Article

Review of Mental Testing: Its history, principles, and applications .

Journal of Applied Psychology (Impact Factor: 4.31). 01/1951; 35(3):219. DOI: 10.1037/h0050678

ABSTRACT Reviews the book, "Mental testing: Its history, principles, and applications," by F. L. Goodenough (see record 1950-00848-000). Mental testing as treated in this book is broadly defined, to include the measurement of achievement and personality characteristics in addition to intelligence. The book is intended for students entering the field of testing, and for professional workers in schools and institutions who have occasion to use tests and test results. There is material of interest to clinical students, psychometrists, school psychologists, school principals and teachers, social workers, psychiatrists, pediatricians, judges in juvenile courts, employment experts, and school counselors. The book is the scholarly general treatment of mental testing which has been needed for a long time. It makes a rare and valuable contribution to psychological literature. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

0 Followers
 · 
13 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present article addresses reliability issues in light of recent studies and debates focused on psychometrics versus datametrics terminology and reliability generalization (RG) introduced by Vacha-Haase. The purpose here was not to moderate arguments presented in these debates but to discuss multiple perspectives on score reliability and how they may affect research practice, editorial policies, and RG across studies. Issues of classical error variance and reliability are discussed across models of classical test theory, generalizability theory, and item response theory. Potential problems with RG across studies are discussed in relation to different types of reliability, different test forms, different number of items, misspecifications, and confounding independent variables in a single RG analysis.
    Educational and Psychological Measurement 10/2002; 62(5):783-801. DOI:10.1177/001316402236878 · 1.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The analysis of response inconsistency is a crucial aspect of intellectual and clinical psychological assessment. Erratic patterns of failures and successes across and within particular domains qualify the measurement of intellectual potential and functioning. Although the interpretation of intertest scatter (inconsistencies between subtest scores) on intellectual tests has been elaborated on in the literature, intratest scatter (inconsistencies within specific subtests) is an underresearched area. Some approaches towards establishing a quantitative measure of intrasubtest scatter (ISS) have been developed, but most have proved clinically impractical or have produced inconsistent results. This article proposes a methodology of codifying ISS on the Wechsler Intelligence Scales to provide a measurement of inefficiency within subtests for individual subjects. In addition to systematizing and standardizing scatter measurement in clinical assessment, such codification will be useful in future research directed at discriminating groups based on inefficient performance across particular subtests. Applications and limitations in ISS interpretation for the various Wechsler instruments are annotated and discussed.
    Canadian Journal of School Psychology 06/2009; 24(2):140-157. DOI:10.1177/0829573509333456