The Effects of Stereotype Threat on the Test Performance of College Students with Physical Disabilities

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mackenzie L. Bohl ◽  
Destinee A. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Stereotype Threat ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Physical Disabilities

The consequences of stereotype threat on the academic performance of White and non-White lower income college students

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa A. Harrison ◽  
Chiesha M. Stevens ◽  
Adrienne N. Monty ◽  
Christine A. Coakley
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Academic Performance ◽  
Stereotype Threat ◽  
Lower Income

Magnitude and accuracy differences between judgements of remembering and forgetting

2012 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 2231-2257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Serra ◽  
Benjamin D. England
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Relative Accuracy ◽  
Absolute Accuracy ◽  
Paired Associates ◽  
Lower Point ◽  
Memory For Past Test ◽  
Study Test

Metacognition researchers have recently begun to examine the effects of framing judgements of learning (JOLs) in terms of forgetting (rather than remembering) on the judgements' magnitude and accuracy. Although a promising new direction for the study of metamemory, initial studies have yielded inconsistent results. To help resolve these inconsistencies, in four experiments we had college students ( N = 434) study paired associates and make JOLs framed in terms of either remembering or forgetting over two study–test trials. Our goals were to further document the effects of framing on the magnitude and accuracy of JOLs and to consider explanations for why specific patterns tend to emerge. The present experiments provide evidence that (a) judgements of forgetting are psychologically anchored at the midpoint of the JOL scale, whereas judgements of remembering are anchored at a lower point, (b) differences in absolute accuracy (calibration) by frame are largely artefactual and stem from differences in anchoring, (c) differences in JOL magnitude and absolute accuracy by frame do not obtain when memory cues are salient to participants, and (d) a forget frame impairs the relative accuracy (resolution) of JOLs across trials by reducing participants' reliance on cues such as memory for past test performance.

Construct Validity and Psychometric Properties of the Cornell Critical Thinking Test (Level Z): A Contrasted Groups Analysis

1992 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 291-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig L. Frisby
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Ability Group ◽  
Total N ◽  
Ability Groups ◽  
Test Level

Total scores and section scores (both corrected and uncorrected for guessing) on the Cornell Critical Thinking Test—Level Z were analyzed for evidence of construct validity. The test performance of three ability groupings of college students and a “no-booklet” (guessers) group (Total N = 527) was examined. Statistically significant differences were found among the corrected total score means for all four groups. Differences among the means of the three ability groups were statistically significant on one corrected and one uncorrected section of the test. In addition, the formula which corrects for guessing substantially improved the estimate of internal consistency reliability for the low-ability group only. Support for the heterogeneity of the thinking skills measured by Form Z was mixed and inconclusive. Implications for the use or modification of the test are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document