Depth-Perception-Based Representation in Holistic Rating on ESL Essay Writing

References

• Alemi, M., & Tajeddin, Z. (2014). Pragmatic rating of L2 refusal: Criteria of native and non-native English teachers. TESL Canada Journal, 30(7), 63. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i7.1152
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric‐referenced self‐assessment and middle school students’ writing. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695941003696172
   Google Scholar
• Attali, Y. (2014). A ranking method for evaluating constructed responses. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74(5), 795–808. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164414527450
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attali, Y., & Burstein, J. (2006). Automated essay scoring with e-rater® V. 2. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 4(3), i–21. https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/jtla/article/view/1650
   Google Scholar
• Bacha, N. (2001). Writing evaluation: What can analytic versus holistic essay scoring tell us? System, 29(3), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00025-2
   Google Scholar
• Banks, M., Petrosino, L., Fucci, D., Leach, E., & Christopher, D. (1994). Effect of personality on magnitude-estimation scaling of complex auditory stimuli. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79(1 Pt 2), 435–442. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1994.79.1.435
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barkaoui, K. (2007). Rating scale impact on EFL essay marking: A mixed-method study. Assessing Writing, 12(2), 86–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2007.07.001
   Google Scholar
• Barkaoui, K. (2010). Explaining ESL essay holistic scores: A multilevel modeling approach. Language Testing, 27(4), 515–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210368717
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barkaoui, K. (2011). Effects of marking method and rater experience on ESL essay scores and rater performance. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(3), 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.526585
   Google Scholar
• Barneron, M., Allalouf, A., & Yaniv, I. (2019). Rate it again: Using the wisdom of many to improve performance evaluations. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 32(4), 485–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baryla, E., Shelley, G., & Trainor, W. (2012). Transforming rubric using factor analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 17(1), 4.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, J. (2015). Analogue magnitude representations: A philosophical introduction. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 66(4), 829–855. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axu014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80115-5
   Google Scholar
• Berteletti, I., Lucangeli, D., Piazza, M., Dehaene, S., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Numerical estimation in preschoolers. Developmental Psychology, 46(2), 545–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017887
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, J. L., & Siegler, R. S. (2006). Developmental and individual differences in pure numerical estimation. Developmental Psychology, 42(1), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.6.189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brookhart, S. M. (2018, April). Appropriate criteria: key to effective rubrics. In Frontiers in Education, 3, 22. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00022
   Google Scholar
• Bryant, P., & Squire, S. (2001). Children’s mathematics: Lost and found in space. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (pp. 175–200). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burge, T. (2010). Origins of objectivity. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, D. P., Dijkerman, H. C., & Milner, A. D. (1998). Perception and action in depth. Consciousness and Cognition, 7(3), 438–453. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.1998.0366
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Casarotti, M., Michielin, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2007). Temporal order judgment reveals how number magnitude affects visuospatial attention. Cognition, 102(1), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandrasekaran, C., Canon, V., Dahmen, J. C., Kourtzi, Z., & Welchman, A. E. (2007). Neural correlates of disparity-defined shape discrimination in the human brain. Journal of Neurophysiology, 97(2), 1553–1565. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01074.2006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, H., & He, B. (2013, October). Automated essay scoring by maximizing human-machine agreement. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 1741–1752). https://aclanthology.org/D13-1180.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Clay, V., König, P., & König, S. U. (2019). Eye tracking in virtual reality. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 12(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.12.1.3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, J. K. (1976). Distance perception as a function of age. Australian Journal of Psychology, 28(2), 109–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049537608255269
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Converse, B. A., & Dennis, P. J. (2018). The role of “prominent numbers” in open numerical judgment: Strained decision makers choose from a limited set of accessible numbers. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 147, 94–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, R. M., & Goossens, L. L. (2008). TU Delft expert judgment data base. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 93(5), 657–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2007.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, C. R. (1977). Holistic evaluation of writing. In R. C. Cooper (Ed.), Evaluating writing: Describing, measuring, judging (pp. 3–31). National Council of Teachers of English. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED143020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Cumming, A., Kantor, R., & Powers, D. E. (2002). Decision making while rating ESL/EFL writing tasks: A descriptive framework. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 67–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, L. (2016). The influence of training and experience on rater performance in scoring spoken language. Language Testing, 33(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215582282
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Hevia, M. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2009). Spontaneous mapping of number and space in adults and young children. Cognition, 110(2), 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.11.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Hevia, M. D., Vallar, G., & Girelli, L. (2008). Visualizing numbers in the mind’s eye: The role of visuo-spatial processes in numerical abilities. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32(8), 1361–1372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.05.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Cohen, L. (2003). Three parietal circuits for number processing. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20(3), 487–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290244000239
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowker, A. (1996). Estimation strategies of four groups. Mathematical Cognition, 2(2), 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467996387499
   Google Scholar
• Dowker, A. (2013). Young children’s estimates for addition: The zone of partial knowledge and understanding. In A. J. Baroody & A. Dowker (Eds.), The development of arithmetic concepts and skills: Constructive adaptive expertise (pp. 265–288). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410607218-14
   Google Scholar
• Dumas, D., & Runco, M. (2018). Objectively scoring divergent thinking tests for originality: A reanalysis and extension. Creativity Research Journal, 30(4), 466–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2018.1544601
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duro, M. L., & Dorneles, B. V. (2019). Discrete numerical estimation: A comparison between children and adults. Educação e Pesquisa, 45, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-4634201945193407
   Google Scholar
• Finson, K. D., & Ormsbee, C. K. (1998). Rubrics and their use in inclusive science. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34(2), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/105345129803400203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorentini, A., & Maffei, L. (1970). Electrophysiological evidence for binocular disparity detectors in human visual system. Science, 169(3941), 208–209. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.169.3941.208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foley, J. M. (1980). Binocular distance perception. Psychological Review, 87(5), 411–434. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.5.411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, R., Aslin, R. N., Shea, S. L., & Dumais, S. T. (1980). Stereopsis in human infants. Science, 207(4428), 323–324. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7350666
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fucci, D., Petrosino, L., Schuster, S. B., & Randolph, E. (1991). Lingual vibrotactile threshold shift during magnitude-estimation scaling: Effects on magnitude-estimation responses and scaling behaviour across age. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72(1), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1991.72.1.183
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furnham, A., & Boo, H. C. (2011). A literature review of the anchoring effect. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2010.10.008
   Google Scholar
• Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2013). The neural mechanisms underlying passive and active processing of numerosity. NeuroImage, 70, 301–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.12.048
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghalib, T. K., & Al-Hattami, A. A. (2015). Holistic versus analytic evaluation of EFL writing: A case study. English Language Teaching, 8(7), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n7p225
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. J., & Walk, R. D. (1960). The “visual cliff”. Scientific American, 202(4), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0460-64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg, M. H., Linden, S., Ballew, M. T., Rosenthal, S. A., & Leiserowitz, A. (2019). The role of anchoring in judgments about expert consensus. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(3), 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, S., Hebert, M., Sandbank, M. P., & Harris, K. R. (2016). Assessing the writing achievement of young struggling writers: Application of generalizability theory. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39(2), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714555019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, H. (1949). Jung’s psychological types: Ambiguous scores and their interpretation. The Journal of General Psychology, 40(1), 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1949.9918238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gulyás, B., & Roland, P. E. (1994). Processing and analysis of form, colour and binocular disparity in the human brain: Functional anatomy by positron emission tomography. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 6(12), 1811–1828. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.1994.tb00574.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadad, B. S., Maurer, D., & Lewis, T. L. (2011). Long trajectory for the development of sensitivity to global and biological motion. Developmental Science, 14(6), 1330–1339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01078.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harsch, C., & Martin, G. (2013). Comparing holistic and analytic scoring methods: Issues of validity and reliability. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(3), 281–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.742422
   Google Scholar
• Henik, A., Gliksman, Y., Kallai, A., & Leibovich, T. (2017). Size perception and the foundation of numerical processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(1), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416671323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmlund, T. B., Chandler, C., Foltz, P. W., Cohen, A. S., Cheng, J., Bernstein, J. C., Rosenfeld, E. P., & Elvevåg, B. (2020). Applying speech technologies to assess verbal memory in patients with serious mental illness. NPJ Digital Medicine, 3(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0241-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, J. (2009). Factors Affecting the Assessment of ESL Students’ Writing. International Journal of Applied Educational Studies, 5(1), 1–17. http://bit.ly/3vvvhQw
   Google Scholar
• Huang, J., & Foote, C. J. (2010). Grading between the lines: What really impacts professors’ holistic evaluation of ESL graduate student writing? Language Assessment Quarterly, 7(3), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300903540894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter, D. M., Jones, R. M., & Randhawa, B. S. (1996). The use of holistic versus analytic scoring for large-scale assessment of writing. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 11(2), 61. https://www.evaluationcanada.ca/secure/11-2-061.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Huot, B. (1990). Reliability, validity, and holistic scoring: What we know and what we need to know. College Composition and Communication, 41(2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.2307/358160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyde, D. C., & Mou, Y. (2017). Magnitude rather than number: More evidence needed. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, Article e173. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16002119
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jach, D. (2018). A usage-based approach to preposition placement in English as a second language. Language Learning, 68(1), 271–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jahoda, G., & McGurk, H. (1974). Pictorial depth perception in Scottish and Ghanaian children, a critique of some findings with the Hudson test. International Journal of Psychology, 9(4), 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207597408247109
   Google Scholar
• Janssen, G., Meier, V., & Trace, J. (2015). Building a better rubric: Mixed methods rubric revision. Assessing Writing, 26, 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. L., Penny, J., & Gordon, B. (2001). Score resolution and the interrater reliability of holistic scores in rating essays. Written Communication, 18(2), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018002003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. L., Penny, J., Fisher, S., & Kuhs, T. (2003). Score resolution: An investigation of the reliability and validity of resolved scores. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(4), 299–322. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1604_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonsson, A., & Balan, A. (2018). Analytic or holistic: A study of agreement between different grading models. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 23(12), Article 12. http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=23&n=12
   Google Scholar
• Joram, E., Subrahmanyam, K., & Gelman, R. (1998). Measurement estimation: Learning to map the route from number to quantity and back. Review of Educational Research, 68(4), 413–449. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068004413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kadosh, R. C., Lammertyn, J., & Izard, V. (2008). Are numbers special? An overview of chronometric, neuroimaging, developmental and comparative studies of magnitude representation. Progress in Neurobiology, 84(2), 132–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2007.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, M. T. (2016). Validity as the evaluation of the claims based on test scores. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(2), 309–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1156645
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, D., Jung, Y. J., Han, Y., Choi, J., Kim, E., Jeong, B., Ro, Y. M., & Park, H. (2014). fMRI analysis of excessive binocular disparity on the human brain. International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 24(1), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/ima.22083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunter, M., & Baumert, J. (2007). Who is the expert? Construct and criteria validity of student and teacher ratings of instruction. Learning Environments Research, 9(3), 231–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-006-9015-7
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Y. J. (2006). The process-oriented ESL writing assessment: Promises and challenges. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(4), 307–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leibovich, T., Katzin, N., Harel, M., & Henik, A. (2017). From “sense of number” to “sense of magnitude”: The role of continuous magnitudes in numerical cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, Article e164. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16000960
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, W. (2022). Scoring rubric reliability and internal validity in rater-mediated EFL writing assessment: Insights from many-facet Rasch measurement. Reading and Writing, 35(10), 2409–2431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10279-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, J. (2019). An investigation of the text features of discrepantly-scored ESL essays: A mixed methods study. Assessing Writing, 39, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logue, A. W. (1976). Individual differences in magnitude estimation of loudness. Perception & Psychophysics, 19(3), 279–280. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204182
   Google Scholar
• Loomis, J. M., Da Silva, J. A., Fujita, N., & Fukusima, S. S. (1992). Visual space perception and visually directed action. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 906–921. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.906
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loomis, J. M., Da Silva, J. A., Philbeck, J. W., & Fukusima, S. S. (1996). Visual perception of location and distance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5(3), 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10772783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mittenberg, W., Malloy, M., Petrick, J., & Knee, K. (1994). Impaired depth perception discriminates Alzheimer’s dementia from aging and major depression. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 9(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/9.1.71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montibeller, G., & Von Winterfeldt, D. (2015). Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 35(7), 1230–1251. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12360
   Google Scholar
• Moon, T. R., & Hughes, K. R. (2005). Training and scoring issues involved in large-scale writing assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 21(2), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2002.tb00088.x
   Google Scholar
• Moskal, B. M. (2002). Recommendations for developing classroom performance assessments and scoring rubrics. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 8(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.7275/jz85-rj16
   Google Scholar
• Moskowitz, H. R. (1977). Magnitude estimation: Notes on what, how, when, and why to use it. Journal of Food Quality, 1(3), 195–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4557.1977.tb00942.x
   Google Scholar
• Myers, M. (1980). A procedure for writing assessment and holistic scoring. National Council of Teachers of English and Educational Resources Information Center.
   Google Scholar
• Namaziandost, E., & Ahmadi, S. (2019). The assessment of oral proficiency through holistic and analytic techniques of scoring: A comparative study. Applied Linguistics Research Journal, 3(2), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.14744/alrj.2019.83792
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, N. W., & Van Meter, A. M. (2007). Measuring written language ability in narrative samples. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(3), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560701277807
   Google Scholar
• Noël, M. P., Rousselle, L., & Mussolin, C. (2005). Magnitude representation in children. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 179–195). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, A. (2019). Expert knowledge elicitation: subjective but scientific. The American Statistician, 73(sup1), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2018.1518265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohta, R., Plakans, L. M., & Gebril, A. (2018). Integrated writing scores based on holistic and multi-trait scales: A generalizability analysis. Assessing Writing, 38, 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ooi, T. L., Wu, B., & He, Z. J. (2001). Distance determined by the angular declination below the horizon. Nature, 414(6860), 197–200. https://doi.org/10.1038/35102562
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, J., DeWind, N. K., & Brannon, E. M. (2017). Direct and rapid encoding of numerosity in the visual stream. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, Article e185. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16002235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins, K. (1983). On the use of composition scoring techniques, objective measures, and objective tests to evaluate ESL writing ability. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 651–671. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfautz, J. D. (2002). Depth perception in computer graphics (No. UCAM-CL-TR-546). University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory. https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-546.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Philbeck, J. W., & Loomis, J. M. (1997). Comparison of two indicators of perceived egocentric distance under full-cue and reduced-cue conditions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 23(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.23.1.72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Read, J. (2005). Early computational processing in binocular vision and depth perception. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 87(1), 77–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2004.06.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid, J., & Kroll, B. (1995). Designing and assessing effective classroom writing assignments for NES and ESL students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(1), 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90021-7
   Google Scholar
• Renier, L., & De Volder, A. G. (2010). Vision substitution and depth perception: Early blind subjects experience visual perspective through their ears. Disability and Rehabilitation. Assistive Technology, 5(3), 175–183. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483100903253936
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rieser, J. J., Ashmead, D. H., Talor, C. R., & Youngquist, G. A. (1990). Visual perception and the guidance of locomotion without vision to previously seen targets. Perception, 19(5), 675–689. https://doi.org/10.1068/p190675
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao, Z., & Li, X. (2017). Native and non-native teachers’ perceptions of error gravity: The effects of cultural and educational factors. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 26(1-2), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-017-0326-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadalla, E. K., Burroughs, W. J., & Staplin, L. J. (1980). Reference points in spatial cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(5), 516–528. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.5.516
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sakyi, A. A. (2000, October). Validation of holistic scoring for ESL writing assessment: How raters evaluate. In A. J. Kunnan (Ed.), Fairness and validation in language assessment: Selected papers from the 19th Language Testing Research Colloquium, Orlando, Florida (Vol. 9, p. 129). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schipolowski, S., & Böhme, K. (2016). Assessment of writing ability in secondary education: Comparison of analytic and holistic scoring systems for use in large-scale assessments. L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16(Open Issue), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2016.16.01.03
   Google Scholar
• Schoonen, R. (2005). Generalizability of writing scores: An application of structural equation modeling. Language Testing, 22(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt295oa
   Google Scholar
• Shi, L. (2001). Native-and nonnative-speaking EFL teachers’ evaluation of Chinese students’ English writing. Language Testing, 18(3), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1191/026553201680188988
   Google Scholar
• Siegler, R. S. (2016). Magnitude knowledge: The common core of numerical development. Developmental Science, 19(3), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12395
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegler, R. S., & Opfer, J. E. (2003). The development of numerical estimation: Evidence for multiple representations of numerical quantity. Psychological Science, 14(3), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.02438
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sims, M. E., Cox, T. L., Eckstein, G. T., Hartshorn, K. J., Wilcox, M. P., & Hart, J. M. (2020). Rubric rating with MFRM versus randomly distributed comparative judgment: A comparison of two approaches to second‐language writing assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(4), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slusser, E. B., Santiago, R. T., & Barth, H. C. (2013). Developmental change in numerical estimation. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 142(1), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028560
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorace, A. (2010). Using magnitude estimation in developmental linguistic research. In E. Blom & S. Unsworth (Eds.), Experimental methods in language acquisition research (pp. 57–72). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.27.05sor
   Google Scholar
• Steedle, J. T., & Ferrara, S. (2016). Evaluating comparative judgment as an approach to essay scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 29(3), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1171769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens, S. S. (1956). The direct estimation of sensory magnitudes: Loudness. The American Journal of Psychology, 69(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/1418112
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sulsky, L. M., & Balzer, W. K. (1988). Meaning and measurement of performance rating accuracy: Some methodological and theoretical concerns. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tajeddin, Z., & Alemi, M. (2014). Pragmatic rater training: Does it affect non-native L2 teachers’ rating accuracy and bias? International Journal of Language Testing, 4(1), 66–83. https://bit.ly/3Z2bKot
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, C. L., Kaufman, J. C., & Barbot, B. (2021). Measuring creative writing with the storyboard task: The role of effort and story length. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(2), 476–488. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. A., & Opfer, J. E. (2008). Costs and benefits of representational change: Effects of context on age and sex differences in symbolic magnitude estimation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 101(1), 20–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Troia, G. A., Harbaugh, A. G., Shankland, R. K., Wolbers, K. A., & Lawrence, A. M. (2013). Relationships between writing motivation, writing activity, and writing performance: Effects of grade, sex, and ability. Reading and Writing, 26(1), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9379-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turpin, A., Scholer, F., Mizzaro, S., & Maddalena, E. (2015, August). The benefits of magnitude estimation relevance assessments for information retrieval evaluation. In Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 565–574). https://doi.org/10.1145/2766462.2767760
   Google Scholar
• Valdez, A. C., Ziefle, M., & Sedlmair, M. (2018). Priming and anchoring effects in visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(1), 584–594. https://doi.org/10.1109/tvcg.2017.2744138
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Daal, T., Lesterhuis, M., Coertjens, L., Donche, V., & De Maeyer, S. (2019). Validity of comparative judgement to assess academic writing: Examining implications of its holistic character and building on a shared consensus. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1253542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., Engelhard, G. Jr., Raczynski, K., Song, T., & Wolfe, E. W. (2017). Evaluating rater accuracy and perception for integrated writing assessments using a mixed-methods approach. Assessing Writing, 33, 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wexler, M., & Van Boxtel, J. J. (2005). Depth perception by the active observer. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(9), 431–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.06.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, E. M. (1984). Holisticism. College Composition and Communication, 35(4), 400. https://doi.org/10.2307/357792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, J., Olinghouse, N. G., McCoach, D. B., Santangelo, T., & Andrada, G. N. (2016). Comparing the accuracy of different scoring methods for identifying sixth graders at risk of failing a state writing assessment. Assessing Writing, 27, 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winke, P. (2011). Evaluating the validity of a high‐stakes ESL test: Why teachers’ perceptions matter. TESOL Quarterly, 45(4), 628–660. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.268063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winke, P., & Lim, H. (2015). ESL essay raters’ cognitive processes in applying the Jacobs et al. rubric: An eye-movement study. Assessing Writing, 25, 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiseman, C. S. (2012). A comparison of the performance of analytic vs. holistic scoring rubrics to assess L2 writing. International Journal of Language Testing, 2(1), 59–92. https://www.ijlt.ir/article_114361_9544f0e7ef140d3731098f945f34a848.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, E. W. (1997). The relationship between essay reading style and scoring proficiency in a psychometric scoring system. Assessing Writing, 4(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1075-2935(97)80006-2
   Google Scholar
• Wu, B., Ooi, T. L., & He, Z. J. (2004). Perceiving distance accurately by a directional process of integrating ground information. Nature, 428(6978), 73–77. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02350
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xi, X. (2021). Validity and the automated scoring of performance tests. In G. Fulcher & F. Davidson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language testing (pp. 513–529). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003220756-40
   Google Scholar
• Yamamoto, N. (2017). Distance perception. In Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology (continuously updated ed., pp. 1–5). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Yamanishi, H., Ono, M., & Hijikata, Y. (2019). Developing a scoring rubric for L2 summary writing: A hybrid approach combining analytic and holistic assessment. Language Testing in Asia, 9(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-019-0087-6
   Google Scholar