The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning - Volume 8 - Issue 1 - Article 11 - Does Correct Answer Distribution Influence Student Choices When Writing Multiple Choice Examinations?

Oct 15, 2026

Summative evaluation for large first- and second-year undergraduate courses often uses multiple choice question (MCQ) exams delivered with timely feedback. Multiple exam versions are frequently created through computer-based scrambling to deter cheating, but equivalence in assessing student knowledge is essential. This study tested whether having a run of four to five consecutive MCQs with the same correct letter harms students’ ability to keep selecting correctly. Student performance was compared with exams without such series and supported by surveys about attention to correct-answer patterns, during initial selection and Scantron transfer; results indicate scrambling does not adversely affect performance.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Study focus

Method and comparison

Student survey and findings

The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning | Volume 8 | Issue 1 | Article 11 | | --- | --- | | 3-12-2017
Does Correct Answer Distribution Influence Student Choices When Writing Multiple Choice Examinations?
Jacqueline A. Carnegie
University of Ottawa Faculty of Medicine, jcarnegi@uottawa.ca
Follow this and additional works at: [http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea](http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea) | | Recommended Citation Carnegie, Jacqueline A. (2017) "Does Correct Answer Distribution Influence Student Choices When Writing Multiple Choice Examinations?," The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Vol. 8 : Iss. 1 , Article 11. Available at: [http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea/vol8/iss1/11](http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea/vol8/iss1/11) Does Correct Answer Distribution Influence Student Choices When Writing Multiple Choice Examinations? Abstract Summative evaluation for large classes of first-and second-year undergraduate courses often involves the use of multiple choice question (MCQ) exams in order to provide timely feedback. Several versions of those exams are often prepared via computer-based question scrambling in an effort to deter cheating. An important parameter to consider when preparing multiple exam versions is that they must be equivalent in their assessment of student knowledge. This project investigated a possible influence of correct answer organization on student answer selection when writing multiple versions of MCQ exams. The specific question asked was whether the existence of a series of four to five consecutive MCQs in which the same letter represented the correct answer had a detrimental influence on a student’s ability to continue to select the correct answer ashe/she moved through that series. Student outcomes from such exams were compared with results from exams with identical questions but which did not contain such series. These findings were supplemented by student survey data in which students self-assessed the extent to which they paid attention to the distribution of correct answer choices when writing summative exams, both during their initial answer selection and when transferring their answer letters to the Scantron sheet for correction. Despite the fact that more than half of survey respondents indicated that they do make note of answer patterning during exams and that a series of four to five questions with the same letter for the correct answer would encourage many of them to take a second look at their answer choice, the results pertaining to student outcomes suggest that MCQrandomization, even when it does result in short serial arrays of letter-specific correct answers, does not constitute a distraction capable of adversely influencing student performance. Dans les très grandes classes de cours de première et deuxième années, l’évaluation sommative se déroulesouvent par le biais d’examens comportant des questions à choix multiples afin de pouvoir donner rapidement les résultats aux étudiants. Plusieurs versions de ces examens sont souvent préparées et les questions sont brouillées par ordinateur pour dissuader la tricherie. Lors de la préparation de plusieurs versions d’un examen à choix multiples, l’un des paramètres importants à prendre en considération est que chaque version doit êtresemblable aux autres pour évaluer équitablement les connaissances des étudiants. Ce projet a pour but d’examiner l’influence possible de l’organisation des réponses correctes sur le choix des réponses des étudiants lors de la préparation de plusieurs versions d’un examen à choix multiples. La question spécifique qui a été posée était de savoir si l’existence d’une série de quatre ou cinq questions à choix multiples consécutives pour lesquelles la même lettre représentait la bonne réponse pouvait avoir une influence préjudiciable sur l’aptitude des étudiants à continuer à choisir la bonne réponse alors qu’ils progressent d’une qu

FAQs

What was the study’s main question about MCQ exams?

Whether consecutive MCQs sharing the same correct letter negatively influence students’ continued correct selection as they progress through the series.

How did the research compare student outcomes?

It compared results from exams that contained the four to five question runs with identical questions from exams that did not include such series.

Do the findings suggest that MCQ scrambling distracts students?

Yes. Despite many students reporting attention to answer patterns and that such series might prompt a second look, the outcome results suggest randomization does not adversely influence student performance.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Well Done