Claims

Recognition was not associated with item difficulty

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

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.

q3 i? No significant correlation was found between correct recognition and item difficulty. → Vogt P 2026

Evidence

Vogt P 2026

Vogt P, Wolf N, Jordan S, Volz-Willems S, Jäger J, Dupont F. (2026). Can students identify AI? – A cross-sectional quantitative study about AI recognition in tablet-based MCQ assessment among fifth-year undergraduate medical students at Saarland University, Germany. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10410-8

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Kendall's tau-b analysis of the association between origin-recognition and item difficulty in the FM exam study. The article reports "No significant correlation" with τ_b = 0.071, p = 0.534; item difficulty also did not differ significantly between AI and NLE items (U = 136, p = 0.134, r = 0.283).

"No significant correlation between correct recognition and item difficulty was found (τ_b = 0.071, p = 0.534)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id recognition-not-associated-with-item-difficulty
title Recognition was not associated with item difficulty
description Recognition was not associated with item difficulty
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2026
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-11
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — vogt-p-2026

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