IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22401.html

Hit or Miss? Test Taking Behavior in Multiple Choice Exams

Author

Listed:
  • Ş. Pelin Akyol
  • James Key
  • Kala Krishna

Abstract

We model and estimate the decision to answer questions in multiple choice tests with negative marking. Our focus is on the trade-off between precision and fairness. Negative marking reduces guessing, thereby increasing accuracy considerably. However, it reduces the expected score of the more risk averse, discriminating against them. Using data from the Turkish University Entrance Exam, we find that students' attitudes towards risk differ according to their gender and ability. Women and those with high ability are significantly more risk averse: nevertheless, the impact on scores of such differences is small, making a case for negative marking.

Suggested Citation

  • Ş. Pelin Akyol & James Key & Kala Krishna, 2016. "Hit or Miss? Test Taking Behavior in Multiple Choice Exams," NBER Working Papers 22401, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22401
    Note: ED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22401.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    2. Duffie, Darrell & Singleton, Kenneth J, 1993. "Simulated Moments Estimation of Markov Models of Asset Prices," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 929-952, July.
    3. María Paz Espinosa & Javier Gardeazabal, 2013. "Do Students Behave Rationally in Multiple Choice Tests? Evidence from a Field Experiment," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 9(2), pages 107-135, July.
    4. Albert Burgos, 2004. "Guessing and gambling," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(4), pages 1-10.
    5. Pekkarinen, Tuomas, 2014. "Gender Differences in Strategic Behaviour under Competitive Pressure: Evidence on Omission Patterns in University Entrance Examinations," IZA Discussion Papers 8018, IZA Network @ LISER.
    6. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2004:i:4:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 113, pages 1061-1073, Elsevier.
    8. Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain, 1997. "Simulation-based Econometric Methods," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198774754.
    9. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    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. Alexis Direr, 2025. "Ecient Scoring of Multiple-Choice tests [Notation efficace des questions à choix multiples]," Post-Print hal-05384180, HAL.
    2. Maddalena Davoli, 2023. "A, B, or C? Question Format and the Gender Gap in Financial Literacy," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0206, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    3. J. Ignacio Conde-Ruiz & Juan Jos Ganuza & Manuel Garc a, 2020. "Gender Gap and Multiple Choice Exams in Public Selection Processes," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 235(4), pages 11-28, December.
    4. Karlsson, Niklas & Lunander, Anders, 2025. "Cutoff Point in Multiple Choice Examinations using Negative Marking or Number of Correct Scoring - An Analysis of Statistical Power," Working Papers 2025:9, Örebro University, School of Business.
    5. Anaya, Lina & Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro & Zamarro, Gema, 2022. "Understanding performance in test taking: The role of question difficulty order," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Heiko Karle & Dirk Engelmann & Martin Peitz, 2022. "Student performance and loss aversion," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(2), pages 420-456, April.
    7. Jef Vanderoost & Rianne Janssen & Jan Eggermont & Riet Callens & Tinne De Laet, 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, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-27, October.
    8. Graetz, Georg & Karimi, Arizo, 2022. "Gender gap variation across assessment types: Explanations and implications," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    9. Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2021. "Brave boys and play-it-safe girls: Gender differences in willingness to guess in a large scale natural field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    10. Alexis DIRER, 2020. "Efficient scoring of multiple-choice tests," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 2752, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.
    11. Montolio, Daniel & Taberner, Pere A., 2021. "Gender differences under test pressure and their impact on academic performance: A quasi-experimental design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 1065-1090.
    12. Pau Balart & Lara Ezquerra & Iñigo Hernandez-Arenaz, 2022. "Framing effects on risk-taking behavior: evidence from a field experiment in multiple-choice tests," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1268-1297, September.
    13. Graetz, Georg & Karimi, Arizo, 2019. "Explaining gender gap variation across assessment forms," Working Paper Series 2019:8, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    14. Claire Duquennois, 2022. "Fictional Money, Real Costs: Impacts of Financial Salience on Disadvantaged Students," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(3), pages 798-826, March.
    15. Saygin, Perihan O. & Atwater, Ann, 2021. "Gender differences in leaving questions blank on high-stakes standardized tests," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    16. Riener, Gerhard & Wagner, Valentin, 2017. "Shying away from demanding tasks? Experimental evidence on gender differences in answering multiple-choice questions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 43-62.
    17. Hayri Alper Arslan & Yang Song & Tong Wang, 2024. "Preference submission timing and college admission outcomes: evidence from Turkey," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 28(1), pages 189-241, February.

    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. Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2021. "Brave boys and play-it-safe girls: Gender differences in willingness to guess in a large scale natural field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Caliendo, Marco & Lee, Wang-Sheng & Mahlstedt, Robert, 2017. "The gender wage gap and the role of reservation wages: New evidence for unemployed workers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 161-173.
    3. Pau Balart & Lara Ezquerra & Iñigo Hernandez-Arenaz, 2022. "Framing effects on risk-taking behavior: evidence from a field experiment in multiple-choice tests," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1268-1297, September.
    4. Alexander Tsyplakov, 2010. "Revealing the arcane: an introduction to the art of stochastic volatility models (in Russian)," Quantile, Quantile, issue 8, pages 69-122, July.
    5. Tsyplakov, Alexander, 2010. "Revealing the arcane: an introduction to the art of stochastic volatility models," MPRA Paper 25511, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Saygin, Perihan O. & Atwater, Ann, 2021. "Gender differences in leaving questions blank on high-stakes standardized tests," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    7. Abrahams, Scott, 2026. "Gender differences in choosing fast and slow: Evidence from competitive powerlifting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    8. Nisha Prakash & Subburaj Alagarsamy, 2022. "Does Gender and Family Income Impact Stock Trading of B-School Students? Findings from a Stock Simulation Exercise," Vision, , vol. 26(4), pages 454-460, December.
    9. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    10. Oege Dijk, 2017. "For whom does social comparison induce risk-taking?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 519-541, April.
    11. Sumit Agarwal & Richard K. Green & Eric Rosenblatt & Vincent Yao & Jian Zhang, 2015. "Who Bears the Pen? Relative Income and Gender Gap in Mortgage Signing Order," Working Paper 9475, USC Lusk Center for Real Estate.
    12. Jose Maria Cabrera & Alejandro Cid, 2024. "Gender Differences in Response to Relative Performance Feedback: A Field Experiment in Education," Documentos de Trabajo/Working Papers 2408, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economia. Universidad de Montevideo..
    13. Nagore Iriberri & Pedro Rey-Biel, 2019. "Competitive Pressure Widens the Gender Gap in Performance: Evidence from a Two-stage Competition in Mathematics," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(620), pages 1863-1893.
    14. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & José de Sousa & Alexis Noir-Luhalwe, 2022. "Social Distancing and Risk Taking: Evidence from a Team Game Show [Distanciation sociale et prise de risque : Les résultats d'un jeu d'équipe]," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03792423, HAL.
    15. Inessa Love & Boris Nikolaev & Chandra Dhakal, 2024. "The well-being of women entrepreneurs: the role of gender inequality and gender roles," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 325-352, January.
    16. Andreasen, Martin M. & Christensen, Bent Jesper, 2015. "The SR approach: A new estimation procedure for non-linear and non-Gaussian dynamic term structure models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 184(2), pages 420-451.
    17. Ali Zeytoon-Nejad, 2025. "Price risk aversion vs payoff risk aversion: a gender comparison through a laboratory experiment," Papers 2512.20909, arXiv.org.
    18. Anindya Biswas & Biswajit Mandal, 2016. "Estimating Preference Parameters From Stock Returns Using Simulated Method Of Moments," Annals of Financial Economics (AFE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 1-13, March.
    19. Takashi Kamihigashiw & John Stachurski, 2014. "Seeking Ergodicity in Dynamic Economies," Working Papers 2014-402, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    20. Albert Marcet & David A. Marshall, 1994. "Solving nonlinear rational expectations models by parameterized expectations: convergence to stationary solutions," Working Paper Series, Macroeconomic Issues 94-20, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: 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:nbr:nberwo:22401. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.