IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/col/000089/012061.html

A derivation of the optimal answer-copying index and some applications

Author

Listed:
  • Mauricio Romero
  • ÔøΩlvaro Riascos
  • Diego Jara

Abstract

Multiple choice exams are frequently used as an efficient and objective instrument to evaluate knowledge. Nevertheless, they are more vulnerable to answer-copying than tests based on open questions. Several statistical tests (known as indices) have been proposed to detect cheating but to the best of our knowledge they all lack a mathematical support that guarantees optimality in any sense. This work aims at filling this void by deriving the uniform most powerful (UMP) test assuming the response distribution is known. In practice we must estimate a behavioral model that yields a response distribution for each question. We calculate the empirical type-I and type-II error rates for several indices, that assume different behavioral models, using simulations based on real data from twelve nation wide multiple choice exams taken by 5th and 9th graders in Colombia. We find that the index with the highest power among those studied, subject to the restriction of preserving the type-I error, is the one that uses a nominal response model for item answering, conditions on the answers of the individual suspected of being the source of copy and calculates critical values via a normal approximation. This index was first studied by Wollack (1997) and later by W. Van der Linden and Sotaridona (2006) and is superior to the indices studied and developed by Wesolowsky (2000) and Frary, Tideman, and Watts (1977). Furthermore, we compare the performance of the indices on examination rooms with different levels of proctoring and find that increasing the level of proctoring can reduce copying by as much as 50% and that simple strategies such as having different students answer different portions of the test at different times canal so reduce cheating by over 50%. Finally, a Bonferroni type false discovery rate procedure is used to detect massive cheating. The application is straightforward and we believe it could be use to make entire examination rooms retake an exam under stricter surveillance conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Mauricio Romero & ÔøΩlvaro Riascos & Diego Jara, 2014. "A derivation of the optimal answer-copying index and some applications," Documentos CEDE 12061, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
  • Handle: RePEc:col:000089:012061
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstream/handle/1992/8507/dcede2014-32.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George Wesolowsky, 2000. "Detecting excessive similarity in answers on multiple choice exams," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(7), pages 909-921.
    2. Diego Jara & ÔøΩlvaro Riascos & Mauricio Romero, 2010. "Detecci√≥n de copia en pruebas del Estado," Documentos CEDE 7093, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    3. Alexander Shapiro & Jos Berge, 2002. "Statistical inference of minimum rank factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 79-94, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:osf:socarx:ck9z6_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Li, Tao & Zhou, Yisu, 2017. "Do Pay-for-Grades Programs Encourage Student Cheating? Evidence from a randomized experiment," SocArXiv ck9z6, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mauricio Romero & Ã lvaro Riascos & Diego Jara, 2015. "On the Optimality of Answer-Copying Indices," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 40(5), pages 435-453, October.
    2. Nowak, Piotr Bolesław, 2016. "The MLE of the mean of the exponential distribution based on grouped data is stochastically increasing," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 49-54.
    3. Dirk Tasche, 2009. "Estimating discriminatory power and PD curves when the number of defaults is small," Papers 0905.3928, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2010.
    4. Karim, Md Aktar Ul & Bhagat, Supriya Ramdas & Bhowmick, Amiya Ranjan, 2022. "Empirical detection of parameter variation in growth curve models using interval specific estimators," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. repec:isu:genstf:2008010108000016857 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Zhang, Ruijing & Dai, Hongzhe, 2022. "A non-Gaussian stochastic model from limited observations using polynomial chaos and fractional moments," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Camilo Alberto Cárdenas-Hurtado & Aaron Levi Garavito-Acosta & Jorge Hernán Toro-Córdoba, 2018. "Asymmetric Effects of Terms of Trade Shocks on Tradable and Non-tradable Investment Rates: The Colombian Case," Borradores de Economia 1043, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    8. Anastasiou, Andreas, 2017. "Bounds for the normal approximation of the maximum likelihood estimator from m-dependent random variables," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 171-181.
    9. Charlotte Micheloud & Fadoua Balabdaoui & Leonhard Held, 2023. "Assessing replicability with the sceptical p$$ p $$‐value: Type‐I error control and sample size planning," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 77(4), pages 573-591, November.
    10. Richmond, Peter & Roehner, Bertrand M., 2015. "The detection of cheating in multiple choice examinations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 436(C), pages 418-429.
    11. Lanqing Hong & Zhi-Sheng Ye & Ran Ling, 2018. "Environmental Risk Assessment of Emerging Contaminants Using Degradation Data," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 23(3), pages 390-409, September.
    12. Liu, Baisen & Xu, Lin & Zheng, Shurong & Tian, Guo-Liang, 2014. "A new test for the proportionality of two large-dimensional covariance matrices," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 293-308.
    13. Evelina Di Corso & Tania Cerquitelli & Daniele Apiletti, 2018. "METATECH: METeorological Data Analysis for Thermal Energy CHaracterization by Means of Self-Learning Transparent Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, May.
    14. Silva, Ivair R., 2017. "Confidence intervals through sequential Monte Carlo," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 112-124.
    15. Jos'e Luis Montiel Olea & Chen Qiu & Jorg Stoye, 2023. "Decision Theory for Treatment Choice Problems with Partial Identification," Papers 2312.17623, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
    16. Denter, Philipp & Sisak, Dana, 2015. "Do polls create momentum in political competition?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Salgado Alfredo, 2018. "Incomplete Information and Costly Signaling in College Admissions," Working Papers 2018-23, Banco de México.
    18. Albrecht, James & Anderson, Axel & Vroman, Susan, 2010. "Search by committee," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(4), pages 1386-1407, July.
    19. Stegeman, Alwin, 2016. "A new method for simultaneous estimation of the factor model parameters, factor scores, and unique parts," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 189-203.
    20. Montebruno, Piero & Bennett, Robert J. & van Lieshout, Carry & Smith, Harry, 2019. "A tale of two tails: Do Power Law and Lognormal models fit firm-size distributions in the mid-Victorian era?," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 523(C), pages 858-875.
    21. Peter Bossaerts & Shijie Huang & Nitin Yadav, 2020. "Exploiting Distributional Temporal Difference Learning to Deal with Tail Risk," Risks, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-20, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C19 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Other
    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:col:000089:012061. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Universidad De Los Andes-Cede (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceandco.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.