001-2002.Method  In this descriptive study,  the data of 21 MCTs performed in one semester  were collected  and recorded  by  Optical  Mark  Reader  (OMR).  From 128-1 questions,  6-12  MCQ ques1io11s  were sampled randomly, and the numbers of low and high-grade students choosing the distracters were compared and analyzed using SPSS software.Results The efficacy of 45.9% of distracters was ''relatively weak" to "extremely weak",  with "relatively weak", "weak", "very weak"  and  "extremely  weak"  distractors  having a  prevalence of  11.4%, 10%, 15.1% and 9.4% respectively. Extremely weak distracters were those that had a negative impact. Which means the high-grade students were more attracted than the low-grades. Of the MCQs. -12.7% had one. and one third of the questions had two weak distracters. Among all 6- questions. only 15.1% had three good distracters.Conclusion Our study showed that more than half of he distracters had a weak quality. So we suggested that before performing a test, the experts ' opinion about the designed questions should be obtained and considered to minimize the technical problems of the questions. Keywords  multiple-choice test, distracter.

Fulltext

The body of the article can be found in the PDF file.

References

  • 1.
    References are available in the PDF file.

Copyright

© 2002, Author(s). This open-access article is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which allows for unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.

Similar Articles

18
Mar
2009

Analytic Assessment Of Multiple-Choice Tests

Maryam Sadat Kaveh Tabatabaee,
Mohammad Hossein Bahreyni Toosi,
Akbar Derakhshan,
Mohammad Khajeh Dalloee,
Hassan Gholami

Kaveh Tabatabaee MS, Bahreyni Toosi MH, Derakhshan A, Khajeh Dalloee M, Gholami H. Analytic Assessment Of Multiple-Choice Tests. J Med Edu. 2003;2(2):e105008. doi: https://doi.org/10.22037/jme.v2i2.883

31
Mar
2012
Multidiscip Cardio Annal

Analysis of multiple choice questions on health sciences at Health Faculty of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (2009)

Michael Mikhailovich Alshibaya,
Maxim Leonidovich Mamalyga,
Dzhanybek Yerikovich Musin,
Alexey Vladimirovich Dorofeev,
Gela Guramovich Getsadze,
Konstantin Vladislavovich Krymov
,et al.

Alshibaya MM, Mamalyga ML, Musin DY, Dorofeev AV, Getsadze GG, et al. Analysis of multiple choice questions on health sciences at Health Faculty of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (2009). Multidiscip Cardio Annal. 2021;12(2):e115638. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/mca.115638

31
Mar
2012

Analysis of multiple choice questions on health sciences at Health Faculty of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (2009)

M Rahmati Yamchi,
M Rahbani Noubar,
R Najafipour,
M Mobasser,
N Zarghami

Rahmati Yamchi M, Rahbani Noubar M, Najafipour R, Mobasser M, Zarghami N. Analysis of multiple choice questions on health sciences at Health Faculty of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (2009). J Inflamm Dis. 2012;16(2):e155694. doi:

31
Mar
2012

Analysis of multiple choice questions on health sciences at Health Faculty of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (2009)

MM Emamjomeh,
F Zahedifar

Emamjomeh M, Zahedifar F. Analysis of multiple choice questions on health sciences at Health Faculty of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (2009). J Inflamm Dis. 2012;15(4):e155671. doi:

15
May
2013

Analytic assessment of multiple choice questions (MCQ) of faculties' members' scholarship in Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, 2010-2011‎

Reza Pourmirza Kalhori‎,
Fatemeh Darabi ,
Farah Roshanpour‎,
Mansour Rezaei

Pourmirza Kalhori‎ R, Darabi ‎ F, Roshanpour‎ F, Rezaei ‎ M. Analytic assessment of multiple choice questions (MCQ) of faculties' members' scholarship in Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, 2010-2011‎. J Clin Res Paramed Sci. 2013;2(1):e82210. doi:

Download PDF2.60 MB

Crossmark

Crossmark

Checking

Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Ordering Reprints

Articles are published under the Creative Commons license stated on each article. No permission or royalty fee is required for uses permitted by that license. CCC handles optional bulk and customized reprint orders. Any quotation covers production and delivery services only, not copyright permission. > Request Reprints from CCC 

Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles