Sex, Temperament, and Language-Related Differences in Examination Performance: A Study of Multiple-Choice and Written-Answer Tests

Abstract

Arousability theory of Robinson predicts sex differences in temperament and in verbal ability and cognitive processing. Related hypotheses were tested in a sample of 73 Kuwaiti 3rd-year medical students by analysis of data obtained from administration of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and from questions requiring written answers or multiple-choice answers in an examination in psychology. Principal components analysis yielded a large sex difference in word production and indicated that variance of written answers loaded on two uncorrelated “linguistic” and “knowledge/cognition” components. Sex differences in temperament were also manifest but these contributed little to the observed differences in examination performance. Statistical tests indicated no sex difference in multiple-choice performance, but the women produced more words than the men and did better on the written-answer questions. In addition, there were substantial and statistically significant correlations between word production and performance on both types of test. The results confirmed predictions from arousability theory that the multiple-choice questions provided a more equitable basis than short written answers for examining classes of men and women in medical school. Written answers for questions could penalise students who are shown to be less proficient in the use of English as a second language.