Writing Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Tarrant M, Ware J: Impact of item-writing flaws in multiple-choice questions on student achievement in high-stakes nursing assessments. Med Educ 2008; 42:198–206

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

2. Tarrant M, Knierim A, Hayes SK, et al: The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments. Nurse Educ Pract 2006; 6:354–363

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

3. Baker EL, Quellmalz ES, University of California Los Angeles Center for the Study of Evaluation: Educational Testing and Evaluation: Design, Analysis, and Policy. Beverly Hills, Calif, Sage Publications, 1980

   Google Scholar 

4. Haladyna TM, Downing SM: A taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules. Appl Meas Educ 1989; 1:37–50

   Article  Google Scholar 

5. Haladyna TM, Downing, SM: The validity of a taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules. Appl Meas Educ 1989; 1:51–78

   Article  Google Scholar 

6. Haladyna TM, Downing SM, Rodriguez MC: A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Appl Meas Educ 2002; 15:309–334

   Article  Google Scholar 

7. Haladyna TM: Developing and Validating Multiple-Choice Test Items. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994

   Google Scholar 

8. Downing SM, Haladyna TM: Handbook of Test Development. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006

   Google Scholar 

9. Kehoe J: Writing Multiple-Choice Test Items. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 4(9): Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC, 1995, Report No EDO-TM-95-3

10. Downing SM: The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: the consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ 2005; 10:133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

11. Case SM, Swanson DB: Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences. Philadelphia National Board of Medical Examiners, 2002. Available at www.nbme.org/publications/item-writing-manual.html

12. Shelton R, Lester N: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and newer antidepressants, in The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Mood Disorders. Edited by Stein DJK, Schatzberg AF. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing, 2005

13. Tamir P: Positive and negative multiple choice items: how different are they? Studies in Educational Evaluation 1993; 19:311–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

14. Harasym PH: Negation in stems of single-response multiple-choice items: an overestimation of student ability. Evaluation and the Health Professions 1993; 16:342–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

15. Case SM: The use of imprecise terms in examination questions: how frequent is frequently? Acad Med 1994; 69:S4–6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

16. Gross LJ: Logical versus empirical guidelines for writing test items: the case of “none of the above.” Evaluation and the Health Professions 1994; 17:123–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

17. Frary RB: The none-of-the-above option: an empirical study. Appl Meas Educ 1991; 4:115–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

18. Knowles SL, Welch CA: A meta-analytic review of item discrimination and difficulty in multiple-choice items using “None-of-the-above.” Educ Psychol Meas 1992; 52:571–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

19. Kolstad RK, Kolstad RA: The option “none of these” improves multiple-choice test items. J Dent Educ 1991; 55:161–163

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

20. Ascalon ME, Meyers LS, Davis BW, et al: Distractor similarity and item-stem structure: effects on item difficulty. Appl Meas Educ 2007; 20:153–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

21. Trevisan MS: Estimating the optimum number of options per item using an incremental option paradigm. Educ Psychol Meas 1994; 54:86–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

22. Taylor AK: Violating conventional wisdom in multiple choice test construction. College Student J 2005; 39:141

    Google Scholar 

23. Swanson DB, Holtzman KZ, Clauser BE, et al: Psychometric characteristics and response times for one-best-answer questions in relation to number and source of options. Acad Med 2005; 80:S93–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

24. Rachor RE, Gray GT: Must all stems be green? A study of two guidelines for writing multiple choice stems. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 8–12, 1996

    Google Scholar 

25. Triska OH: Clinicians’ perceptions of medical students’ reasoning on multiple choice items. Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, April 11, 1996, New York, p 16

Download references