{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/53555"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/53555","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"A test of Frederic Lord's premise relative to formula scoring","abstract":"Although formula scoring has been used since the early 1900s, it was not until 1975 that Frederic Lord offered the following potential psychometric justification for its use: If under formula-scoring directions an examinee omits only those items which would result in completely random guesses under number-right scoring directions, then the formula score will be a more efficient estimator of the examinee's standing on the trait measured. Whenever the number of omissions is greater than zero, the formula score will be more reliable than the number-right score. The purpose of this study was to test the premise that examinees omit only those items for which they have no knowledge when taking a test under formula-scoring directions. Several studies had been carried out previously to test this premise, and the design used in this study was a synthesis of the previous designs. Included in this study was an investigation of examinees' responses, under formula-scoring directions, to items that were constructed to be obscure. Also examinees responded to questions about their attitudes towards formula-scored tests and their strategies when taking formula-scored tests. Because of the results of the test of Lord's premise, also included in this study was a further investigation of omissiveness, the tendency to omit items under formula-scoring directions. Item difficulty and item omissions were examined relative to Lord's premise. A variable, called L for convenience, was computed for each item in order to find to what extent responses to test items support Lord's premise. Finally, the possibility of misinformation producing a counter effect to inappropriate omissions relative to Lord's premise was investigated.","abstract_html":"Although formula scoring has been used since the early 1900s, it was not until 1975 that Frederic Lord offered the following potential psychometric justification for its use: If under formula-scoring directions an examinee omits only those items which would result in completely random guesses under number-right scoring directions, then the formula score will be a more efficient estimator of the examinee's standing on the trait measured. Whenever the number of omissions is greater than zero, the formula score will be more reliable than the number-right score. The purpose of this study was to test the premise that examinees omit only those items for which they have no knowledge when taking a test under formula-scoring directions. Several studies had been carried out previously to test this premise, and the design used in this study was a synthesis of the previous designs. Included in this study was an investigation of examinees' responses, under formula-scoring directions, to items that were constructed to be obscure. Also examinees responded to questions about their attitudes towards formula-scored tests and their strategies when taking formula-scored tests. Because of the results of the test of Lord's premise, also included in this study was a further investigation of omissiveness, the tendency to omit items under formula-scoring directions. Item difficulty and item omissions were examined relative to Lord's premise. A variable, called L for convenience, was computed for each item in order to find to what extent responses to test items support Lord's premise. Finally, the possibility of misinformation producing a counter effect to inappropriate omissions relative to Lord's premise was investigated.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Koball, Elizabeth H."],"institution":"Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University","degree_name":"Ph. D.","degree_level":"doctoral","degree_discipline":"Educational Research","degree_department":"Educational Research","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Cross, Lawrence H."],"committee_members":["Frary, Robert B.","Hereford, Karl T.","Schulman, Robert S.","Wolfle, Lee M.","Robertson, James I. Jr."],"year":1988,"date_issued":"1988","date_published":"1988","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:09Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en_US"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/53555","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Cross, Lawrence H."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Frary, Robert B.","Hereford, Karl T.","Schulman, Robert S.","Wolfle, Lee M.","Robertson, James I. Jr."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Educational Research"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Koball, Elizabeth H."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2015-06-24T13:35:11Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2015-06-24T13:35:11Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1988"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"dc:type.dcmitype","label":"Dc Type Dcmitype","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Educational Research"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph. D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en_US"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/53555"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Although formula scoring has been used since the early 1900s, it was not until 1975 that Frederic Lord offered the following potential psychometric justification for its use: If under formula-scoring directions an examinee omits only those items which would result in completely random guesses under number-right scoring directions, then the formula score will be a more efficient estimator of the examinee's standing on the trait measured. Whenever the number of omissions is greater than zero, the formula score will be more reliable than the number-right score. The purpose of this study was to test the premise that examinees omit only those items for which they have no knowledge when taking a test under formula-scoring directions. Several studies had been carried out previously to test this premise, and the design used in this study was a synthesis of the previous designs. Included in this study was an investigation of examinees' responses, under formula-scoring directions, to items that were constructed to be obscure. Also examinees responded to questions about their attitudes towards formula-scored tests and their strategies when taking formula-scored tests. Because of the results of the test of Lord's premise, also included in this study was a further investigation of omissiveness, the tendency to omit items under formula-scoring directions. Item difficulty and item omissions were examined relative to Lord's premise. A variable, called L for convenience, was computed for each item in order to find to what extent responses to test items support Lord's premise. Finally, the possibility of misinformation producing a counter effect to inappropriate omissions relative to Lord's premise was investigated."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Ph. D."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A test of Frederic Lord's premise relative to formula scoring"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Cross, Lawrence H."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Frary, Robert B.","Hereford, Karl T.","Schulman, Robert S.","Wolfle, Lee M.","Robertson, James I. Jr."],"dc:contributor.department":["Educational Research"],"dc:creator":["Koball, Elizabeth H."],"dc:date.accessioned":["2015-06-24T13:35:11Z"],"dc:date.available":["2015-06-24T13:35:11Z"],"dc:date.issued":["1988"],"dc:description.abstract":["Although formula scoring has been used since the early 1900s, it was not until 1975 that Frederic Lord offered the following potential psychometric justification for its use: If under formula-scoring directions an examinee omits only those items which would result in completely random guesses under number-right scoring directions, then the formula score will be a more efficient estimator of the examinee's standing on the trait measured. Whenever the number of omissions is greater than zero, the formula score will be more reliable than the number-right score. The purpose of this study was to test the premise that examinees omit only those items for which they have no knowledge when taking a test under formula-scoring directions. Several studies had been carried out previously to test this premise, and the design used in this study was a synthesis of the previous designs. Included in this study was an investigation of examinees' responses, under formula-scoring directions, to items that were constructed to be obscure. Also examinees responded to questions about their attitudes towards formula-scored tests and their strategies when taking formula-scored tests. Because of the results of the test of Lord's premise, also included in this study was a further investigation of omissiveness, the tendency to omit items under formula-scoring directions. Item difficulty and item omissions were examined relative to Lord's premise. A variable, called L for convenience, was computed for each item in order to find to what extent responses to test items support Lord's premise. Finally, the possibility of misinformation producing a counter effect to inappropriate omissions relative to Lord's premise was investigated."],"dc:description.degree":["Ph. D."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/53555"],"dc:language.iso":["en_US"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["A test of Frederic Lord's premise relative to formula scoring"],"dc:type":["Dissertation"],"dc:type.dcmitype":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Educational Research"],"thesis:degree_level":["doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph. D."],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:09Z"}