IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Constructed-Response and Multiple-Choice Questions Measure the Same Thing?




Our study empirically investigates the relationship between constructed-response (CR) and multiple-choice (MC) questions using a unique data set compiled from several years of university introductory economics classes. We conclude that CR and MC questions do not measure the same thing. Our main contribution is that we show that CR questions contain independent information that is related to student learning. Specifically, we find that the component of CR scores that cannot be explained by MC responses is positively and significantly related to (i) performance on a subsequent exam in the same economics course, and (ii) academic performance in other courses. Further, we present evidence that CR questions provide information that could not be obtained by expanding the set of MC questions. A final contribution of our study is that we demonstrate that empirical approaches that rely on factor analyses or Walstad-Becker (1994)-type regressions are unreliable in the following sense: It is possible for these empirical procedures to lead to the conclusion that CR and MC questions measure the same thing, even when the underlying data contain strong, contrary evidence. JEL Classifications: A22

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Hickson & W. Robert Reed, 2009. "Do Constructed-Response and Multiple-Choice Questions Measure the Same Thing?," Working Papers in Economics 09/08, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
  • Handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:09/08

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Stephen Hickson & W. Robert Reed & Nicholas Sander, 2010. "To Use Constructed-Response Questions, Or Not To Use Constructed-Response Questions? That Is The Question," Working Papers in Economics 10/69, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.

    More about this item


    Principles of Economics Assessment; Multiple Choice; Constructed Response; Free Response; Essay;

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:cbt:econwp:09/08. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Albert Yee). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.