Psychological test Flashcards
The International Personality Item Pool test, commonly known as the IPIP-NEO test, measures an employee’s personality on five broad personality categories and 30 sub-categories. Organizations can use this test to evaluate an employee’s ability to get along in a multicultural setting, which is important because globalization brings employees, customers and suppliers from around the world. The five broad categories and sub-categories are extraversion or gregariousness, with sub-categories of friendliness, social engagement and activity level; agreeableness, which involves trust, altruism and cooperation; conscientiousness, with sub-categories of self- confidence, cautiousness and achievement; neuroticism or self-consciousness, which refers to sensitivity to other people’s opinions; and openness to new experiences, which includes adventurousness and the readiness to challenge authority.
IPIP-NEO Personality Test
named after organizational theorist Kathy Kolbe, is based on the premise that an employee’s problem-solving abilities are stable and independent of intelligence, personality and education. The index specifies four problem-solving modes: fact finder, which involves information gathering; follow-through, which refers to the scheduling and organizing of activities; quick start, which means innovation and risk taking; and the solution implementation process. Employees answer several multiple-choice questions based on problem-solving scenarios. The scores for each of the four modes reveal whether an employee is likely to initiate action, respond to needs or prevent problems. Companies can use this assessment method to match employees with the right jobs and improve organizational performance.
Kolbe Index
This battery offers 18 individually sold tests that are used for selection, placement, reassignment, and vocational counseling. It offers 18 individually sold tests that are designed to help measure distinct aptitudes or functions important to a variety of industrial positions. Percentile norms are based on more than 40 job classifications. Validation studies were conducted in various companies for a variety of jobs and measures were found to be related to job performance. Note: The FIT battery differs from the FACTTM battery in that the FIT tests are generally for upper-level positions and have shorter time limits.
Flanagan Industrial Tests (FIT)
Note: The tests may be used separately or in any combination. They are designed for Supervisory, technical, office, skilled labour and other industrial positions. These are paper and pencil tests and each package of 25 booklets contains one type of test. They are hand-scored with scoring stencil, yielding 18 individual scores. Each test takes about 5-15 minutes to complete.
Ability to visualize how separate pieces will look as a whole. Ten-minute time limit.
Assembly
Ability to identify a simple figure that is part of a complete drawing. Ten-minute time limit.
Components
Ability to control hand and arm movements while working through a series of mazes. Five-minute time limit.
Coordination
Ability to understand electrical and electronic principles as well as analyze diagrams of electrical circuits.
Fifteen-minute time limit.
Electronics
Knowledge of correct grammar and sentence structure. Five-minute time limit.
Expression
Ability to think of ingenious and effective ways of solving problems. Fifteen-minute time limit.
Ingenuity
Ability to spot imperfections or flaws in a series of objects. Five-minute time limit.
Inspection
Ability to read and comprehend given information. Fifteen-minute time limit.
Judgment and Comprehension
Ability to reason through mathematical word problems. Fifteen-minute time limit.
Mathematics and Reasoning
Ability to understand mechanical principles and analyze mechanical movement. Fifteen-minute time limit.
Mechanics
Ability to add, subtract, multiply and divide. Five-minute time limit.
Arithmetic
Ability to memorize different terms and their meanings. Ten-minute time limit
Memory
Ability to perceive and reproduce pattern outlines accurately. Five-minute time limit.
Patterns
Ability to plan, organize and schedule various types of activities. Fifteen-minute time limit.
Planning
Capacity for precision work with small objects. Five-minute time limit.
Precision
Ability to read scales, graphs and charts. Five-minute time limit.
Scales
Ability to read tables quickly and accurately. Five-minute time limit.
Tables
Knowledge of words used in business and government environments. Fifteen-minute time limit.
Vocabulary
Note: Normative Data Percentile norms and stanines provided are based on more than 40 job classifications. Percentile norms and stanines are also listed for 12th-grade students and male university students entering their first year. Validation Studies FIT was validated in various companies and was found to be predictive of job success for a number of different jobs.
Purpose: Designed to discriminate anxiety from depression in individuals. Population: Adults.
Score: Yields a total score
Time: (5-10) minutes.
Author: Aaron T. Beck.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was developed to address the need for an instrument that would reliably discriminate anxiety from depression while displaying convergent validity. Such an instrument would offer advantages for clinical and research purposes over existing self-report measures, which have not been shown to differentiate anxiety from depression adequately.
Scoring: The scale consists of 21 items, each describing a common symptom of anxiety. The respondent is asked to rate how much he or she has been bothered by each symptom over the past week on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 to 3. The items are summed to obtain a total score that can range from 0 to 63.
Reliability: The scale obtained high internal consistency and item-total correlations ranging from .30 to .71 (median=.60). A subsample of patients (n=83) completed the BAI after 1 week, and the correlation between intake and 1-week BAI scores was .75.
Validity: The correlations of the BAI with a set of self-report and clinician-rated scales were all significant. The correlation of the BAI with the HARS-R and HRSD-R were .51 and .25, respectively. The correlation of the BAI with the BDI was .48. Convergent and discriminant validity to discriminate homogeneous and heterogeneous diagnostic groups were ascertained from three studies. The results confirm the presence of these validities.
Norms: The three normative samples of psychiatric outpatients were drawn from consecutive routine evaluations at the Center for Cognitive Therapy in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The total sample size was 1,086. There were 456 men and 630 women.
Suggested Uses: Recommended for use in assessing anxiety in clinical and research settings.
Beck Anxiety Inventory
Purpose: Designed to determine presence and severity of symptoms of depression. Population: Adolescents and adults.
Score: Produces single score indicating intensity of the depressive symptoms.
Time: 5-10 minutes, longer for patients with severe depression or obsessional disorders. Author: Aaron T. Beck, Robert A. Steer, and Gregory K. Brown.
Publisher: the Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition (BDI-II) is a 21-item self-report instrument intended to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression as listed in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; 1994). This new revised edition replaces the BDI and the BDI-1A, and includes items intending to index symptoms of severe depression, which would require hospitalization. Items have been changed to indicate increases or decreases in sleep and appetite, items labeled body image, work difficulty, weight loss, and somatic preoccupation were replaced with items labeled agitation, concentration difficulty and loss of energy, and many statements were reworded resulting in a substantial revision of the original BDI and BDI-1A. When presented with the BDI-II, a patient is asked to consider each statement as it relates to the way they have felt for the past two weeks, to more accurately correspond to the DSM-IV criteria.
Scoring: Each of the 21 items corresponding to a symptom of depression is summed to give a single score for the BDI-II. There is a four-point scale for each item ranging from 0 to 3. On two items (16 and 18) there are seven options to indicate either an increase or decrease of appetite and sleep. Cut score guidelines for the BDI-II are given with the recommendation that thresholds be adjusted based on the characteristics of the sample, and the purpose for use of the BDI-II. Total score of 0-13 is considered minimal range, 14-19 is mild, 20-28 is moderate, and 29-63 is severe.
Reliability: BDI has been used for 35 years to identify and assess depressive symptoms, and has been reported to be highly reliable regardless of the population. It has a high coefficient alpha, (.80) its construct validity has been established, and it is able to differentiate depressed from non-depressed patients. For the BDI-II the coefficient alphas (.92 for outpatients and .93 for the college students) were higher than those for the BDI- 1A (.8 6). The correlations for the corrected item-total were significant at .05 level (with a Bonferroni adjustment), for both the outpatient and the college student samples. Test-retest reliability was studied using the responses of 26 outpatients who were tested at first and second therapy sessions one week apart. There was a correlation of .93, which was significant at p < .001. The mean scores of the first and second total scores were comparable with a paired t (25) =1.08, which was not significant.
Validity: One of the main objectives of this new version of the BDI was to have it conform more closely to the diagnostic criteria for depression, and items were added, eliminated and reworded to specifically assess the symptoms of depression listed in the DSM-IV and thus increase the content validity of the measure. With regard to construct validity, the convergent validity of the BDI-II was assessed by administration of the BDI-1A and the BDI-II
to two sub-samples of outpatients (N=191). The order of presentation was counterbalanced and at least one other measure was administered between these two versions of the BDI, yielding a correlation of .93 (p<.001) and means of 18.92 (SD = 11.32) and 21.888 (SD = 12.69) the mean BDI-II score being 2.96 points higher than the BDI-1A. A calibration study of the two scales was also conducted, and these results are available in the BDI-II manual. Consistent with the comparison of mean differences, the BDI-II scores are 3 points higher than the BDI-1A scores in the middle of the scale. Factorial Validity has been established by the inter-correlations of the 21 items calculated from the sample responses.
Norms: The normative sample included 500 outpatients from rural and suburban locations. All patients were diagnosed according to DSM-III-R or DSM-IV criteria were used to investigate the psychometric characteristics of BDI-II. The group was comprised of 63% women, and 37% men, the mean age was 37.20 years, range of 13-86 years. The racial/ethnic makeup was 91% White, 4% African American, 4% Asian American, and 1% Hispanic. A student sample of 120 college students in Canada served as a comparative normal group.
Suggested use: The BDI-II is intended to assess the severity of depression in psychiatrically diagnosed adults and adolescents 13 years of age and older. It is not meant to serve as an instrument of diagnosis, but rather to identify the presence and severity of symptoms consistent with the criteria of the DSM-IV. The authors warn against the use of this instrument as a sole diagnostic measure, as depressive symptoms may be part of other primary diagnostic disorders.
Beck Depression Inventory - 2nd Edition
Purpose: Designed to measure negative attitudes about the future. Population: Ages 17 and over.
Score: A total scale score.
Time: (5-10) minutes.
Author: Aaron T. Beck.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) is a 20-item scale for measuring negative attitudes about the future. Beck originally developed this scale in order to predict who would commit suicide and who would not. The conceptual basis for the scale derives from the writings of the social psychologist Ezra Scotland.
Scoring: Scoring is straightforward; one simply adds up each of the items marked in the direction keyed for “hopelessness.” Using the scoring template, one counts the number of blackened circles that show up under the circles on the template. The user bases his or her interpretation on the total scale score. The manual contains general cutoff guidelines, although the author recommends that cut-off scores should be based upon clinical decisions.
Reliability: The manual reports KR-20 coefficients (measures of the scale’s internal consistency) ranging from .82 to .93. The manual states that when 21 patients with mixed diagnoses were tested at the Center for Cognitive Therapy both during an intake evaluation and 1 week later, before beginning their therapy, the correlation between their scores on the two occasions was .69. In another sample of patients from the Center for Cognitive Therapy (N = 99), the test-retest reliability over a 6-week span was .66. Both of these test-retest coefficients are statistically significant.
Validity: Concurrent validity. Beck examined the relationship between clinical ratings of hopelessness and BHS scores in two samples: a) 23 outpatients in a general medical practice and b) 62 hospitalized patients who had recently attempted suicide. In the general practice sample, the correlation between the BHS and the ratings of hopelessness was .74; in the suicide-attempt sample, it was .62.
Norms: The normative sample consisted of 294 psychiatric inpatients who had made recent suicide attempts. This sample included 125 men and 169 women. Of the total sample, 150 were white, 139 were black, and 5 belonged to other racial groups. The average age was 29.9 years. On average, the participants had finished 10.85 years of school. As to marital status, 41.5% were single, 17.3% were married, 31.6% were separated or divorced, 2.7% were widowed. and the rest were unmarried but living together or of unknown status.
Suggested Uses: The BHS is recommended for measuring extent of negative attitudes in clinical and research settings.
Beck Hopelessness Scale
Purpose: A rapid, efficient measure of perceptual-motor and cognitive development in children. Population: Ages 4 and over.
Time: (10) minutes.
Author: Lauretta Bender.
Publisher: The American Orthopsychiatric Association, Inc.
Description: The Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test (Bender-Gestalt) is the most frequently administered and thoroughly researched of all of the drawing (copying) tests. It consists of nine geometric designs (numbered A and 1-8) originally developed by Wertheimer to demonstrate the perceptual tendencies to organize visual stimuli into configural wholes (Gestalten). Each design is presented sequentially to the subject whose task is to reproduce them on a blank sheet of paper. Scoring: Scoring is usually relatively easy and rapid, rarely requiring more than three or four minutes, regardless of whether a formalized or intuitive scoring system is employed.
Reliability: The results involving the Bender with young children reveal interscorer reliability to be very high with correlations of .90 and above. Test-retest reliability coefficients with children range from a low of about .50 with kindergarten children measured 8 months apart to .90 with the same age group measured two weeks apart. The majority of more than 20 different
reliability studies reported by Koppitz reveal correlation coefficients in the .80+ range and suggest that normal elementary school children show relatively stable patterns of Bender-Gestalt scores from one administration to the next.
Validity: With respect to the validity of the Bender with children, Koppitz reported
correlation coefficients from about .50 to as high as .80 between the Bender-Gestalt and intelligence as measured by the Stanford-Binet or Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children up to about the age of 10. Beyond this age the correlations drop to essentially zero as most older children obtain nearly perfect scores. She also reported relatively high correlations between Bender scores and subsequent educational achievement of first-grade children. Koppitz also reported a relatively high correlation between the Bender and intellectual and academic performance for retarded children as well. With children diagnosed as having minimal brain damage, she reported that the Bender is a valuable diagnostic tool but cautioned that it should not be used alone but in combination with other psychological tests and any background information available. Norms: Norms for a wide variety of clinical groups, including mentally retarded, organically brain-damaged, psychotic, and normal adults are included in Bender’s classic research monograph.
Suggested Uses: Designed for use in educational, research, and clinical settings.
Bender-Gestalt Test
Purpose: Designed to assess visual perception, visual memory, and visuoconstructive abilities. Population: Ages 8 and over.
Score: Difference between error score and correct score.
Time: Not reported.
Author: Arthur Benton.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Benton Revised Visual Retention Test is a widely used instrument that assesses visual perception, visual memory, and visuoconstructive abilities. Because it measures perception of spatial relations and memory for newly learned material, it is used in clinical diagnosis of brain damage and dysfunction in children and adults, as well as in research. The Benton, as it is usually called, has three alternate forms, each of which consists of ten designs. In addition, there are four possible modes of administration.
Scoring: Test interpretation is based on an assessment of the number and types of errors made and involves several levels of analysis for diagnostic purposes. The examiner compares the examinee’s obtained scores with the expected scores found in the norm tables. When examining the difference between these scores for the number correct, the wider the discrepancy in favor of the expected score, the more probable it is that the examinee has suffered neurological impairment.
Reliability: The interscorer agreement for total error score is high (r = .95) and for major categories of errors reliability is moderate to high (r = .66 to .97). The category of errors having the lowest interscorer reliability is substitutions (.66), whereas distortion and omission/addition categories produce a correlation of .75. All other categories have correlations over .85. Alternate form reliability for Forms C, D, and E is high (r= .85) for Administration A. The multiple-choice forms (F and G) are reported to have a moderate internal consistency, split-half reliability is .76. To determine test-retest reliability, Administration C was given to 194 Kindergarten children twice in a four-month interval. The correlation of .75 between the two sets of scores is very promising.
Validity: A correlation of .42 was found between the Benton and the Digit Span WAIS subtest. This low correlation indicates discriminate validity since the Benton was created to supplement the Digit Span test. Various studies have examined the ability of the Benton to assist in the diagnosis. Using a cutoff score of -3, the test identified as brain-injured 22% of the suspected brain injured, 24% of the true brain injured, and 6% of normals.
Norms: 600 people were used in the norming of this test, but the manual does not indicate the demographic distribution of its sample.
Suggested Uses: The Benton is recommended for use as part of a neuropsychological battery to assess specific dysfunction.
Benton Visual Retention Test
Purpose: Designed to evaluate interpersonal behavior and social interaction within normal individuals. Population: Ages 13 and over.
Scores: Inventory produces 18 scale scores.
Time: (45-60) minutes.
Author: Harrison Gough
Publisher: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
Description: The purpose of the CPI scales is stated by the author as follows: “Each scale is designed to forecast what a person will say or do under defined conditions, and to identify individuals who will be described in characteristic ways by others who know them well or who observe their behavior in particular contexts. The scales are grouped for convenience into four broad categories, bringing together those having related implications. The underlying logic here is interpretational, not factorial, i.e., these four categories do not necessarily constitute psychometric entities.”
Scoring: The items on the inventory produce scores for 18 scales, which are divided into four classes: measures of poise, ascendancy, self-assurance and inter-personal adequacy; measures of socialization, responsibility, intra-personal values, and character; measures of achievement potential and intellectual efficiency; and measures of intellectual and interest modes.
Reliability: The manual contains no information on reliability.
Validity: Correlations between individual CPI scales and relevant external criteria fall in the .2 to .5 range. Such relationships are typical in personality research, and extremely high correlations are unlikely to be found since the scales are developed to assess rather broad behavioral tendencies. The manual contains no information on item intercorrelations and factorial analyses.
Norms: The manual contains no information on norms.
Suggested Uses: Using the CPI as a research tool and as an assessment device for adolescents and adults have been popular among psychologists.
California Psychological Inventory
Purpose: Designed to assess “social competence” and “behavior problems” in children. Population: Ages 4-18.
Score: Five scale scores.
Time: Not reported.
Authors: Thomas M. Achenbach and Craig Edelbrock.
Publisher: Thomas M. Achenbach.
Description: The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) was designed to address the problem of defining child behavior problems empirically. It is based on a careful review of the literature and carefully conducted empirical studies. It is designed to assess in a standardized format the behavioral problems and social competencies of children as reported by parents.
Scoring: The CBCL can be self-administered or administered by an interviewer. It consists of 118 items related to behavior problems which are scored on a 3-point scale ranging from not true to often true of the child. There are also 20 social competency items used to obtain parents’ reports of the amount and quality of their child’s participation in sports, hobbies, games, activities, organizations, jobs and chores, friendships, how well the child gets along with others and plays and works by him/herself, and school functioning.
Reliability: Individual item intraclass correlations (ICC) of greater than .90 were obtained “between item scores obtained from mothers filling out the CBCL at 1-week intervals, mothers and fathers filling out the CBCL on their clinically-referred children, and three different interviewers obtaining CBCLs from parents of demographically matched triads of children.” Stability of ICCs over a 3-month period were .84 for behavior problems and .97 for social competencies. Test-retest reliability of mothers’ ratings were .89. Some differences were found between mothers’ and fathers’ individual ratings. Validity: Several studies have supported the construct validity of the instrument. Tests of criterion-related validity using clinical status as the criterion (referred/non-referred) also support the validity of the instrument. Importantly, demographic variables such as race and SES accounted for a relatively small proportion of score variance.
Norms:Normative data, obtained from parents of 1,300 children, were heterogeneous with respect to race and socioeconomic status and were proportionate to the composition of the general U.S. population.
Suggested Uses: It is suggested that the CBCL is a viable tool for assessing a child’s behaviors, via parent report, in a clinical or research environment.
Child Behavior Checklist
Purpose: Designed as a projective method of describing personality. Population: Ages 3 to 10 years.
Score: N/A.
Time: (30) minutes.
Authors: Leopold Bellak and Sonya Sorel Bellak.
Publisher: C.P.S., Inc.
Description: The Children’s Apperception Test (CAT-A) is a projective method of describing personality by studying individual differences in the responses made to stimuli presented in the form of pictures of animals in selected settings. The 10 items consist of 10 scenes showing a variety of animal figures, mostly in unmistakably human social settings. The use of animal rather than human figures was based on the assumption that children of these ages would identify more readily with appealing drawings of animals than with drawings of humans. The author discusses interpretation on the basis of psychoanalytic themes, but there is no compelling reason that Children’s Apperception Test protocols could not be interpreted from other theoretical frameworks.
Scoring: This projective technique is not “scored” in a quantitative sense. The gist of stores is recorded, and the presence or absence of thematic elements is indicated on the form provided.
Reliability and Validity: No statistical information is provided on the technical validity and reliability of the CAT.
Norms: Information on norms is not included in the manual.
Suggested Uses: Designed for use in clinical and research settings.
Children’s Apperception Test
Purpose: Designed to assess attention-deficit/hyperactivity (ADHD) and related problems in children. Population: Children, aged 3 years through 17 years.
Score: Short and long versions of parent, teacher, and self-report forms with subscales.
Time: 20 minutes or less, longer for reading disabilities, ESL, or psychiatric problems.
Author: C. Keith Conners
Publisher: MHS
Description: The Connors Rating Scale - Revised (CRS-R) updates the original Conners’ Rating Scale, provides three scales rather than two, with long and short versions of each scale. The “Hyperactivity Index” had been renamed the Conners’ Global Index, and is included on the forms for teachers and parents. While the long versions require more time to complete, they correspond more closely to the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV, APA, 1994). The short version is useful when time is limited or when repeated administrations are needed.
Scoring: Computer programs are available for scoring, calculating standardized T-scores from raw scores, and providing graphic display and a report of the results.
Reliability: The coefficient alphas for internal reliability were highly satisfactory for the normative groups. For the long form there was a range from .728 to .942 and .857 to .938 for the short form of the CRS-R, indicating that the CRS-R subscales are accurate in measuring the constructs they were intended to measure. Validity:OneTheCRS-RhasbeencomparedtotheCDI,TheCRS,andtheCPToverallindex. Correlationswere also done between the teacher, parent, and adolescent ratings. The results indicate that the CRS-R does in fact identify childhood and adolescent ADHD behavioral problems and psychopathology. Validity studies are continuing. Norms: The normative sample consisted of over 8000 cases. Data are from over 200 schools in over 45 states and 10 provinces throughout the US and Canada for parents, teacher and self-reports was included.
Suggested use: The main use of the CRS-R is for the assessment of ADHD. The subscales however provide information useful for assessment of conduct problems, cognitive problems, family problems, emotional, anger control and anxiety problems. The CRS-R can be used for screening, for treatment monitoring, as a research instrument, and as a clinical diagnostic aid.
Conners’ Rating Scales - Revised
Purpose: Designed to assess the cognitive ability and achievement of children.
Population: Children, aged 2 years 6 months through 17 years 11 months.
Scores: General Conceptual Ability, cluster scores and core subtest scores.
Time: (25-65) minutes for Preschool level, (40 –65) minutes for School-Age Level on the Cognitive Battery, (15- 25) minutes for the School Achievement tests.
Author: Colin D. Elliott
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation
Description: The Differential Ability Scales is an individually administered test battery intending to measure cognitive and achievement levels for children for classification and diagnostic purposes. Its diverse nature makes it possible to profile a child’s strengths and weaknesses. This instrument intends to provide a wider range of measurement possibilities than found in other similar batteries. The tasks and scores of the DAS are said to reflect a wide range of theories to accommodate a variety of theoretical views. It consists of 20 subtests, 17 cognitive and 3 achievement subtests yielding an overall cognitive ability score and achievement scores. Differences between cognitive abilities and between cognitive ability and achievement can be explored. Harder or easier sets of items can be administered if high or low ability is expected in out-of-level testing.
Scoring: Scores are obtained on three levels, the General Conceptual Ability (GCA) made up the cluster scores, with a foundation provided by the individual subtests. The GCA score is based on a definition of psychometric g as the general ability of an individual to perform complex mental processing that involves conceptualization and the transformation of information (conceptual and reasoning ability), the cluster scores represent verbal, spatial, and nonverbal reasoning abilities, and the subtest represent specific ability or processes. Special ability scores for Verbal Ability, Nonverbal Reasoning Ability, and Spatial Ability are reported as percentiles and standard scores. Such measures as perceptual and memory skills on the diagnostic subtest are reported by age as both percentile and T scores.
Reliability: The reliability coefficient (IRT in most cases,) was high for The GCA in all ages, with an average of .90 at the lowest preschool lever, and .94 for the upper preschool level. And .95 for the School Age level. Test-retest reliability scores were very stable for the GCA and cluster scores. Ranging from .79 to .94. Tests with high internal reliability were also found to have high test-retest reliability.
Validity: Inter-correlation of subtests and composites by age ranges were 100.3 and 99.7 for GCA, and SNV for ages 2:6 –3:5, 99.6 and 99.8 for ages 3:6-5:11. There were high correlations between the DAS and the WPPSI-R on the composite scores for 4 and 5 year olds. The correlations between the verbal composites of the DAS and the SB-IV composites were reasonably high, at .74 to .77 for 4 and 5 year olds. Correlations with the McCarthy Scales of Children’s Ability (MSCA) showed highest correlations with the Verbal, Perceptual-Performance, or Qualitative scales. For school age level all of the DAS composites correlated highly with the WISC-R Full Scale IQ, and the DAS Verbal ability cluster correlated very highly with the WISC-R Verbal IQ for 8 to 10 year olds and for 14 to 15 year olds. The verbal composites of the DAS and the SB-IV for 9 to 10 year olds also correlated very highly.
Norms: The normative sample included 3,475 children and adolescents representative of the US population census for race/ethnicity, gender, community size, and parent education.
Suggested use: According to the author, the GCA of the DAS is an excellent predictor of academic achievement.
This instrument is able to address a wide variety of referral questions for a broad age range of children in school and clinical settings, as well as in research.
Differential Ability Scales
Purpose: Personality inventory. Population: College and adults. Scores: 15 scores.
Time: (40-55) minutes.
Author: Allen L. Edwards.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS) is a forced choice, objective, non-projective personality inventory, derived from the theory of H. A. Murray, which measures the rating of individuals in fifteen normal needs or motives. On the EPPS there are nine statements used for each scale. Social Desirability ratings have been done for each item, and the pairing of items attempts to match items of approximately equal social desirability. Fifteen pairs of items are repeated twice for the consistency scale.
Scoring: The EPPS consists of 15 scales: achievement, deference, order, exhibition, autonomy, affiliation, interception, succorance, dominance, abasement, nurturance, change, endurance, heterosexuality, and aggression.
Reliability: Split-half reliability coefficients, or coefficients of internal consistency for 1,509 students in the college normative group range from .60 to .87 with a median of .78. The author also presents test-retest stability coefficients with a one-week interval. These are based on a sample of 89 students and range from .55 to .87 with a median of .73. Other researchers have reported similar results over a three-week period, showing correlations of .55 to 87 with a median of .73.
Validity: The manual reports studies comparing the EPPS with the Guilford Martin Personality Inventory and the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale. Other researchers have correlated the California Psychological Inventory, the Adjective Check List, the Thematic Apperception Test, the Strong Vocational Interest Blank, and the MMPI with the EPPS. In these studies there are often statistically significant correlations among the scales of these tests and the EPPS, but the relationships are usually low-to-moderate and often are difficult for the researcher to explain.
Norms: 1,509 students in college.
Suggested Uses: Recommended primarily for instructional value and research settings.
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule
Purpose: Developed as a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery. Population: Ages 5-8, 9-14, 15 and over.
Scores: One combined score: Halstead impairment index.
Time: Not reported.
Author: Ralph M. Reitan
Publisher: Reitan Neuropsychology Laboratories, University of Arizona.
Description: The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery (HRNB) was developed to predict the presence of brain damage while offering a comprehensive view of a patient’s individual functions. The purpose of this battery is to provide the clinician with a database for inferring the nature, location, and extent of the structural changes in the brain that may underlie and explain the pattern of intact and impaired functions derived from the measures and qualitative information yielded by the battery. The present battery consists of 10 tests which have been shown empirically to best discriminate between normals and patients with documented cortical damage. The authors offer convincing data favoring clearer brain damage localization with the HRNB for acute lesions rather than more chronic neuropathology.
Scoring: The battery includes tests purported to measure elements of memory, abstract thought, language, sensory-motor integration, imperception, and motor dexterity.
Reliability: Information on reliability is not included in the manual.
Validity: The battery has been shown to discriminate normal controls from patients with brain damage with considerable accuracy (84-98%). The normative base for establishing a profile of individual standard score patterns can be found in a large collection of studies designed to demonstrate validity of the battery to differentiate (1) organic neurological from normal populations, (2) organic neurological from functional psychiatric populations, (3) focal from diffuse neurological disease, (4) regional focal cerebral dysfunction by major zones, and (5) the etiological conditions associated with individual differences in outcome pattern.
Norms: The manual reports no standardization or normative data, but relies upon the body of research which has evolved for the past 30 years with the battery.
Suggested Uses: It is suggested that the HRNB is a more than adequate neuropsychological instrument for use in clinical and research settings.
Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery
Purpose: Designed to measure school achievement of children. Population: Grades 1-12.
Score: Age and grade norms.
Time: (60-75) minutes.
Authors: Alan S. Kaufman and Nadeen L. Kaufman.
Publisher: American Guidance Service.
Description: The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (K-TEA) was designed to measure school achievement of children enrolled in Grades 1-12. It consists of two overlapping forms: Comprehensive and Brief. The Brief Form globally samples the areas of reading, mathematics, and spelling, whereas the Comprehensive Form measures more specific skills in the areas of reading decoding and comprehension, mathematics applications and computation, and spelling. Norm- referenced measures are included in both forms. The Comprehensive Form also provides criterion-referenced assessment data to analyze the students’ errors in each subtest content area. Additionally, all standard scores in both forms are set at a mean of 100, with a standard deviation of 15, to allow for comparisons between the K-TEA and previously obtained standard IQ scores.
Scoring: The Comprehensive Form subtests include: Mathematics/Applications (60 items), Reading/Decoding (60 items), Spelling (50 items), Reading/Comprehension (50 items), and Mathematics/Computation (60 items). Raw scores can be converted to age and grade norms.
Reliability: The overall reliability coefficients ranged from .87 to .95 for all ages. Internal consistency showed strong reliability in this area. Coefficients ranged from .77 to .85 by grade level and from .82 to .88 by age group. Test-retest intervals ranged from 1 to 35 days. In most cases the results showed a .90 or better test-retest coefficient. Because there are two forms of the K-TEA (Brief and Comprehensive), reliability between the two was examined. The overall results showed interform reliability coefficients to be in the low .90s, with a range from .87 to .96 for the different grade levels and .90 to .97 for the separate age groups. Interform reliability coefficients in the areas of reading were higher (in the .90s) for younger children and fell into the upper .70s for older children.
Validity: Data that correlate performance on both forms of the K-TEA with other achievement tests are presented in the manual. The other tests included the Wide Range Achievement Test, the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT), the Metropolitan Achievement Test, the Stanford Achievement Test, and the K-ABC. The test authors present data to support relatively strong correlations on most of these measures (e.g., K-ABC ranged from .83 to .88; PIAT ranged from .75 to .86). Norms: The standardization sample was representative with regard to geographic region, sex, socioeconomic status, and educational level of parents.
Suggested Uses: The K-TEA is recommended for achievement assessment in educational and research settings.
Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement
Purpose: Designed as an objective personality measure for adolescents. Population: Ages 13 to 18 years.
Score: 8 personality-style dimensions.
Time: Not reported.
Authors: Theodore Millon, Catherine J. Green, and Robert B. Meagher, Jr.
Publisher: NCS Professional Assessment Services.
Description: The Millon Adolescent Personality inventory (MAPI) is an objective personality measure of the true-false type that assesses a number of personality dimensions, expressed concerns, and behavioral correlates in adolescents aged 13 to 18 years.
Scoring: The inventory comprises eight scales measuring personality styles based on Millon’s theory of personality types; four scales designed to tap subjects’ expressed concerns, such as peer security and acceptance of sexual maturation; and four scales assessing subjects’ actual behavior. The MAPI yields normative scores that are adjusted for personality-trait- prevalence data on each of the personality style, expressed concern, and behavioral correlate scales. A narrative report interprets scores on each of the three sets of scales, identifies noteworthy responses to individual items, lists applicable DSM-III-R diagnoses, and discusses therapeutic implications for use in treatment planning.
Reliability: Two test-retest studies produced stability coefficients generally within the acceptable range. An analysis of the internal consistency of all 20 MAPI scales produced a median reliability coefficient of .74, with a range from .67 to .84. The findings are within the acceptable range for scales of this type.
Validity: Internal validity was established by employing statistical correlation of each of the 150 test items with total scores on each of the 20 scales, subsequent to completion of the initial scale-construction stage. Those test items that displayed a moderate correlation (usually .30 or higher) with any scale other than a theoretically incompatible one were added to that scale. Further validity research was undertaken subsequent to the completion of the final form of the MAPI. In general, the 20 individual scales of the MAPI display moderate correlations in the expected direction with relevant scales of the California Psychological Inventory, 16 PF, and the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule.
Norms: The test was normed on groups of “clinical” and “nonclinical” subjects ranging
in age from 13 to 19 years. The normal group consisted of 1,071 males and 1,086 females enrolled in public and parochial schools in a number of cities in various parts of the United States. The clinical group consisted of 430 adolescents, of whom 325 were outpatients and 105 were inpatients. The sample was 84% white, 11% black, 3% Hispanic, 1% Oriental, and 1% other. The standardization sample roughly matched the estimated percentages for socioeconomic status groups within the general population.
Suggested Uses: The MAPI is recommended for use in clinical and research settings.
Millon Adolescent Personality Inventory
Purpose: Designed to provide treatment information in the areas of personality disorders and clinical syndromes. Population: Adult clinical population 18 and over with 8th grade reading
Scales: 28 clinical personality scores Modified Indices (4), Clinical Personality Patterns (11), Severe Personality Pathology (3), Clinical Syndromes (7), and Severe Clinical Syndromes (3)
Time: approx. 25 minutes
Author: Theodore Millon, Roger Davis, and Carrie Millon
Publisher: NCS Pearson
Description: The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-3rd. Ed. (MCMI-III) is an update of the MCMI-II which represents ongoing research, conceptual developments, and the changes in the DSM-IV. It is a standardized, self- report questionnaire assessing a wide range of information related to personality, emotionality, and test-taking attitude. The MCMI-III contains 175 items which produce 28 scales. Changes to the MCMI-II include addition of the Depressive and PTSD scales. There are 90 new items and 85 that remained the same maintaining the 175 total items of the MCMI-II. Most of the changes had to do with the severity of the symptoms to increase the ability to detect pathology. The items per scale were reduced, keyings were reduced from 953 to 440, and the possible ratings per item reduced from 3 to 2 choices. The instrument is brief in comparison to other personality inventories, it has a strong theoretical basis, administration and scoring are simple, and it has a multi-axial format. Scoring: The MMCI-III consists of 28 p\clinical personality scales, Modifying Indices (Disclosure, Desirability, Debasement, Validity), Clinical Personality Patterns (Schizoid, Avoidant, Depressive, Dependent, Histrionic, Narcissistic, Antisocial, Aggressive (Sadistic), Compulsive, Passive-Aggressive (Negativistic), Self-Defeating), Severe Personality Pathology (Schizotypal, Borderline, Paranoid), Clinical Syndromes (Anxiety, Somatoform, Bipolar: Manic, Dysthymia, Alcohol Dependence, Drug Dependence, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), Severe Clinical Syndromes (Thought Disorder, Major Depression, Delusional Disorder).
Reliability: For the MCMI-III the internal consistency measures have been strong. The alpha coefficients exceed . 80 for 20 of the 26 scales. The Depression scale had a high of .90, and the Compulsive scale was low at .66. Test-retest reliability, interval of 5 to 14 days, was equally high with a median of .91.
Validity: Factor analysis supports the organization of the scales. Many correlation have been made between the MCMI-III and related instruments, for example, the Beck Depression Inventory correlated with the MCMI-III Major Depression (.74) and Dysthymia (.71). High correlations were also found between the MMPI-2 and the MCMI- III Major Depression (.71) and Dysthymia (.68). While there have been some surprising results, with moderate or low correlations, most of the findings have been in the expected direction.
Norms: The instrument was normed with psychiatric patients and uses a new weighted score, the Base Rate Score (BRS) that takes into account the prevalence of the specific disorder in the psychiatric population. The normative data and transformation scores are based entirely on clinical samples and are applicable only to individuals who evidence problematic emotional and interpersonal symptoms or who are undergoing professional psychotherapy or a psychodiagnostic evaluation.
Suggested use: MCMI-III is used primarily in clinical settings with individuals who require mental health services for emotional, social, or interpersonal difficulties. One reviewer states that he considers this test as one of the greatest contributions made to the field during his professional life.
Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory - 3rd Ed.
Purpose: Designed as an objective personality test for the assessment of psychopathology. Population: Adults.
Score: Reports scores for the various scales.
Time: (40-90) minutes.
Authors: Starke Hathaway and J. Charnley McKinley.
Publisher: University of Minnesota Press.
Description: The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) is a broad-based test designed to assess a number of major patterns of personality, emotional, and behavioral disorders. It consists of 567 statements that a subject mark true or false. The test provides internal checks that determine if the general requirements have not been satisfied. Scoring: The inventory is scored in subunits, eight of which are conventionally termed clinical scales and provide the clinical profile. The clinical scales are Scale 1 (Hypochondriasis); Scale 2 (Depression); Scale 3 (Hysteria); Scale 4 (Psychopathic Deviate); Scale 6 (Paranoia); Scale 7 (Psychasthenia); Scale 8 (Schizophrenia); and Scale 9 (Hypomania). Two other scales were added from within the original item pool. Scale 5 (Masculinity-femininity) was developed along with the eight clinical scales. Shortly after, Scale 0 (Social Introversion) was added. Three additional measures were designed to estimate the validity of the clinical profile. The L (Lie) Scale has statements dealing with a common, relatively insignificant weakness to which most people are willing to confess. The F (Infrequency) Scale is made up of statements that were answered in the keyed direction by less than 10% of the inventory’s original standardization group. The K Scale was designed to trap the respondent who attempts to conceal actual psychopathology.
Reliability: Reliability information on the new MMPI-2 basic scales was computed from test-retest data on 82 males and 111 females retested after a median of 7 days. Correlation coefficients ranged from .67 to .92 for males (median r = .82), and from .58 to .91 for the females (median r = .79).
Validity: Additional validity indicators have been developed for MMPI-2. The FB (Back F) scales identifies individuals who
are likely to be completing the inventory in an invalid manner. Also, the VRIN (Variable Response Inconsistency) and TRIN (True Response Inconsistency) scales provide an index of a subject’s tendency to respond in ways that are either inconsistent or contradictory.
Norms: The restandardization sample for the MMPI-2, comprised of subjects between the ages of 18 and 90 (1,138 males and 1,462 females) was drawn from communities in California, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington, in addition to proportionate samples of individuals from a federal Indian reservation and various military bases. Suggested Uses: Uses include screening, assessment, selection, and prediction applications in both research and clinical settings.
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2
Purpose: Designed to classify individuals according to Jungian theory. Population: High school and college students.
Score: Two types of scores on the four given dimensions.
Time: Not reported.
Authors: Isabel Briggs Myers and Katharine C. Briggs.
Publisher: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
Description: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a forced-choice, self-report inventory that attempts to classify individuals according to an adaptation of Carl Jung’s theory of conscious psychological type. There is the assumption that human behavior, perceived as random and diverse, is actually quite orderly and consistent. This view supposes that the observed variability is due to “certain basic differences in the way people prefer to use perception and judgment.” The MBTI should be regarded “as affording hypotheses for further testing and verification rather than infallible expectations of all behaviors.”
Scoring: The MBTI classifies individuals along four theoretically independent dimensions. The first dimension is a general attitude toward the world, either extraverted (E) or introverted (I). The second dimension, perception, describes a function and is divided between sensation (S) and intuition (N). The third dimension, also a function, is that of processing. Once information is received, it is processed in either a thinking (T) or feeling (F) style. The final dimension is judging (J) versus perceiving (P).
Reliability: With test-retest intervals from five weeks to 21 months, reliability coefficients range from .73 to .83 for E-I, .69 to . 87 for S-N, .56 to .82 for T-F, and .60 to .87 for J-P. Phi coefficient estimates measuring internal consistency range from .55 to .65 (E-I), .64 to .73 (S-N), .43 to .75 (T-F), and .58 to .84 (J-P). These reliabilities are similar to other self-report inventories.
Validity: The MBTI manual provides correlational data with the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Study of Values (AVL), the Cray- Wheelwright Psychological Type Questionnaire (also known as the Jungian Type Survey), The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS), the Personality Research Inventory (PRI), the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), and the Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB), among others. The Sixteen Personality Factors Test (16PF) and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale have also been correlated with the MBTI. These numerous correlational studies indicate that “. . . a wealth of circumstantial evidence has been gathered and results appear to be quite consistent with Jungian theory.” Examination of data on individual MRTI scales demonstrates the behaviors and attitudes which the MBTI appears to tap, suggesting a strong argument for construct validity.
Norms: No general adult sample distribution is available; high school or college distributions are the comparison groups. Little empirical information is available on minorities or on blue-collar workers.
Suggested Uses: Recommended for use in research or clinical settings.
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Purpose: Designed to measure five major dimensions or domains of normal adult personality. Population: Ages 17 and older.
Scores: 30 facet scores and 5 domain scores.
Time: (30-40) minutes.
Authors: Paul T. Costa, Jr. and Robert R. McCrae.
Publisher: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Description: The NEO-PI-R is the most recent version of Costa and McCrae’s instrument to assess normal adult personality using the five-factor model taxonomy of personality. It is one of the few commercially available test based on this model. Scoring: The NEO-P-R assesses five major domains of personality: Neuroticism (N), Extroversion (E), Openness to Experience (O), Agreeableness (A), and Conscientiousness (C), each represented by six lower level facet scale scores. It is available in three formats: self-report and observer-report versions and the NEO-FFI, a 60-item short form of the instrument. Reliability: Domain level reliabilities range from .86 to .95 for both the self and observer rating forms of this instrument. Facet level reliabilities are good ranging from .56 to .90 for both self- and observer-report forms of the NEO-PI-R. Short-term test-retest reliability has been found with the NEO-FFI and the NEO-PI-R. Long-term test-retest reliability has been shown for the N, E, and O domains for the previous version of this instrument.
Validity: There is strong consensual validity between self, peer, and spouse reports of the test. Construct, convergent, and divergent validity evidence for the scales has been collected by Costa and McCrae. NEO-PI-R scales correlated with analogous scales from other instruments.
Norms: Norms are based on a sample of 1,000 subjects (500 males, 500 females) selected from three large scale studies of the NEO-PI-R. The normative sample was stratified to match 1995 U.S. Census projections for age, gender, and race. Separate norms are also provided for college-aged samples.
Suggested Uses: It is recommended that these scales are useful tools for personality assessment and may provide a useful bridge between basic research in personality psychology and applied psychology.
NEO Personality Inventory - Revised
Purpose: Designed as a test of receptive vocabulary achievement and verbal ability. Population: (English speaking) individuals ages 2:6 through 90+ years
Score: Standard scores range from 40 to 160.
Time: (11-12) minutes for most people.
Author: Lloyd M. Dunn and Leota M. Dunn
Publisher: American Guidance Service
Description: The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Third Edition (PPVT-III) updates the PPVT of 1959 and the PPVT-R of 1981, and like them is an individually administered, un-timed, norm-referenced, wide-range test with two parallel forms. The 204 items on each form are grouped into 17 sets of 12 items of 4 black and white illustrations forming a picture plate. The original PPVT used 300 stimulus words, 150 on each form of the test. In the development of the PPVT-III item pool, national tryouts were used to eliminate stimulus words that were biased by gender, region, race or ethnicity. The test has two parallel forms, requires no oral or written responses and no reading by the examinee.
Scoring: Rapid and objective scoring is done while the test in being administered. Raw scores are converted into normative scores.
Reliability: The alpha reliabilities for the 25 standardized age groups were between .92 and .98 with a median reliability of .95 for both forms. The split-half reliabilities for the 25 age groups ranged from .86 to .97, with a median of .94 for both forms. The altenate forms reliabilities range from .88 to .96 with a median correlation of .94. Validity: Correlations of the PPVT-III form A and B scores with scores of the WISC-III VIQ are .91 and .92; with the KAIT Crystallized IQ, .87 and .91; and with the K-BIT Vocabulary score, .82 and .80. Slightly lower correlations with the non-verbal scores were predicted; with the WISC-III PIQ .82 and .84; KAIT Fluid IQ, .76 and.85, and with the K-BIT matrices score, .65 and .62. Full scale IQ on the WISC-III was .90 and .90, KAIT Composite IQ was .85 and .91, K-BIT composite, .78 and .76.
Norms: The normative sample included 2725 persons. And while the original PPVT was standardized only on white children from Tennessee, the normative sample of the PPVT-III was selected to match the data of the 1994 US Census. The sample was stratified with each age group by gender, race/ethnicity, geographic region, and SES. Only individuals who were determined to speak and understand English were included in the testing Suggested use: The PPVT-III is useful in testing preschool children for vocabulary acquisition as an indicator of linguistic and cognitive development. When English is the language of home, school, and community, it can be used as a screening device for verbal ability and for giftedness and for mental retardation. It is a useful test for people who perform poorly on group tests, or for nonreaders and for those with written language problems. For individuals with language impairment, it can provide a measure of linguistic potential, and it is useful for those who are autistic, withdrawn, or have psychotic problems, as speech is not required. Individuals with cerebral palsy or with visual-perceptual problems can also take this test.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - 3rd Edition
Purpose: Designed to provide information relevant to clinical diagnosis, treatment planning, and screening for psychopathology.
Population: Ages 18 years to adult.
Scales: Inconsistency, Infrequency, Negative Impression, Positive Impression, Somatic Complaints, Anxiety, Anxiety- Related Disorders, Depression, Mania, Paranoia, Schizophrenia, Borderline Features, Antisocial Features, Alcohol Problems, Drug Problems, Aggression, Suicidal Ideation, Stress, Nonsupport, Treatment Rejection, Dominance, Warmth.
Total Time: (40-50) minutes.
Author: Leslie C. Morey
Publisher: Psychological Assessment Resources
Description: The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), is a self-report inventory of adult psychopathology. It was designed as a multidimensional alternative to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) for assessing abnormal personality traits. The PAI is a self-report questionnaire consisting of 344 items (scored on a 4-point ordinal scale: F = False; ST = Slightly True; MT = Mainly True; VT = Very True). The PAI includes current items, and avoids colloquial and slang expressions. Items considered potentially biased (on gender, ethnic, economic, religious or other grounds) were excluded. The PAI manual is both comprehensive and informative. Scoring: The PAI has 22 non-overlapping scales which include 4 validity scales, 11 clinical scales, 5 treatment scales, and 2 interpersonal scales (10 scales are further subdivided into 31 conceptually distinct subscales). Most scales consist of 8, 12, or 24 items with an average grade 4 reading level. Validity scales measure response Inconsistency, Infrequency, Negative Impression, and Positive Impression. Raw scores are plotted on the Profile
Forms, yielding T scores (M=50, SD=10).
Reliability: Alpha coefficients of internal consistency for the 22 scales were median .81, median .82, and median . 86 for the normative, college, and clinical samples. Inter item correlations were low, indicating independent content of most items within each scale Median test-retest coefficients over 2-4 weeks showed stability with median alphas exceeding .80.
Validity: Concurrent validity correlations of the PAI validity, clinical, treatment, and interpersonal scales with several other personality instruments (e.g., MMPI, STAI, Beck Scales, Wahler Physical Symptoms Inventory, Fear Survey Schedule) reveal many small to moderate coefficients, suggesting only relatively modest common variance. Exploratory factor analyses based on the scale and subscale intercorrelations for the standardization and clinical samples are methodologically questionable.
Norms: There were three samples, all comprised of at least 1,000 individuals; community-dwelling adults stratified on gender, race, and age according to 1995 U.S. Census projections, clinical patients; and college students (all samples comprised at least 1,000 individuals).
Suggested use: The PAI is intended to provide information relevant to clinical diagnoses, treatment planning and screening for psychopathology.
Personality Assessment Inventory
Purpose: Designed to assess personality characteristics. Population: Grades 7-16 and adults, college.
Score: 15 scores.
Time: (30-45) minutes.
Author: Douglas N. Jackson.
Publisher: Research Psychologists Press, Inc.
Description: Development of the Personality Research Form (PRF) was guided by the belief that more rigorous and valid assessment of personality characteristics could be achieved through the application of modern principles of personality and test theory. The goals established for the PRF were to develop an item pool and a set of personality scales relevant to normal human functioning in a wide variety of situations.
Scoring: There are 15 scores, which include: achievement, affiliation, aggression, autonomy, dominance, endurance, exhibition, harm avoidance, impulsivity, nurturance, order, play, social recognition, understanding, and infrequency. Reliability: The odd-even reliabilities, adjusted using the Spearman-Brown correction, were calculated from the responses of 192 subjects. The reliability estimates for the personality scales ranged from .48 to .90, with a median reliability of about . 78. The reliabilities of the Desirability (validity) Scale ranged from .59 to .66, and those of the Infrequency (validity) Scale ranged from .33 to .57. Test-retest reliability estimates ranged from .57 to .85, with a median of .77.
Validity: The PRF manual contains nine tables reporting correlations between scales on various forms of the PRF and scales on other tests. Reported are the relationships between the PRF-AA and the CPI and Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB), the PRF-A and the Allport Vernon Lindzey Study of Values (SOV), and the PRF-E and the JPI, Jackson Vocational Interest Survey (JVIS), Bentler Psychological Inventory (BPI), Bentler Interactive Psychological Inventory (BIPI), and Cattell’s High School Personality Questionnaire (HSPQ). In general, the PRF scales have higher correlations with scales from the other instruments measuring the same or a similar construct (e.g., dominance-leadership) than with scales measuring different or antithetical constructs.
Norms: The normative sample consisted of 1,029 male and 1,002 female college students selected to represent a stratified random sample by regions of the United States.
Suggested Uses: The PRF is recommended for use in personality research and for measuring normal personality traits in settings such as schools, colleges, clinics, guidance centers, business, and industry.
Personality Research Form
Purpose: Designed to measure a person’s ability to form perceptual relations. Population: Ages 6 to adult.
Score: Percentile ranks.
Time: (45) minutes.
Author: J.C. Raven.
Publisher: U.S. Distributor: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM) was designed to measure a person’s ability to form perceptual relations and to reason by analogy independent of language and formal schooling, and may be used with persons ranging in age from 6 years to adult. It is the first and most widely used of three instruments known as the Raven’s Progressive Matrices, the other two being the Coloured Progressive Matrices (CPM) and the Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM). All three tests are measures of Spearman’s g.
Scoring: The SPM consists of 60 items arranged in five sets (A, B, C, D, & E) of 12 items each. Each item contains a figure with a missing piece. Below the figure are either six (sets A & B) or eight (sets C through E) alternative pieces to complete the figure, only one of which is correct. Each set involves a different principle or “theme” for obtaining the missing piece, and within a set the items are roughly arranged in increasing order of difficulty. The raw score is typically converted to a percentile rank by using the appropriate norms.
Reliability: Internal consistency studies using either the split-half method corrected for length or KR20 estimates result in values ranging from .60 to .98, with a median of .90. Test-retest correlations range from a low of .46 for an eleven-year
interval to a high of .97 for a two-day interval. The median test-retest value is approximately .82. Coefficients close to this median value have been obtained with time intervals of a week to several weeks, with longer intervals associated with smaller values. Raven provided test-retest coefficients for several age groups: .88 (13 yrs. plus), .93 (under 30 yrs.), .88 (30- 39 yrs.), .87 (40-49 yrs.), .83 (50 yrs. and over).
Validity: Spearman considered the SPM to be the best measure of g. When evaluated by factor analytic methods which were used to define g initially, the SPM comes as close to measuring it as one might expect. The majority of studies which have factor analyzed the SPM along with other cognitive measures in Western cultures report loadings higher than .75 on a general factor. Concurrent validity coefficients between the SPM and the Stanford-Binet and Weschler scales range between .54 and .88, with the majority in the .70s and .80s.
Norms: Norm groups included in the manual are: British children between the ages of 6 and 16; Irish children between the ages of 6 and 12; military and civilian subjects between the ages of 20 and 65. A supplement includes norms from Canada, the United States, and Germany.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses include measurement of a person’s ability to form perceptual relations and reason by analogy in research settings.
Raven Standard Progressive Matrices
Purpose: Designed “as a screening instrument of overall adjustment.” Population: College students, adults, high-school students.
Score: Index of Overall Adjustment.
Time: (20-40) minutes.
Authors: Julian Rotter, Michael Lah, and Janet Rafferty.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description:The Second Edition of the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank (RISB) is a projective measure of maladjustment with a semi-objective scoring system. This revised instrument provides direct information on personality conflicts. As scoring depends on intuitive clinical insights, cognizance of personality dynamics is essential for accurate interpretation. Although responses can also be scored qualitatively for projected motivational needs, as a general rule, interpretation of subjective scales is notoriously unreliable.
Scoring: Responses are rated on a 7-point ordinal scale (higher scores suggesting greater maladjustment) on the basis of omissions and incomplete responses, conflict responses, positive responses, or neutral responses. Overall scores generally range from 80 to 205 (on a scale from zero through 240). However, because of the diversity among individuals’ idiosyncratic responses, the RISB cannot readily be computer scored. This inevitably raises questions as to the objectivity and scoring consistency of RISB responses.
Reliability: Several studies reported in the RISB manual suggest uncertain reliability. Stability coefficients are reported as ranging from a low .38 (retest interval of 3 years) up to .82 (retest after only 1-2 weeks), so it cannot be assumed that the instrument is always reliable. Some inconsistency in scoring is evident because although interscorer reliabilities range from . 72 to .99, item-rater reliabilities range from .44 to .93. Because the scoring examples are based solely on college samples, there is the further question as to their applicability for high school and adult groups. A positive feature of this test is its item homogeneity. The manual reports split-half estimates ranging from .74 to .86, and a Cronbach alpha coefficient of .69. This moderate level of item homogeneity suggests little item redundancy, and yet sufficient internal consistency to justify its use. Validity: The RISB relies predominantly on face validity, so that item responses are readily amenable to distortion, depending on respondents’ lack of self-insight, and their conscious and unconscious motives. The instrument may act more effectively as a trait measure than as a state indicator of changes over time, and not be situationally sensitive. Despite these limitations, the RISB has received widespread use in both clinical and nonclinical settings.
Norms: College students.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses of the RISB include screening, tracking changes in scores over time, group comparisons, and research.
Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank, Second Edition
Purpose: Designed to test applicants for clerical positions. Population: Applicants for clerical positions.
Scores: Three scores.
Time: (15) minutes.
Authors: George Bennett and Marjorie Gelink.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Short Employment Tests (SET) is a group of 3 five-minute tests for applicants to clerical positions. According to the authors, SET is “not intended for use with candidates for administrative positions, nor with maintenance employees or factory production workers.”
Scoring: The battery consists of a Verbal (V) test of vocabulary and word knowledge, a 50 item test of general vocabulary; a Numerical (N) test of simple mathematical computations, a 90 item test of the four arithmetic operations; and a Clerical Aptitude (CA) test involving locating a name in a list and classifying a dollar amount next to that name. The tests are short and quickly administered and scored.
Reliability: The manual does not include reliability data on total scores, although subsequent reviewers have established these to be quite high.
Validity: The overall trend in the validity studies is that the total validity coefficients (combining all three tests) are higher than individual test validities. This emphasizes the importance of administering all three tests as opposed to administering only one or two of them. The highest correlations with similar sections of other tests are in the CA test, where all of the correlations are significant at the .01 level.
Norms: Normative data in the 1978 supplement to the original manual are frequently presented in applicant tables involving both sexes. This may result in test administrator confusion when referring to normative data.
Suggested Uses: The SET appears to be a usable employment device for the specific area of clerical applicants.
The Short Employment Tests
Purpose: Designed as an objective personality test. Population: Ages 16 and above.
Score: Sten scores.
Time: 30-60 minutes.
Author: Raymond B. Cattell
Publisher: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.
Description: The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) is an objective test of 16 multidimensional personality attributes arranged in omnibus form. In general, it provides normed references to each of these attributes (the primary scales). Conceptualized and initially developed by Raymond B. Cattell in 1949 as a broad, multipurpose measure of the “source traits” of individual personality, the 16PF is appropriate for a wide range of multifaceted populations. It provides a global representation of an individual’s coping style, the person’s reactive stance to an ever-fluid and transactional environment and that individual’s ability to perceive accurately certain specific environmental requisites for personal behavior.
Scoring: A subject’s raw score for each of the 16 primary factors is obtained through a weighted procedure where particular responses count as “1” or “2” summatively toward the final raw score. These weighted or unweighted sums are then compared to the desired normative score tables in the tabular supplement where a particular sten score is identified based on the magnitudinal range of the response and the individual normative demographics of the respondent. This sten score is entered on the profile form and subsequently depicted graphically for ease of interpretation.
Reliability: Reliability coefficients calculated by test-retest with short intervals (single or multiple day) demonstrate relatively acceptable coefficients, with only sporadic instances of a scale falling below a .70 magnitude. For stability coefficients, test-retest administrations conducted over long intervals (several weeks), magnitudes are expectedly reduced. Intercorrelations between primary factor scales generated from different test forms are seldom greater than .50 when Forms A and B are compared. Fewer coefficients of .50 or more magnitude exist for Forms C and D. Validity: Forms A and B are reported to have the greatest total direct validity where each form has seven scales with validity coefficients of at least .70 magnitude. Indirect construct validities for Forms A, B, C, and D are also reported in the form of multiple correlation coefficients, representing the degree of relationship between each primary scale magnitude and the total remaining primary scale magnitudes in the 16PF. As might be anticipated, correlational coefficients fall below a .80 magnitude in only two instances: .63 for Shrewdness and .74 for Imagination.
Norms: The norms were constructed for high-school juniors and seniors, college students, and a general nation- wide population of age and income levels commensurate with the then current U.S. Bureau of Census figures. Suggested Uses: The 16PF is recommended for use in personality assessment as part of a battery in clinical and research settings.
Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire
Purpose: Designed for the testing of cognitive abilities.
Population: Individuals ages 2 through 85+ years.
Score: Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale Scores.
Time: Varies depending on age and functional level of examinee. Most items are untimed adding to the overall time for administration.
Author: Gale H. Roid.
Publisher: Riverside Publishing.
Description: This fifth edition blends features of earlier editions of the SB with recent improvements in psychometric design. Point-scale format subtests, designed to measure behavior at every age, and used in the 1986 edition are combined with the age-scale or functional-level design of the earlier editions (1916-1937). Two routing subtests identify the developmental starting points of the examinee, and the items can be tailored to cognitive level, resulting in greater precision in measurement. The fifth edition maintains many of the same subtests and items of previous editions, and includes a global g factor and several broad factors at the second level as in the Stanford-Binet Fourth Edition (SB: FE). Changes in the SB5 distinguishing it from the SB: FE, include some modernization of both artwork and content and some additions and enhancement of content. The SB5 now has five factors, (Fluid Reasoning, Knowledge, Quantitative Reasoning, Visual- Spatial Processing, and Working Memory) as opposed to the four of the SB: FE. Many toys and objects have been returned from earlier editions, as they are helpful with early childhood assessment. Unique to the SB5 is the use of a nonverbal mode
of testing covering all five cognitive factors. The range of the scales has been extended to more accurately measure both higher and lower areas of functioning. Changes in the Item and Record Forms are reported to have made the scale more useful for clinical, forensic, school and vocational applications and interpretations. This edition also allows for evaluation of the abilities of elderly examinees.
Scoring: Raw scores are converted into scaled scores (M = 10, SD = 3) using age appropriate tables. The scaled scores are summed for Nonverbal, Verbal and Full Scale IQ as well as for the five factor index scores. These are all normalized standard scores (M = 100, SD = 15). Percentile rank equivalent and the confidence intervals are also obtained. Computerized scoring is faster, provides greater consistency of raw score conversion and is recommended for use whenever available.
Reliability: Using the split half method, and correcting with the Spearman-Brown formula, reliability coefficients were extremely high for the Full Scale Score (.98). The Nonverbal (.95) and Verbal (.96), showed excellent stability, and the Abbreviated Battery (.91) is also considered excellent as it contains only two subtests. The five factor index scores were all above 90, and were higher than the subtest scales, which were however comparable to other cognitive tests with ranges from .84 to .89.
Validity: As with the SB: FE, several studies were done to investigate the validity of the SB5. The first such studies explored the relationship between the SB5 and the SB: FE and the Form L-M. There was a high correlation (.90) between the SB5 Full Scale and the SB: FE Composite Scale. The higher scores of the Composite Scale are explained by the differences in the SD used and the countrywide changes in the IQ (0.3 points per year, as documented by Flynn (1985, 1987). The difference in the Full Scale Score of the SB5 and the one score of the Form L-M was in the direction, but not as great as predicted. Differences in scoring and nonverbal aspects of the tests, as the Full Scale and Verbal Score correlations are high (.85 and .88). Comparisons were also made with other tests such as the WPPSI-R, the WISC-III, the WAIS-III, and the Woodcock-Johnson III test of Cognitive Ability and W-J III Test of Achievement. Correlations ranged from . 78 to .84. for Full Scale or Verbal IQ and comparable scores. This extensive analysis revealed a high correlation between the composite IQ scores of the SB5 and the composite scores of previous SB edition and all of the major IQ batteries used for all populations.
Norms: The standardization consisted of 4,800 subjects’ ages 2 to 85+. Care was taken to assure that the sample was as representative of the US population Census 2001. Stratification variables were age, sex, race / ethnicity, geographic region, and socioeconomic level.
Suggested use: The SB5 are used in diagnosis of mental retardation, learning disabilities, and developmental cognitive delays in young children and for placement in academic programs for the intellectually gifted.
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: 5th Edition (SB5)
Purpose: Designed to study anxiety.
Population: Grades 9-16 and adults.
Score: 2 scores: state anxiety and trait anxiety.
Time: (10-20) minutes.
Author: Charles D. Spielberger, Richard L. Gorusch, and Robert E. Lushene.
Publisher: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
Description: The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) was initially conceptualized as a research instrument for the study of anxiety in adults. It is a self-report assessment device which includes separate measures of state and trait anxiety. According to the author, state anxiety reflects a “transitory emotional state or condition of the human organism that is characterized by subjective, consciously perceived feelings of tension and apprehension, and heightened autonomic nervous system activity.” State anxiety may fluctuate over time and can vary in intensity. In contrast, trait anxiety denotes “relatively stable individual differences in anxiety proneness . . .” and refers to a general tendency to respond with anxiety to perceived threats in the environment.
Scoring and Norms: Scores on the STAI have a direct interpretation: high scores on their respective scales mean more trait or state anxiety and low scores mean less. Both percentile ranks and standard (T) scores are available for male and female working adults in three age groups (19-39, 40-49, and 50-69), male and female high school and college students, male military recruits, male neuropsychiatric patients, male medical patients, and male prison inmates.
Reliability: The stability of the STAI scales was assessed on male and female samples of high school and college students for test-retest intervals ranging from one hour to 104 days. The magnitude of the reliability coefficients decreased as a function of interval length. For the Trait-anxiety scale the coefficients ranged from .65 to .86, whereas the range for the State- anxiety scale was .16 to .62. This low level of stability for the State-anxiety scale is expected since responses to the items on this scale are thought to reflect the influence of whatever transient situational factors exist at the time of testing.
Validity: Correlations are presented in the manual between this scale and other measures of trait-anxiety: the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale, the IPAT Anxiety Scale, and the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List. These correlations are .80, .75, and .52, respectively.
Suggested Uses: Recommended for studying anxiety in research and clinical settings.
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
Purpose: Designed to assess handicapped and non-handicapped persons in their personal and social functioning. Population: Birth to 18 years and low functioning adults.
Score: 13 scores.
Time: 2 editions: Interview Edition (20-60) minutes, Interview Ed., Expanded Form (60-90) minutes.
Authors: Sara S. Sparrow, David A. Balla, and Dominick V. Cicchetti.
Publisher: American Guidance Service.
Description: The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS) were designed to assess handicapped and non-handicapped persons from birth to adulthood in their personal and social functioning. Following Edgar Doll’s original conceptualization of adaptive behavior as multidimensional in structure and his measurement of the behaviors by areas, the VABS is organized around four Behavior Domains: Communication, Daily Living Skills, Socialization, and Motor Skills.
Scoring: Standard score equivalents for domain raw scores and Adaptive Behavior Composite Standard scores were developed by the Angoff and Robertson procedure already familiar to users of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. The manual also provides percentile ranks and stanines (for the domain and Composite scores), adaptive levels (by percentile groups), age equivalents (by raw score conversions) and maladaptive levels (for the Maladaptive Behavior domain.
Reliability: Split-half and test-retest reliability coefficients for the Composite scores are good, ranging from median values of .83 for the Motor Skills domain to .94 for the Composite. Interrater coefficients are lower for the same measures: .62 to . 78. When broken down by subdomains, the coefficients fluctuate a great deal and some are quite low.
Validity: Selected standardization subgroups were compared on the original Vineland, the ABIC, the K-ABC, the PPVT-R, and the VABS. These concurrent measures exhibited low to moderate correlations, with generally higher coefficients obtained when the comparisons were made on subjects with handicapping conditions.
Norms: Standardization sampling followed 1980 census data and included 3,000 subjects from birth through 18-11 equally divided by sex.
Suggested Uses: The VABS is recommended for assessment in clinical and research settings.
Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales
Purpose: Designed to assess learning, memory, and working memory.
Population: Individuals in the age range of 16-89 years.
Score: Eight primary indexes and four supplemental auditory process composites.
Time: (30 - 35) minutes, 25-30 min. between tests, (15-20) min. for optional subtests.
Author: David Wechsler.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: This third edition updates the WMS-R and provides subtest and composite scores that assess memory and attention functions using both auditory and visual stimuli. There are now eight Primary Indexes (Auditory Immediate (was Verbal), Visual Immediate (was Visual), Immediate Memory (new), Auditory Delayed (new), Visual Delayed (new), Auditory Reception Delayed (new), General Memory (only delayed subtest scores), and Working Memory), which constitute Immediate Memory, General (Delayed) Memory, and Working Memory (was Attention/Concentration). This edition retains the index score configuration of the WMS-R, but scale content, administration and scoring procedures have been changed. There is one slight change to the optional Information and Orientation subtest and one item has been deleted and six items added to the Mental Control subtest. The Figural Memory, Visual Paired Associated, and card B of Visual Reproduction subtests have been dropped. There are slight wording and administration changes in Logical Memory, and added subtests help to assess various aspects of visual memory. Requires strict and discreet timing for certain subtests.
Scoring: Requires verbatim recording of responses for subjective scoring on many sub-tests.
Reliability: The reliability coefficients for the WMS-III Primary subtests and Primary Indexes were on average found to be higher than for the WMS-R. Internal consistency reliability coefficients ranged for .70s to the .90s.
Validity: Correlation with the WMS-R was not direct because of the many changes in the scales. The Verbal Memory of the WMS-R had a .72 correlation coefficient with the Auditory Immediate, .68 with the Auditory Delayed, and .65 with General Memory of the WMS-III. The General Memory of the WMS-R and the Auditory Immediate .73, Auditory Delay .69, and general memory .67 of the WMS-III. As expected the correlations were lower for visually presented material with .34 for verbal memory and visual memory indexes. When correlated with the Children’s Memory Scale, the WMS-III auditory indexes correlated highest with the corresponding CMS indexes. Studies comparing the WMS-III and the WIAT show highest correlations between the WMS-III auditory indexes and working memory indexes and the WIAT subtests and composites, similar to results found with the CMS and the WIAT. In comparing the WMS-III with the WAIS-III there is a pattern of the auditory memory correlating more strongly with the VIQ and the visual memory measures correlating more strongly with the PIQ as an indication of convergent and divergent validity; while they are related, they measure different constructs.
Norms: The normative sample for the WMS-R included six age groups of 50 subjects each for a total sample of 300 aged 16 to 74 years. In contrast the WMS-III standardization sample, stratified to be representative of the general population included 1250 individuals aged 16-89 years.
Suggested use: The WMS-III provides a more detailed analysis of memory function. When used in conjunction with the WAIS-III, meaningful comparisons between intellectual ability and memory functions can be made.
Wechsler Memory Scale –3rd Edition (WMS-III)
Purpose: Designed as a comprehensive test of cognitive ability for adults. Population: Ages 16-89.
Score: Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and Full Scale IQ.
Time: (60 - 90) minutes.
Author: David Wechsler.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition updates the WAIS-R, represents contemporary updated norms, and extends the age range. Some items have been modified, and there is greater discrimination for individuals in the mild to moderate mental retardation range as the floor has been extended. The artwork has been updated, but has been criticized as being distracting and overly detailed and discriminating against disadvantaged individuals, while the colors are thought to be potentially unfair to color blind individuals. There is less emphasis on timed performance, the new Matrix Reasoning subtest provides a better measure of fluid intelligence, the Letter-Number Sequencing subtest measures working memory, and the Symbol Search subtest (adapted from the WISC-III) measures processing speed. These changes strengthen the theoretical basis and statistical linkage to other measures of achievement and cognitive functioning.
Scoring: There are 14 subtests making up the Verbal and Performance Scales with 7 subtests each, however three of the subtests are supplemental or optional. Letter-Number Sequencing is a supplementary subtest for the Verbal Scale but must be administered for computing the Working Memory Index Score. Matrix Reasoning and Symbol Search are additions to the Performance Scale, and are also parts of the Perceptual Organization and the Processing Speed Indexes respectively. Eleven subtests are used to compute the IQ scores. There are four index scores, Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, Working Memory and Processing Speed Indexes also comprised of eleven subtests. While scoring rules and reverse rules are implemented consistently, and improvements in the presentation, scoring criteria and queries and prompts, are noted, some items seem to be marked arbitrarily for query, and complex judgments are sometimes required for scoring.
Reliability: Extensive testing of reliability was an emphasis of the WAIS-III. The split-half reliability coefficients are outstanding for the Full Scale IQ, the Verbal IQ, and the VCI, and are excellent for the Performance IQ, POI, and WMI. For most of the subtests the split-half reliabilities are excellent, however for the Object Assembly and the Picture Arrangement is below .75 for many of the age levels. There is less than excellent test-retest stability for the Letter-Number Sequencing, Picture Arrangement, or Object Assembly, and the PO and PS factors do not appear as separate constructs for the oldest age group. The WAIS-III helps to provide information about the interrelationships of a broad array of cognitive abilities as it is statistically linked to the WIAT and the WMS-III. Validity: Evidence of concurrent validity of the WAIS-III and WAIS-R, WISC-III, WIAT, SB: FE has been provided, and the criterion-validity of .88 for the SB: FE and a range of .53-.81 with WIAT composites.
Norms: The normative sample was stratified for many key variables and was consistent with the latest census data. Oversampling was done for research on educational level and cognitive abilities, and to perform item bias analyses for African-American and Hispanic individuals. Another strength of the WAIS-III standardization sample was that the FSIQ was extended to 45 to 155 from 46 to 150.
Suggested use: The WAIS-III can be used for assessment of learning disabilities. A sample of LD adults administered the WAIS-III and the WMS-III had low scores on the ACID profile, (Arithmetic, Coding [Digit Symbol- Coding], Information, and Digit Span). Discrepancies among index score were found with LD adult population using the WAIS-III, and may be a stronger way to identify LD. In LD groups, WMI<VCI, and PSI <POI. Therefore combining the WMI and the PSI as in the SCALD profile (Symbol Search, Coding, Arithmetic, Letter-Number Sequencing, and Digit Span) may be useful for investigating LD in adults. The WAIS-III is used for understanding ADHD, for assessment of mental retardation, and interpretation of age related differences in ability, such as age trends in working memory and intelligence.
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – 3rd Edition (WAIS-III)
Purpose: Designed as a general test of cognitive ability for children and adults. Population: Ages 10 and over.
Score: Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale IQ.
Time: (40-60) minutes.
Author: David Wechsler.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Wechsler Bellevue Intelligence Scale (WBIS) is a general test of intelligence, which Wechsler defined as, “… the global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment.” In keeping with this definition of intelligence as an aggregate of mental aptitudes or abilities, the WBIS consists of 11 subtests divided into two parts, verbal and performance.
Scoring: The battery of tests consists of six Verbal and five non-verbal or Performance tests as follows: an information test, a general comprehension test, a memory span test (digits forward and backward), an arithmetical reasoning test, a similarities test, a vocabulary test, a block design test, an object assembly test and a digit symbol test.
Reliability: Reliability coefficients for the subtests range from .62 to .88. The Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and Full Scale IQ have reliability coefficients of .84, .86, and .90, respectively.
Validity: The author investigates correlations between the WBIS and other tests of cognitive ability. The coefficients are as follows: Stanford-Binet, 1937 rev., .62; Otis, .73; Raven Progressive Matrices, .55, and the Army Alpha test, .53.
Norms: The WBIS was standardized on 1750 subjects of both sexes, ages 7-69. This sample’s demographic characteristics are not representative of the United State population.
Suggested Uses: Because of its dated normative and psychometric data, the WBIS is recommended for teaching purposes only.
Wechsler Bellevue Intelligence Scale
Purpose: Designed to as a “measure of a child’s intellectual and cognitive ability.” Population: Children, aged 6 years 0 months through 16 years 11 months. Score: Four Index Scales and a Full Scale Scores.
Time: (65 - 80) minutes for most children.
Author: David Wechsler.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: This fourth edition updates the WISC-III and provides subtest and composite scores representing intellectual functioning in general and specific cognitive abilities. The changes in the WISC-IV represent current research on cognitive development, intellectual assessment and cognitive processes. The revisions also include updated norms, additional subtests, and emphasis on scores reflecting discrete areas of cognitive functioning. New subtests include Word Reasoning, Matrix Reasoning, Picture Concepts, Cancellation, and Letter-Number Sequencing. Former WISC-III subtests that were dropped include Mazes, Object Assembly, and Picture Arrangement.
Scoring: Requires Subtest raw scores are converted into scaled scores that are summed into four index scores. The Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) is composed of three subtests that are mostly verbal, the Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI) uses three subtests that rely less on verbal skills, the Working Memory Index (WMI) consists of items requiring recall and repetition of letters and numbers, and the Processing Speed Index (PSI) uses non-verbal, timed search and coding tests. The optional subtests are not included in the index scores unless they replace a core test.
Reliability: The subtest reliability coefficients for internal consistency ranged from .79 to .90 with a median of .86. These coefficients showed substantial improvement from those of WISC-III subtests. The index scores reliability coefficient ranged from .88 PSI to .97 FS with a median of .92. These are identical to or slightly higher than WISC- III corresponding scales.
Validity: One of the manual reports strong correlations between WISC-IV metrics and comparable metrics from the WISC-III WPPSI-III, WAIS-III, Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI; Wechsler, 1999), WIAT-II, Children’s Memory Scale (CMS; Cohen, 1997) Gifted Youth Version (Bar-On & Parker, 2000), and the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-Second Edition (ABAS-II; Harrison & Oakland, 2003. Evidence of construct validity was also established using matched samples of clinical and non-clinical children.
Norms: One of the major goals was to update the norms to be more representative of the relevant population. The normative sample included 2200 children aged 6:0-16:11 and additional samples from special groups. The sample was stratified on demographic variables of age, sex, race/ethnicity, parent education level, and geographic region based on the March 2000 U.S. census data.
Suggested use: The WISC-IV is an appropriate instrument for practitioners and clinical researchers in assessing children’s intelligence and general cognitive functioning. When used with other assessment tools, it can be useful in identifying giftedness, mental retardation, and cognitive strengths and weaknesses. The test results can be useful in treatment planning, in placement and provision of clinical or educational services, and can add important information to a neuropsychological evaluation.
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – 4th Edition (WISC-IV)
Purpose: Designed to measure intellectual abilities and academic achievement.
Population: Children, aged 2:6 years through 7:3 years.
Scales: Verbal, Performance, Full Scale IQS, Processing Speed Quotient, and General Language Composite Time: 30-35 minutes for children aged 2:6-3:11 and 40-50 minutes for ages 4-7:11.
Author: David Wechsler
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation
Description: The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence - Third Edition is a revision of the WPPSI- R and has extended the age range, updated the norms, added new subtests and composite scores, and claims to have a developmentally appropriate structure based on contemporary intelligence and cognitive development theory. The artwork has been updated, and some the test material has been made more child-friendly and engaging. Some modifications in the administration and scoring make the scales easier to use.
Scoring: The WPPSI-III contains 4 core subtests for ages 2:6 to 3:11; Receptive Vocabulary, Information, (VIQ) Block Design, Object Assembly (PIQ), and 7 for ages 4:0 to 7:3; Information, Vocabulary, Word Reasoning (VIQ), Block Design, Matrix Reasoning, Picture Concepts (PIQ), and Coding (FSIQ). Supplemental tests for 2:6 to 3:11 group are Picture naming and Receptive Vocabulary (GLC). For the 4 to 7:3 group the supplementary tests are Symbol Search, Comprehension, Picture Completion, Similarities, Object Assembly (PSQ), and the optional
subtests are Receptive Vocabulary and Picture Naming (GLC). The WPPSI-III employs the Deviation IQ (M=100, SD=15) for the Verbal, Performance and Full Scale IQS, and scaled scores (M=100, SD=3) for the subtests Reliability: The reliability coefficient of the WPPSI-III subtests range from .83 to .95. The reliability coefficients for the composite scales ranged from .89 to .96. Test-retest reliabilities for a mean interval of 26 days for the 2:6 to 3:11 year old group Verbal, Performance, Full and General Language scores were .90, .84, .92 and .92 respectively. For the 4 to 7:3 year old group for Verbal, Performance, Processing Speed, Full and General Language werer.92, .87, .93, .92, and .90 respectively.
Validity: The evidence of previous research that because of the similarity of content, much of the research on the validity of the WPPSI- R The scores derived from the WPPSI-R correlate well with the WPPSI, WISC-R, Stanford Binet (4th ed.), and McCarthy Scales (rs between WPPSI-R FSIQs and other test composites range from .74 to . 90). The correlation between the WPPSI-R FSIQ and the Kaufman-Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) Mental Processing Composite is low (.49), but the K-ABC has consistently yielded lower correlations with other intelligence tests as well. These results imply good criterion validity for the WPPSI-R. There are also studies showing the discriminant validity of the WPPSI-R with gifted, mentally deficient, learning disabled, and speech- language impaired children.
Norms: The normative sample included 1700 children in nine age groups. The sample was representative of the US population of children aged 2:6 to 7:3 for sex, race/ethnicity, parental education level and geographic region. Suggested use: The WPPSI-III for assessment of general intellectual functioning as part of an assessment to identify giftedness, delays, or mental retardation. Results can be useful in guiding clinical or school related placements.
Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence - 3rd Edition
Purpose: Designed to assess the cognitive ability of children.
Population: All individuals aged 5-75.
Score: Absolute, Standard, and Grade scores for reading, spelling and arithmetic.
Time: (15-30) minutes for each of the 3 forms.
Author: Joseph Jastak / Gary Wilkenson.
Publisher: Wide Range, Inc.
Description: The re-standardization of the WRAT serves to expand the scope of the test to include pre and post testing while maintaining an ease and reliability of previous editions. The WRAT-3 uses a single level format, and has two alternate forms, the BLUE and TAN, which provide the traditional three subtests of previous editions. The alternate forms may be used in combination with one another for a more qualitative assessment of academic skill, or singularly, leaving the other form to be used for testing at a later date. There are three subtests contained on each of the alternate forms. The reading subtest includes the recognition and naming of letters and pronunciation of words out of context. In the spelling subtest, the examinee is asked to write his or her own name, and then to write letters and words as they are dictated. The Arithmetic involves counting, reading number symbols, solving oral problems, and doing written computations.
Scoring: The norms for all tests on the Blue, the Tan, and Combined forms provide raw scores, standard scores with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, absolute scores and grade scores. The raw score is a basic unit of test measure, and has limited interpretive use. The absolute scores are an interval scale obtained through a Rasch analysis. These scores are suitable for use in statistical studies, pre-post testing, local norming and cut-off levels. The standard scores are scaled on the norm. They are also an interval scale, with equal gradient so they can be used for parametric statistical analyses. The grade scores are defined by mean performance for a particular grade level. The scores are ordinal and have limited use for interpretation of test results.
Reliability: Median test coefficient alphas for the nine tests of WRAT-3 range from .82 to .95. The range is higher for the three Combined tests (Both BLUE and TAN cards). Alternate form correlations of Reading (.92), Spelling (.93), and Arithmetic (.89) also support the reliability of the measure.
Validity: The WRAT-3 intents to measure basic academic skills. There is a high correlation with the WRAT-R (.79-.92) The WRAT correlated moderately well with the WAIS-R. (.66, .66, and .73) for the Reading, Spelling and Arithmetic Combined scores and the Full Scale WISC-R score.
Norms: A stratified national sampling included nearly 5000 individuals provided data for standardization of the WRAT-3.
Suggested use: The WRAT-3 is used to measure the basic codes used to learn reading, spelling, and arithmetic. When used with a measure of general intelligence that has the same SD, the WRAT-3 can be useful in determining learning ability or disability
Wide Range Achievement Test - Third Edition (WRAT-3)
Purpose: Designed to evaluate a child’s ability for learning and memorizing information. Population: Ages 5 through 17
Scales: Verbal Memory Index, Visual Memory Index, Learning Index, General Memory Index Time: 45-60 minutes for Core Battery; 83-102 minutes for Expanded Battery.
Authors: David Sheslow & Wayne Adams
Publisher: JastakAssociatesInc
Description: The Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning (WRAML) is designed to assess memory and learning functions across the school years.
Scoring: There are nine subtests each yielding a norm-referenced score. Scores on three subtests are combined to give a Verbal Memory Index, a Visual Memory Index, and a Learning Index. The scaled scores for these three indexes are then summed to yield a General Memory Index. Four of the nine subtests (Verbal Learning, Story Memory, Sound Symbol, and Visual Learning) ask for both immediate and delayed recall. Interpretations are provided, based on the age of the child tested, of the difference between the immediate and delayed score. Thus, the nine subtests of the WRAML yield a total of 18 scores. The GMI and Verbal, Visual, and Learning Indexes can be computed in percentiles and standard scores. Individual subtests yield scaled scores.
Reliability: For the nine subtests, the reliability coefficients are usually between .80 and .85. When subtests are combined, reliabilities range from approximately .90 to .96. Test reliability is as high for younger as for older children.
Validity: Construct validity, used in Rasch measurement, indicates excellent item definitions of variables measured and internal consistency Comparisons with the WMS-R for adolescents (16-17 year). The WRAML appears superior to the WMS-R for use with adolescents. The WRAML is well validated, and is widely used in research. Information is also included concerning the standard error of measurement for each subtest and index for each age group, along with correlations between scores on the WRAML and other standardized instruments such as the McCarthy Memory Index, Stanford Binet Short-Term Memory, and the Wechsler Memory Scale. Norms: The test was normed and standardized based on samples of children from 5 to 16 years of age. There were approximately 112 children in each subgroup (half-year intervals). The total norming group consisted of 2,363 individuals. The norming samples are representative of the US population with regard to gender, geographic region, and parental occupation.
Suggested use: The major use for the WRAML is clinical in terms of providing incremental information in making an individual diagnosis. The WRAML is used to evaluate learning and school–related problems. It is helpful in evaluating the effects of a language disability or problems with verbal memory retrieval, in identifying the inefficient or disorganized memory strategies of a bright but under-achieving student, and in pointing to the functional inefficiencyofmemoryinachildwithattentiondeficit. Itcanbeusedtoassessmemoryfollowingheadinjury.
Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning
Purpose: Designed to measure general mental ability for aid in personnel selection. Population: Adult employment applicants.
Score: Yields one total score.
Time: 12 (20) minutes.
Author: E.F. Wonderlic.
Publisher: E.F. Wonderlic & Associates, Inc.
Description: The Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT), so named to reduce the possibility that job applicants will think they are taking an intelligence test, was originally a revision of the Otis Self-Administering Tests of Mental Ability. The WPT is a 50- item, 12-minute omnibus test of intelligence. The items and the order in which they are presented provide a broad range of problem types (e.g., analogies, analysis of geometric figures, disarranged sentences, and definitions) intermingled and arranged to become increasingly difficult. The WPT exists in 16 forms, and was designed for testing adult job applicants in business and industrial situations.
Scoring: The WPT yields one final score which is the sum of correct answers.
Reliability: The manual reports odd-even reliabilities, which are not appropriate for speeded tests; however, it also reports test-retest reliabilities of .82 to .94, and interform reliabilities of .73 to .95.
Validity: Correlations with educational level and/or academic achievement are between .30 and .80.
Norms: White adults across all occupational categories.
Suggested Uses: Suggested uses include as measure of general ability for employment screening, although it should be used with caution.
Wonderlic Personnel Test
Purpose: Designed to reveal associative connections between stimuli words and responses. Population: Adults.
Score: N/A.
Time: N/A.
Authors: D. Rapaport, M. Gill, and R. Schafer.
Publisher: International Universities Press, Inc.
Description: The word association method is a psychological test intended to reveal associative connections between stimulus words and free verbal responses. Subjects are instructed to give discrete verbal responses to common stimulus words (usually nouns or verbs). Because verbalizations reflect ideation, it is assumed that the systematic study of associative thought can reveal information about an individual’s personality characteristics, areas of emotional disturbances,
and the like. Although the method has no necessary tie to any particular theory, it is usually employed as a projective technique.
Scoring: There are no formal scoring procedures employed with this method.
Reliability and Validity: The manual provides no reliability and Validity information. Very few validity and reliability studies have been undertaken because internal clinical judgment constitutes such an integral part of the approach.
Norms: Norms are included in the manual for normal college students and schizophrenics.
Suggested Uses: The Word Association Test is recommended as part of a comprehensive test battery in clinical and research settings.
Word Association Test
Purpose: Designed to measure intellectual abilities and academic achievement.
Population: Ages 2 to 90+
Scales: Reading, Oral Language, Mathematics, Written Language, Knowledge, Supplemental Scores, Intra- Achievement Discrepancies, and Total Achievement
Time: 60-70 minutes.
Authors: Richard Woodcock, Nancy Mather, Kevin McGrew
Publisher: Riverside Publishing
Description: This Woodcock Johnson III - Tests of Achievement (WJ III ACH) updates and expands the WJ-R Tests of Achievement (WJ-R ACH)) with the intension of improving the diagnostic power of the instrument. The WJ III ACH is designed to identify and describe an individual’s current strengths and weaknesses. Three oral tests, a diagnostic spelling test and a measure of phonological awareness have been added to evaluate fluency in reading and in math. The other WJ III battery, the WJ III Test of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III COG) is designed to measure general and specific cognitive functions. When these two batteries are administered together, they allow the tester to investigate over-underachievement and to examine patterns of intra-individual discrepancies among cognitive or achievement areas. The batteries of the WJ III COG and WJ III ACH are further classified as standard or extended. Scoring: Scoring is to be completed during testing to determine basal and ceiling levels. Incorrect responses are recorded verbatim. Raw scores are totaled and converted into age and grade equivalents, percentile ranks, and discrepancy scores with use of the Scoring Tables. Compuscore and Profiles Program are used for all other scoring. The WJ III ACH includes the basic interpersonal communication skill (BICS) scores, and the cognitive- academic language proficiency (CALP) score. These scores are helpful for determining the ability of nonnative speakers of English to function in informal settings and academic settings (e.g., college lectures), respectively. Reliability: The median reliability coefficient alphas for all age groups for the standard battery of the WJ III ACH for tests 1 through 12 ranged from .81 to .94. For the Extended battery, median coefficients ranged from .76 to . 91. The reliability scores for the WJ III meet or exceed standards. The median cluster reliabilities are mostly .90 or higher, and the individual test reliabilities are mostly .80 or higher, and can be used for decision making purposes with support from other sources.
Validity: The technical manual presents a considerable amount of evidence supporting the validity of scores from the test, noting that the earlier versions of the battery have also been shown to have validity The WJ III ACH content is similar to other achievement tests in subject areas and to established practice in schools. Growth curves of cluster scores in the technical manual illustrate expected developmental progressions, with steep growth from age 5 to 25, with a decline thereafter. The most extensively presented data focus on validity evidence from confirmatory factor analyses of test scores from participants age 6 to adult. These analyses show that the seven- factor CHC cognitive model is more closely related to the observed internal structure than six other models derived from other commonly used cognitive batteries. The internal correlations of the entire battery are consistent with relations between areas of achievement and between areas of achievement and ability clusters.
Norms: The normative samples (pre-school, school aged, college and adult) were selected to be representative of the US population, based on geographic distribution, community size and type, and SES, occupational status, sex, race.
Suggested use: The WJ III Tests of Achievement has uses for educational, clinical or research purposes, for diagnosis, educational programming, guidance, program evaluation.
Woodcock Johnson III - Tests of Achievement
Purpose: Designed to measure, together with the WJ III Ach, intellectual abilities and academic achievement. Population: Ages 2 to 90+
Scales: Verbal Ability, Thinking Ability, Cognitive Efficiency, Supplemental, Intra-Cognitive Discrepancies, Predicted Acheivement and General Intellectual Ability (GIA)
Time: 60-70 minutes.
Authors: Richard Woodcock, Nancy Mather, Kevin McGrew
Publisher: Riverside Publishing
Description: The Woodcock Johnson III - Tests of Cognitive Skills (WJ III COG) updates and expands the WJ-R Tests of Cognitive Ability (WJ-R COG) and is designed to measure general and specific cognitive functions. The other battery the WJ III ACH is designed to identify and describe an individual’s current strengths and
weaknesses. When these two batteries are administered together, they allow the tester to investigate over- underachievement and to examine patterns of intra-individual discrepancies among cognitive or achievement areas.ThebatteriesoftheWJIIICOGandWJIIIACHarefurtherclassifiedasstandardorextended. Newtests, clusters and interpretive procedures have been added with the intension of improving the diagnostic power of the instrument and increasing the breadth and depth of coverage. The clusters are grouped into three cognitive areas, Verbal Ability, Thinking Ability, and Cognitive Efficiency. Oral language tests have been moved to the WJ III ACH.
Scoring: Requires scoring during testing to determine basal and ceiling levels. Raw scores are totaled and converted into age and grade equivalents, percentile ranks, and discrepancy scores with use of the Scoring Tables. Compuscore and Profiles Program are used for all other scoring. The WJ III COG provides two indices of general cognitive functioning (i.e., intelligence) by means of the General Intellectual Ability (GIA) score and the Brief Intellectual Ability (BIA) score.
Reliability: The median reliability coefficient alphas for all age groups for the standard battery of the WJ III COG for tests 1 through 10 ranged from .81 to .94. For the Extended battery, median coefficients ranged from .74 to .97. The reliability scores for the WJ III meet or exceed standards. The median cluster reliabilities are mostly .90 or higher, and the individual test reliabilities are mostly .80 or higher, and can be used for decision making purposes with support from other sources.
Validity: The technical manual presents a considerable amount of evidence supporting the validity of scores from the test, noting that the earlier versions of the battery have also been shown to have validity. Test content on the WJ III COG has emerged from previous versions, is similar to the content found on other well-established cognitive measures, or is based on sound experimental instruments.
Norms: The normative samples (pre-school, school aged, college and adult) were selected to be representative of the US population, based on geographic distribution, community size and type, and SES, occupational status, sex, and race.
Suggested use: The WJ III Tests of Cognitive Ability has uses for educational, clinical or research purposes. As a diagnostic tool, it can determine specific strengths and weaknesses, and can help associate certain factors on future development. Intra-ability, intra-individual and ability/achievement discrepancies can be useful in determining the existence of specific disabilities, and in selection for LD programs. The test results may be helpful ins educational programming, individual program planning, guidance, in assessing growth, in research and evaluation and it is an excellent instrument for introducing individual assessment in college and university courses. psychometric training.
Woodcock Johnson III - Tests of Cognitive Skills
Purpose: Designed to reveal associative connections between stimuli words and responses. Population: Adults.
Score: N/A.
Time: N/A.
Authors: D. Rapaport, M. Gill, and R. Schafer.
Publisher: International Universities Press, Inc.
Description: The word association method is a psychological test intended to reveal associative connections between stimulus words and free verbal responses. Subjects are instructed to give discrete verbal responses to common stimulus words (usually nouns or verbs). Because verbalizations reflect ideation, it is assumed that the systematic study of associative thought can reveal information about an individual’s personality characteristics, areas of emotional disturbances, and the like. Although the method has no necessary tie to any particular theory, it is usually employed as a projective technique.
Scoring: There are no formal scoring procedures employed with this method.
Reliability and Validity: The manual provides no reliability and Validity information. Very few validity and reliability studies have been undertaken because internal clinical judgment constitutes such an integral part of the approach.
Norms: Norms are included in the manual for normal college students and schizophrenics.
Suggested Uses: The Word Association Test is recommended as part of a comprehensive test battery in clinical and research settings.
Word Association Test
Purpose: Designed to assess neurologically impaired patients. Population: Ages 15 and over.
Scores: Fourteen scores.
Time: (90-150) minutes.
Authors: Charles J. Golden, Thomas A. Hammeke, and Arnold D. Purisch.
Publisher: Western Psychological Services.
Description: The Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB) is based on the theory of higher cortical functioning by Aleksandr R. Luria. In contrast to the more psychometric and quantitative approach of most western clinical neuropsychologists, Luria utilized unstructured qualitative techniques in assessing neurologically impaired patients. Golden and his colleagues have attempted to integrate Luria’s techniques into American clinical neuropsychology.
Scoring: The LNNB generates fourteen scores: motor, rhythm, tactile, visual, receptive speech, expressive speech, writing, reading, arithmetic, memory, intellectual processes, pathognomic, left hemisphere, and right hemisphere.
Reliability and Validity: Several studies have reflected positively on the LNNB. When compared to the Halstead Neuropsychological Battery, they were found to be roughly equivalent in the hands of experienced clinical neuropsychologists in discriminating between a mixed group of psychiatric and brain-damaged populations. Each battery achieved an overall hit rate of approximately 80%. The LNNB was also found to separate brain-injured patients from pseudoneurological patients with an approximately 80% hit rate. The hit rate for various other groups are as follows: ideopathic seizure group (77.3%), seizures secondary to brain injury group (88.9%), and normals (87.5%).
Norms: Neurologically impaired patients.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses include screening and neuropsychological evaluations for neurologically impaired patients.
The Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery
Purpose: Designed as a multi-variable projective personality test. Population: Ages 5 and over.
Score: 20-22 scores.
Time: (75) minutes.
Author: Wayne H. Holtzman.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Holtzman Inkblot Technique (HIT) is a multi-variable projective personality test that was designed to overcome psychometric limitations of the Rorschach.
Scoring: The HIT is an inkblot test that consists of two alternate forms of 45 inkblots. It is scored on 22 variables. These are: reaction time, rejection. Location, space, form definiteness, form appropriateness, color, shading, movement, pathognomic verbalization, integration, content (human, animal, anatomy, sex, abstract), anxiety, hostility, barrier, penetration, balance, and popular. Administration and scoring are rather time consuming, except in computerized versions.
Reliability: The author reported intrascorer consistency on three examiners after a period of about 3 months. These reliabilities average about .95 on 9 scores. Interscorer consistency is reported for a number of different scorers for various scores. The lowest reported score reliabilities are .57, the highest .99. Intrasubject reliabilities are reported for 15 different groups on all 22 scores. These split-half reliabilities vary widely, but generally range between .50 and .90 with an approximate average in the .70s or .80s. No test-retest reliabilities w ere found which might furnish information about whether the scores are measuring persisting traits.
Validity: Information regarding validity does not appear in the manual.
Norms: College students, average adults, 7th graders, elementary school children, 5-year olds, chronic schizophrenics, mental retardates, and depressed patients.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses of the Holtzman Inkblot test include experimental and clinical applications.
The Holtzman Inkblot Technique
Purpose: Designed to identify individuals’ attitudes and views about themselves, others, and the world. Population: Adolescents and adults.
Score: Four categories.
Time: (15-20) minutes.
Author: Bertram R. Forer.
Publisher: Western Psychological Services.
Description: The Forer Structured Sentence Completion Test (FSSCT) is comprised of 100 sentence stems developed to identify individuals’ attitudes and views about themselves, others, and the world. Sentence stems reflect an approximately equal balance among third-person and first-person singular and plural stimulus presentations. The structure of the FSSCT involves both the specificity of the sentence stems and the evaluation system used to assess the quality of responses. Scoring: Forer has developed a Checklist and Clinical Evaluation Form for both the adolescent and adult forms. These forms provide a structured evaluation scheme that the examiner can use to group individual items into one of four categories: Interpersonal Figures, Wishes, Causes of Own (feelings and behaviors), and Reactions (to other people). Each item is rated according to “attitudes toward” and “characteristics of” in the first two categories and “attitudes toward” in the last two categories. All of the terms used have specific clinical operational definitions and clear implications about the structure and organization of one’s personality. Forer has attempted to define these terms operationally in the manual.
Reliability and Validity: The manual contains no information on reliability and validity.
Norms: Norms are not available.
Suggested Uses: The FSSCT is recommended as a supplement to a battery of psychological tests in clinical or research settings.
Forer Structured Sentence Completion Test
Purpose: Designed as a supplemental scoring form for the house-tree-person technique. Population: Children and adults.
Score: IQ score.
Time: Not reported.
Author: John N. Buck.
Publisher: Western Psychological Services.
Description: The House-Tree-Person (H-T-P) projective technique developed by John Buck was originally an outgrowth of the Goodenough scale utilized to assess intellectual functioning. Buck felt artistic creativity represented a stream of personality characteristics that flowed onto graphic art. He believed that through drawings, subjects objectified unconscious difficulties by sketching the inner image of primary process. Since it was assumed that the content and quality of the H-T-P was not attributable to the stimulus itself, he believed it had to be rooted in the individual’s basic personality. Since the H-T-P was an outcropping of an intelligence test, Buck developed a quantitative scoring system to appraise gross classification levels of intelligence along with at qualitative interpretive analysis to appraise global personality characteristics.
Scoring: The Post-Drawing Interrogation form (PDI) consists of 60 questions varying from direct and concrete to indirect and abstract. Once the PDI has been administered and the interview has been completed, the examiner records items of detail, proportion, and perspective in the Scoring Folder. After completing the scoring tables, the examiner derives an IQ figure for the percentage of raw G, a net weighted score, a weighted “good” score, and a weighted “flaw” sore, which then comprise the items for the profile configuration.
Reliability and Validity: The manual contains no information on validity and reliability.
Norms: The standardization sample included 140 adults. No attempt was made to randomly select a stratified sample of subjects from the general population. Twenty adults were selected for each of seven intellectual levels (imbecile, moron, borderline, dull average, average, above average, and superior).
Suggested Uses: This instrument is recommended for projective assessment in research and clinical settings.
House-Tree-Person Interrogation Form
Purpose: Designed to measure directional confusion. Population: Children and adults.
Score: Total hand dominance rating.
Time: Not reported.
Author: Albert J. Harris.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The author defines lateral dominance as the preferred use and better performance of one side of the body as compared to the other side. Dominance is said to be crossed when the dominant hand and dominant eye are on opposite sides. Hand dominance is called mixed or incomplete when the individual does not show a consistent preference for, or superiority of, one hand. The author claims that this battery, which consists of ten tests, are sensitive indicators of directional confusion.
Scoring: Test 1 measures subject’s knowledge of right and left; test 2 assesses hand preferences; test 3 assesses simultaneous writing; test 4 assesses handwriting; test 5 measures tapping; test 6 assesses card dealing ability; test 7 measures strength of grip; test 8 consists of monocular tests; test 9 consists of binocular tests; and test 10 involves stereoscopic testing. After the separate hand dominance tests have been rated, a total hand dominance rating is ascertained. The author states that this rating is a matter of qualitative judgment.
Reliability: The author states that a rough approximation of reliability coefficients can be obtained by the use of the coefficient of contingency. On this basis, the author states that the maximum value for the four hand dominance tests is .894. Split-half techniques yield Spearman-Brown reliability coefficients of .85 and .88. Test-retest reliabilities based on group administration in college classes yield coefficients ranging from .75 to .83.
Validity: The author claims that the nature of the tasks are appropriate for the purposes for which the test are intended. On this basis, he claims the tests evidence content validity. The author also asserts that the hand dominace tests are reliable and discriminitive measures which are more sensitive to mixed dominance and directional confusion than many previous sets of hand dominance tests.
Norms: The manual provides no information on norms.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses include assessment of hand dominance or directional confusion in research and clinical settings.
Harris Test of Lateral Dominance
Purpose: Designed to assess genic relationship.
Population: Ages 4 and over.
Score: N/A.
Time: (10-15) minutes repeated six to ten times with one day intervals. Author: Lipot Szondi.
Publisher: U.S. Distributor: Grune & Stratton, Inc.
Description: The Szondi Test is a projective technique based on a person’s reaction to a series of 48 photographs of psychotic patients. The photographs were chosen in accordance with the principle of genic relationship; that is, the person assumedly selects a photograph which portrays a psychiatric disorder also inherent in the subject’s own familial genealogy. Scoring: This test yields eight factors and 4 vectors (each vector is a total of 2 factors). They are as follows; homosexual, sadistic, sexual vector, epileptic, hysteric, paroxysmal vector, catatonic, paranoic, schizophrenic vector, depressive, manic, and contact vector.
Reliability and Validity: The manual contains no information on reliability and validity.
Norms: The manual contains no information on normative samples.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses include projective assessment in a clinical setting.
Szondi Test
Purpose: Developed to identify strengths and deficits in cognitive, affective, intrapersonal and interpersonal functioning.
Population: ages 5 to 18
Scales: Quantitative Scales (Cognitive Functions, Personality Functions, Affective Functions), Qualitative Indicators (Affective Functions, Cognitive Functions)
Time: 45-60 minutes (short form); 120 minutes (long form)
Author: Giuseppe Constantino, Robert G. Malgady, and Lloyd H. Rogler
Publisher: Western Psychological Services
Description: The Tell-Me-a-Story (TEMAS) is a multicultural thematic apperception test designed for use with minority and non-minority children and adolescents with a set of stimulus cards and extensive normative data for each group. The stimulus card are structured to elicit specific responses, and are in color to facilitate verbalization and projection of emotional states. It differs from the TAT in that 1) it focuses on personality functions as manifested in internalized interpersonal relationships rather than on intrapsychic dynamics, 2) the TEMAS consists of 23 chromatic pictures while the TAT has 19 achromatic pictures and one bland card, 3) TEMAS attempts to elicit meaningful stories indicating conflict resolutions of bipolar personality functions, while the TAT uses ambiguous stimuli to elicit meaningful stories, 4) The TEMAS stimuli represent the polarities of negative and positive emotions cognitions and interpersonal functions, while the TAT is primarily weighted to represent negative emotions, depressive mood, and hostility. The TEMAS stimulus cards are culturally relevant, gender sensitive, and have diminished ambiguity.
Scoring: The children’s stories are scored in the record booklet using specific criteria representative of cognitive, affective and intrapersonal and interpersonal functioning. The scales and functions scored are Quantitative Scales (Cognitive Functions [Reaction Time, Total Time, Fluency, Total Omissions], Personality Functions [Interpersonal Relations, Aggression, Anxiety-Depression, Achievement Motivation, Delay of Gratification, Self-Concept, Sexual Identity, Moral Judgment, Reality Testing], Affective Functions [Happy, Sad, Angry, Fearful]), Qualitative Indicators (Affective Functions [Neutral, Ambivalent, Inappropriate Affect], Cognitive Functions [Conflict, Sequencing, Imagination, Relationships, Total Transformations, Inquiries, Omissions and Transformations scores for each of the following: Main Character, Secondary Character, Event, Setting]).
Reliability: Internal consistency reliability estimates were reported by the manual for the 34 functions (Cognitive, Personality, and Affective) suggested by the authors. The Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .31 to .98 with half below an acceptable level (.70), even for projective tests. Test-retest reliabilities were low where the highest function correlation was r = .53 and 26 of the 34 functions showed correlations near zero. Because the interrater reliabilities were typically moderate to high, the test-retest correlations suggest an extremely situational nature to this instrument. The functions proposed by the authors might vary with time, but should be more stable within individuals than illustrated by the test-retest data reported. One reviewer’s conclusion is that the TEMAS does not measure the constructs it proposes to measure, or does so with a large proportion of each score attributable to error. However, establishing reliability and subsequent validity has been a common problem for projective testing in general.
Validity: The TEMAS manual implies criterion-related validity using a rather complex regression analysis that concludes 6 to 22% of the variance of therapeutic outcomes is predicted using four standardized measures and four ratings of graduate students as criteria. The analysis reported is not sufficient evidence to conclude that correlational validity has been established. In independent research, the verbal responses of Hispanic children were greater to the TEMAS than to the TAT, however there is a lack of differential effectiveness of the minority cards. Additionally, greater verbal response does not necessarily indicate that the scores for Black or Hispanic students were more valid measures of personality than the scores that might have been obtained on the TAT. The TEMAS is based on a reasonable premise (i.e., existing projective techniques may be culturally insensitive) and the measure has promising construct related validity, but it has not yet established criterion-related validity and has yet to show that it is better than the TAT or similar measures at assessing the personality characteristics of minority children. The well-established TAT is still the suggested standard for thematic projective investigations. The reliability of the TEMAS is not acceptable when estimated with both internal consistency and test-retest methods. The TEMAS is not an improvement over other projective tests and may have poorer psychometric properties than existing measures. The TEMAS cards may be useful for research purposes so direct comparisons to the TAT and other personality instruments are encouraged. Clinical or predictive uses of the TEMAS are still questionable and caution is recommended, even when minority children are the clients.
Norms: The normative sample included 2,000 individuals ages 11 to 85+ years, spanned The sample was representative of the US population census for gender, socioeconomic status (examinee or parental education levels), and race or ethnic group.
Suggested use: The TEMAS is of clinical use to better understand the cognitive, affective and personality functions, give problem-specific information in order to develop a more accurate treatment plan, to assess therapeutic progress and outcome.
Tell-Me-a-Story
Purpose: Designed primarily to measure a subject’s receptive (hearing) vocabulary for Standard American English. Population: Ages 2.5 to 40.
Score: 1 score.
Time: (10-20) minutes.
Authors: Lloyd M. Dunn, Leota M. Dunn, Gary J. Robertson, and Jay L. Eisenberg.
Publisher: American Guidance Service.
Description: The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised (PPVT-R) was designed as a measure of receptive language and has replaced the original Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) published in 1959. The PPVT-R retains many features of its predecessor. For example, it consists of two forms (L and M), allows a verbal or nonverbal response, is individually administered, and is untimed (although administration time typically requires only 15-20 minutes). The PPVT-R contains 350 items making it more reliable and discriminating than the PPVT, which had only 300 items.
Scoring: The score is obtained by subtracting errors from total ceiling score.
Reliability: The test manual reports internal consistencies from .61 to .88, and alternate form reliability values from .71 to .91 from the standardization sample. Also, when alternate-form equivalency is examined by comparing means, Form M typically produces slightly higher standard score equivalents than does Form L.
Validity: When PPVT-R standard scores are compared to PPVT IQS, WISC-R IQS, and Stanford-Binet IQS, the mean PPVT-R scores have been significantly lower. However, results from two studies indicate comparable mean standard scores between the PPVT-R and McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities. Correlations ranging from .16 to .78 have been obtained from studies examining the relationship between the PPVT-R standard score equivalents and various “g factor” scores such as Wechsler Full Scale IQS, Stanford-Binet IQS, and McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities GCIs; correlation coefficients ranging from .40 to .60, however, are more common. The modest coefficients of determination emerging from these correlations suggest limited shared variance; thus PPVT-R scores should not be interpreted as intelligence test scores. No predictive validity (or long-term temporal stability) data are available.
Norms: The PPVT-R was standardized in 1979 on a sample of 4,100 children and youth in the age range from 2 1⁄2 to 19 years with 100 children of each sex at each age level. It was also standardized on a sample of 828 adults with approximately 200 adults for each of the age ranges from 19 to 24, 25 to 29, 30 to 34, and 35 through 40 years. The sample of children was selected to approximate the 1970 U.S. Census data for sex and age, geographic, occupational background, racial-ethnic, and urban-rural population distributions.
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses include research and educational applications.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Revised
Purpose: Designed as a nonverbal test of performance intelligence. Population: Ages 3 and over.
Scores: 2 scores, Test Age and qualitative or Q score.
Time: (15-60) minutes.
Author: Stanley D. Porteus.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The Porteus Maze Test is a nonverbal test of performance intelligence. It is a graded set of paper forms on which the subject traces the way from a starting point to an exit; the subject must avoid blind alleys along the way. There are no time limits. The mazes vary in complexity from simple diamond shape for the average three-year-old to intricate labyrinths for adults. There are three sets of mazes: the original (the Vineland series), and two supplements, the Extension and the Supplement.
Scoring: Administration must be studied from Porteus’ instructions. The scoring instructions are also included in Porteus’ book. The scoring results in a Qualitative or Q score and a Test Age.
Reliability: This information is not included in the manual.
Validity: Many early studies of correlations with other intelligence tests ranged widely from moderate to high coefficients. Because the Porteus is a nonverbal performance test, one does not expect a high correlation with purely verbal tests, but the correlation should be at least moderately positive. Researchers note that a correlation coefficient of .50 is representative of studies with other IQ tests. Correlations with intelligence tests involving spatial abilities, such as the Kohs Blocks and Knox Cubes, are particularly high.
Norms: This information is not included in the manual.
Suggested Uses: Reviewers do not recommend this test for clinical use, but suggest that further research is necessary to validate the author’s claims.
The Porteus Maze Test
Purpose: Designed to measure children’s personal independence and social skills. Population: Mentally retarded and emotionally maladjusted ages 3- adult, grades 2-6. Score: Domain , Factor, and Comparison Scores.
Time: (30-120) minutes.
Authors: Kazuo Nihira, Ray Foster, Max Shellhaas, and Henry Leland.
Publishers: Publishers Test Service.
Description: The AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale is designed to measure children’s personal independence and social skills. Adaptive behavior is a critical component in the diagnostic classification of the mentally retarded and is defined as “the effectiveness or degree with which the individual meets the standards of personal independence and social responsibility expected for his or her age and cultural group.”
Scoring: Three main types of scores are derived from the item response scores (Domain, Factor, and Comparison scores.) The Domain score is simply the summation of all items within a given domain, the Factor score is the summation of the Domain scores with a given factor, and the Comparison score is a weighted summation of three Factor scores. Thus, there is a progression in score derivation that results in a score that compares a child to same-aged peers in either Regular, EMR, or TMR reference groups.
Reliability: The only form of reliability data documented in the technical manual is the internal consistency of each factor via the coefficient alpha technique. With the exception of the Personal Adjustment Factor, the coefficient alphas are high (range . 71 to .97). The omission of test-retest and interrater reliabilities is a major concern for a test that can be administered to several parties (i.e., teachers, parents, guardians) and, in the case of a handicapped child, possibly several times over the course of a few years.
Validity: Two types of validity data are presented in the manual: (a) data on the relationship between adaptive behavior ratings and intelligence test performance and (b) data on the predictive power of the ABS for accurately classifying normal and mentally retarded children. With respect to intelligence, most of the 21 ABS domains have low to moderate correlations with IQ test performances. Noticeable exceptions were observed between IQ and the Language Development domain (r ranging from .39 to .63 depending on age group) and IQ and the Numbers and Time domain (r ranging from .33 to .62). Norms: The ABS was standardized on a sample of 6,523 individuals in California and Florida ranging in ages from 3 through 17 years. Individuals sampled were classified into one of three groups: Regular, EMR, or TMR. Individuals from various racial/ethnic groups and locales were included. Although the sample represents only two states, the size and diversity of the sample are very good compared to other adaptive behavior scales.
Suggested Uses: Recommended as part of a classification/diagnostic battery in screening and placement decisions regarded the mentally handicapped.
AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale
Purpose: Designed to assess the abilities of preschool children. Population: Children, ages 2.5 - 8.5.
Score: Six scale scores.
Time :( 45-60) minutes.
Author: Dorothea McCarthy.
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.
Description: The McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities (MSCA) is a measurement device used to assess the abilities of preschool children.
Scoring: The results of the MSCA produce six scale scores: verbal, perceptual-performance, quantitative, composite (general cognitive), memory, motor.
Reliability: In the MSCA manual, McCarthy provides information on the internal consistency and stability of test scores, as they were obtained from the standardization sample. The internal consistency coefficients for the General Cognitive Index (GCI) averaged .93 across 10 age groups between 2.5, and 8.5 years. Mean reliability coefficients for the other five Index Scales ranged from .79 to .88. The manual includes information on test-retest reliability over a one month interval on a stratified sample of 125 children grouped into three age levels. The average coefficient for the GCI was .80, with correlations ranging from .69 to .89 for the other scales. Other studies of long and short-term stability resulted in stability coefficients for the GCI of .81 and .84, respectively. Stability coefficients of the cognitive scales ranged from .62 to .76 with the Motor Scale emerging as the only scale that lacked stability (r=33).
Validity: According to the manual, the content of the MSCA and the organization of the six scales were determined primarily through “intuitive and functional considerations” based on McCarthy’s extensive teaching and clinical experience. Analyses of the standardization data for five age groups and for separate groups of blacks and whites have given generally good support for the construct validity of the battery for normal children, although each factor did not emerge for every age group. The results also provide evidence that a child’s profile of MSCA Index scores reflect real and meaningful performance in domains of cognitive and motor ability. The major practical implication of these results for test users is that a child’s strengths and weaknesses can be determined through the interpretation of differences on Scale Indexes, as proposed originally by McCarthy.
Norms: The test was standardized on a sample of 1,032 children stratified by race, geographic region, father’s occupational status, and, informally, urban-rural residency, in accordance with the 1970 U.S. Census data. The major problem which has affected test users’ confidence in the meaning of the scores is the exclusion of exceptional children from the standardization sample.
Suggested Uses: The MSCA is a useful aid in screening and diagnostic decisions.
McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities
Purpose: Designed for assessing cognitive development in children. Population: Children, ages 2.5-12.5.
Score: 16 subtests.
Time: (40-85) minutes.
Author(s): Alan Kaufman and Nadeen Kaufman.
Publisher: American Guidance Service.
Description: The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) is a clinical instrument for assessing cognitive development. Its construction incorporates several recent developments in both psychological theory and statistical methodology. The K-ABC also gives special attention to certain emerging testing needs, such as use with handicapped groups, application to problems of learning disabilities, and appropriateness for cultural and linguistic minorities. The authors rightly caution, however, that success in meeting these special needs must be judged through practical use over time. They also point out that the K-ABC should not be regarded as “the complete test battery”; like any other test, it should be supplemented and corroborated by other instruments to meet individual needs, such as the Stanford-Binet, Wechsler scales, McCarthy scales, or neuropsychological tests.
Scoring: The 16 subtests are grouped into a mental processing set and achievement set, which yield separate global scores. The mental processing set is then grouped into those requiring primarily sequential processing of information and those requiring simultaneous processing, with separate global scores for each.
Validity and Reliability: Odd-even reliabilities within one-year age groups averaged in the .70s and .80s for subtests; for global scores, the averages were in the high .80s and .90s. Test-retest reliabilities were computed within age groups spanning 3 or 4 years, retested after intervals of 2 to 4 weeks. For subtests, these reliabilities ranged from .59 to .98, clustering in the .70s and .80s; for global scores, they ranged from .77 to .97. In general, reliabilities were higher for the achievement than for the mental processing tests. Concurrent and predictive validity (6- to 12 interval) against standardized achievement tests, were investigated in several small groups of both normal and exceptional children. The correlations vary widely, but most appear promising, and the patterns of correlations with subtests tend to fit theoretical expectations. Analyses by ethnic groups yielded closely similar validities for Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites.
Norms: Norms for the battery are based on administration of the tests to representative samples of 100 children at each 6- moth age interval from 2.5 to 12.5, a total of 2000 individuals. A variety of supplementary norms are provided, some requiring the testing of additional subjects. Sociocultural norms are provided based on a cross-tabulation by race (black-white) and by parental education (less than high school education, high school graduate, and one or more years of college or technical school).
Suggested Uses: Recommended uses of the K-ABC include integration as a component of a cognitive assessment battery in clinical situations.
Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children
