OVERCONFIDENCE ON PROBABILISTIC TESTS

A potentially valuable measure of overconfidence on confidence response multiple-choice tests was evaluated. The measure of overconfidence was based on probabilistic responses to seven nonsense items embedded in a 33 item vocabulary test. The test was administered under both confidence response and conventional choice response directions to 208 undergraduate educational psychology students. Measures of vocabulary knowledge based on confidence and choice responses, overconfidence, and risk-taking propensity were obtained. The results indicated that overconfidence was significantly related in a negative direction to confidence response vocabulary scores and essentially unrelated to choice response vocabulary scores. A moderate correlation was found between overconfidence and risk-taking propensity. However, the scatter plot for these measures showed that this relationship may have been spurious.     

Additional Influences on Response Certitude and Feedback Requests

This study was designed to build on the previous work of R. W. Kulhavy and associates by investigating additional influences on the relationship between feedback and response certitude during the learning process. The results of the study showed that in addition to response certitude and correctness (as predicted by Kulhavy & Stock, 1989), other factors, including the goal subjects were attempting to attain and their commitment to that goal, also influenced the frequency in which they requested feedback. In addition, requesting feedback as a strategy to learn the material and the subjects′ confidence in reaching their goal influenced performance on the test over the information in a learning task.     

A content analysis of research published in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching from 1985 through 1989

To determine if actual practice was consistent with commonly recommended research methods and procedures, this study examined 130 studies reported over a 5-year period in three volumes of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching (JRST). The results were consistent with similar previous analyses (Shaver & Norton, 1980a, 1980b; Wallen & Fraenkel, 1988a) and indicate that appropriate generalizations beyond the confines of the reported studies may be impossible for most (64%) of the JRST studies surveyed. The findings also show that replication studies, which could be employed to offset deficiencies in generalizability, were not commonly encountered (3%) in these 130 reports. In addition, the study results indicate that many researchers (48%) do not properly restrict their conclusions based on the limits imposed by the accessible populations and samples used; nor do they typically provide possible alternative explanations for the outcomes obtained (76%). These findings prompt the following recommendations: 1. A greater awareness and use of replication as a check on generalizability should be encouraged by the science education community. 2. Clearly defined populations (target and accessible) and fully described samples warrant increased attention as report components from authors, reviewers, and editorial board members of JRST. 3. In light of the difficulties inherent in effecting random selection in educational settings, a greater emphasis should be placed on recognizing the limits that the underlying assumptions of inferential statistics place on research conclusions. The results of this study indicate that the methodological quality of published science education research should remain a concern for both practitioners and readers.