The study was designed to examine the similarity of response options generated by different item writers using a systematic approach to item writing. The similarity of response options to student responses for the same item stems presented in an open-ended format was also examined. A non-systematic (subject matter expertise) approach and a systematic (algorithmic) approach were the methods of item writing employed. Results indicated that neither approach resulted in very similar response options being generated by writers. Few response options produced by either approach corresponded with the incorrect student responses. The variation in incorrect student responses illustrated that the use of multiple choice items to test basic mathematics operations would not account for all student errors. It is probable that multiple choice test scores would be inflated over open-ended format test scores utilizing the same items. The study highlighted some potential problems in attempting to construct unbiased multiple choice tests. (DWH)