Select Page

psychometrics paper using like a specific test

1. Summary of the Literature 1. Test development: What procedures were used to develop the test? Discuss standardization and norm-setting procedures. What is the score distribution/range for the instrument (how to analyze scores/what scores might mean)/ how to compare people to one another) 2. Reliability: What evidence is there in the literature for the reliability of the test scores? Will the measure give an accurate reading over and over again What reliability analyses have been conducted? For each study, describe the study, sampling procedures, and include the reliability estimates for each study. For example: “Administering an early version (1984) of the Substance Abuse Questionnaire—Adult Probation III to a small sample of 30 college students (not substance abusers or legal offenders), a test-retest correlation coefficient of .71 was found across an interval of one week.” 3. Validity: What evidence is there for the validity (construct, concurrent, etc.) of the test? 4. Norms: What evidence is provided for the utility of the test’s norms? Are the normative samples sufficiently large, current, and representative?(external validity, are our measures applicable to general public, data gathered does it give good idea to use on people outside of environment) 2. Report of your Psychometric Analyses. Following a similar format, report the results of your psychometric analyses using SPSS. Include the following information: descriptive statistics, internal consistency, validity for each of your instrument’s subscales. 3. Interpretation and Discussion of Psychometric Analyses. Provide an interpretation and summary of your tests’ strengths and weaknesses on the basis of your psychometric evaluation of the test in the context of previous validation studies. 4. Integrative Evaluation and Critique & Recommendations for Test Use 1. Evaluate the adequacy of the theoretical model underlying the test and the impact of current research on the test’s assumptions.(what is the theory the test tries to measure and does it address the theory) 2. Build on your psychometric evaluation of the test to suggest cautions to keep in mind if the test is used and/or make recommendations for the test author and publisher to follow in further development of the test.  3. Identify at least one population or subgroup for whom this test would not be reliable or valid and provide a rationale. For example, “Because the test refers to activities of daily living common among mainstream, middle-class individuals, it may not provide a valid assessment of functional impairment among lower SES individuals, the homeless, and immigrants from less industrialized countries.” In this last section, refer to the literature to suggest alternatives to assessing the test’s underlying construct in these identified populations (people with schizophrenia, cant figure out connection with others MOOD DISORDERS)  Here was the prompt: A local community-based co-living agency is interested in using “tests” to match individuals for living together and sharing their spaces. Co-living is a modern form of shared housing for individuals that are like-minded to live, work, retire and do activities together. Mostly, these shared places are fully furnished, are specifically-designed living spaces to create an inspiring environment for people to interact and share experiences. The biggest value of joining a co-living space is the access to the community. In order to match like-minded people, however, the agency needs to first assess each individual during the application process in order to determine and find their best match and to assess the roommates every six months of co-living together. Moreover the agency needs to take different age groups into account young professionals vs. retiree. If the applicants are matched, they are asked to engage in a meet-and-greet interview with a member of the agency staff. If the roommates are unhappy with their current match based on the six-months assessment, then they are asked to engage in a follow-up interview to understand the reason for the simply “not a good fit”, and are allowed to participate in the matching process again if desired. The co-living agency has asked you to propose tests, based on state of the art literature to support the agency in the development of the initial matching and six-month reviews.