Low-Stakes Testing and Psychological Reactance: Using the Hong Psychological Reactance Scale to Better Understand Compliant and Non-Compliant Examinees

Abstract

The current study examined whether psychological reactance differs across compliant and non-compliant examinees. Given the lack of consensus regarding the factor structure and scoring of the Hong Psychological Reactance Scale (HPRS), its factor structure was evaluated and subsequently tested for measurement invariance (configural, metric, and scalar) across two types of examinees: examinees that attended university assessments (i.e., compliant examinees) and examinees that skipped these assessments (i.e., non-compliant examinees). Measurement invariance of the HPRS across compliant and non-compliant examinees was supported, enabling the testing of latent mean differences, which provided known-groups validity evidence: non-compliant examinees reported significantly higher levels of reactance than did compliant examinees. Implications for low-stakes testing internationally, including strategies to increase compliance, are discussed.

Measuring Motivation in Low‐Stakes Assessments

“…A. R. Brown and Finney () recently explored the impact of noncompliance on test scores at their home university, where all first‐year students are required to take a 3‐hour assessment that measures general education skills. They are also required to take the same tests in their second or third year so that growth can be determined.…”

“…The researchers tested the hypothesis that students who do not attend the original testing session are more reactant than compliant examinees. Reactance refers to a reaction to threats to perceived loss of freedoms (Brehm & Brehm, 1981). Noncompliance is a common response to feelings of reactance (Brehm & Brehm, 1981).…”

“…Reactance refers to a reaction to threats to perceived loss of freedoms (Brehm & Brehm, 1981). Noncompliance is a common response to feelings of reactance (Brehm & Brehm, 1981). Reactance was measured with the Hong Psychological Reactance Scale (Hong & Page, 1989).…”

“…Thus, even when students are highly motivated, anxiety can have a cost on performance. A second limitation of making all tests have high‐stakes consequences is that assessments that help in making high‐stakes decisions are comparatively costly in terms of administration, test development, and analysis required to carry them out (A. R. Brown & Finney, ; Wise & DeMars, ).…”

Conditioning factors of test-taking engagement in PIAAC: an exploratory IRT modelling approach considering person and item characteristics

“…Test-takers who were less compliant, that is, less motivated, to take the test tended to show higher levels of reactance (Brown and Finney 2011). Another line of research has shown that boredom negatively affects test-taking effort (e.g., Asseburg and Frey 2013).…”