Claims

How commonly the increased efficiency effect is present in test data is unclear

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2020: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q1 i? The prevalence of the increased efficiency effect in test data is, for the time being, unclear. → Steven Wise 2015

Evidence

Steven Wise 2015

Steven Wise. (2015). Response time as an indicator of test taker speed: assumptions meet reality. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 13(3–4), 186–188. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/response-time-as-an-indicator-of-test-taker-speed-assumptions-meet-reality doi:10.1080/15366367.2015.1105062

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

The author's explicit statement of an open question in the commentary: "How commonly this effect is present in test data is, for the time being, unclear." No prevalence estimate or data are provided.

"How commonly this effect is present in test data is, for the time being, unclear."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id increased-efficiency-prevalence-unclear
title How commonly the increased efficiency effect is present in test data is unclear
description How commonly the increased efficiency effect is present in test data is unclear
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2015
recheck_by 2020
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — steven-wise-2015

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.