trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

The number of alternatives in multiple-choice questions affects learning outcomes

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Evidence indicates that altering the number of alternatives or distractors in multiple-choice questions influences psychometric properties such as item difficulty, guessing effects, and distractor efficiency.

The analysis

The retrieved literature (e.g., papers 0 and 9) directly investigates how varying the number of response options or distractors in multiple-choice questions impacts psychometric parameters like item difficulty, guessing, and distractor efficiency, thereby supporting the claim that alternative count affects test outcomes.

Evidence for · 2
Recorded source metadata

Klaus D. Kubinger, Stefana Holocher‐Ertl, Manuel Reif, Christine Hohensinn, Martina Frebort. On Minimizing Guessing Effects on Multiple‐Choice Items: Superiority of a two solutions and three distractors item format to a one solution and five distractors item format. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00493.x

Paper [0] demonstrates that changing the number of options and distractors in multiple-choice questions significantly affects item difficulty and susceptibility to guessing.

See more details
More for · 1
Recorded source metadata

Sunsundegui P, Llorente-Ortega M, Lucena F, Fernández-Ros N, Solas M, Alcaide AB, Landecho MF, Quiroga J, Iñarrairaegui M, Herrero JI. Reducing the Number of Distractors in Multiple-Choice Questions: A Randomized Study in Undergraduate Medical Education.. 2026. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.2583

Paper [9] shows that reducing the number of distractors impacts item characteristics such as distractor efficiency and writing flaws, supporting the role of alternative count in question performance.

The paper trail · every fact has a biography
first checked01 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8201 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt