Javierjavierjavierjavierjavierjavieruntitled1untitled2untitled3unti ✓ Solved

Javier Javier Javier Javier Javier Javier untitled1: untitled2: untitled3: untitled4: untitled5: untitled6: untitled7: untitled8: untitled9: untitled10: untitled11: untitled12: untitled13: untitled14: untitled15: untitled16: untitled17: untitled18: untitled19: untitled20: untitled21: untitled22: untitled23: untitled24: untitled25: untitled26: untitled27: untitled28: What Is Test Reliability/Precision? Chapter 5 What Is Reliability/Precision? Measurement error: variations in measurement using a reliable instrument. Reliable test: is one we can trust to measure each person in approximately the same way every time it is used. 2 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020.

If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 2 Classical Test Theory True score (T): is a measure of the amount of the attribute that the test is designed to measure. Random error: The second part of an observed test score consists of random errors that occur anytime a person takes a test (E). 3 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020.

If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 3 Classical Test Theory True Score Random Error Systematic Error 4 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.

4 Classical Test Theory The Formal Relationship Between Reliability/Precision and Random Measurement Error Parallel Reliability coefficient: the correlation between the two sets of test scores 5 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 5 Three Categories of Reliability Coefficients Test–retest method: a test developer gives the same test to the same group of test takers on two different occasions. Correlation: the scores from the first and second administrations are then compared.

Practice effects: occur when test takers benefit from taking the test the first time (practice), which enables them to solve problems more quickly and correctly the second time. 6 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 6 Three Categories of Reliability Coefficients Alternate-Forms Method Alternate forms: the test developer creates two different forms of the test.

Order effects: changes in test scores resulting from the order in which the tests were taken. Parallel forms: describes different forms of the same test. 7 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.

7 Three Categories of Reliability Coefficients Internal consistency method: is a measure of how related the items (or groups of items) on the test are to one another. Split-half method: is to divide the test into halves and then compare the set of individual test scores on the first half with the set of individual test scores on the second half. 8 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.

8 Three Categories of Reliability Coefficients Homogeneous tests: measuring only one trait or characteristic. Heterogeneous tests: measuring more than one trait or characteristic. 9 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.

9 Three Categories of Reliability Coefficients Scorer Reliability Scorer reliability or interscorer agreement: the amount of consistency among scorers’ judgments Intrascorer reliability: whether each clinician was consistent in the way he or she assigned scores from test to test. 10 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 10 The Reliability Coefficient Adjusting Split-Half Reliability Estimates Other Methods of Calculating Internal Consistency 11 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020.

If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 11 The Reliability Coefficient Calculating Scorer Reliability/Precision and Agreement Interrater agreement: an index of how consistently the scorers rate or make decisions. Intrarater agreement: when one scorer makes judgments, the researcher also wants assurance that the scorer makes consistent judgments across all tests. 12 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020.

If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 12 Interpreting Reliability Coefficients Calculating the Standard Error of Measurement Standard error of measurement (SEM): is an estimate of how much the individual’s observed test score (X) might differ from the individual’s true test score (T). Interpreting the Standard Error of Measurement 13 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here.

If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 13 Interpreting Reliability Coefficients Confidence Intervals Confidence interval--a range of scores that we feel confident will include the test taker’s true score. 14 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.

14 Factors That Influence Reliability Test Length Homogeneity Test–Retest Interval 15 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 15 Factors That Influence Reliability Test Administration Scoring Cooperation of Test Takers 16 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here.

If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here. 16 Generalizability Theory Generalizability theory: an approach to estimating reliability/precision. 17 Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE Publications, 2020. If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here. If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.

17 PART 1 Read the attached powerpoint slides and Answer the following questions. Minimum 300 words, must have in-text citation and references in APA format Test Reliability Identify three tests that are of interest to you. These could be tests that we have already discussed this semester, tests that you will be taking and writing your summaries on, or tests that just interest you! I would recommend choosing some of the assessments that have been in existence and used for quite some time because you will find more information readily available. 1.

Search the Internet to find information about the reliability of each test. Please be sure to reference any supporting journal articles that have tested the reliability of the instruments you have chosen. 2. Report the type of reliability testing conducted on the test and the characteristics of the test takers in each reliability study. 3.

Write one paragraph explaining the similarity or difference between the methods used to estimate reliability for each test. 4. Be sure to support your discussion with scholarly sources. PART 2 Need responses for following discussion posts – minimum 150 words for each response and must have in-text citation and reference in APA format Response 1 We learned about reliability/validity and how test scores should be consistent for this week's discussion. We rely heavily on tests results to have precision and to trust the measurement of each test user's approximate scores the same way every time it is used (Lovler & Miller, 2020).

Looking at different reliability tests, I am intrigued to learn more about using the Spearman-Brown formula, Cohen's Kappa, and standard error of measurement. Different types of tests require strategic calculations of the results and the ability to measure behaviors. These are the three tests I found that I want to investigate further. Projective Tests- We all know about MBTI and its testing ability when it comes to personality. Still, there is another test I want to check, such as the Thematic Appreciation Test (TAT), a projective measurement and technique intended to evaluate a person's patterns of thought, attitudes, observational capacity, and emotional responses to ambiguous test materials (Encylopedia of Mental Disorders, n.d.).

I looked this up and found that it is widely used by practicing clinicians; however, clinicians use different cards or a different number of cards. This process makes it incredibly difficult to obtain reliability and validity estimates and almost impossible to compare results. (Cherry, 2020.) Achievement Tests – Achievement/Motivation tests, such as the Wechlar Individual Assessment test or the Ray Achievement Motivation Scale, can provide insights on individuals' achievement-orientated behaviors. Test users scores differently depending on how motivated and the way they answer the questions (Britt, 2012). What I like about these tests is that the questions are opinion based and depending on the sequence of the answers, the tests rate you on how far individuals are achievers in life.

Neuropsychological Tests – These tests are specifically designed tasks used to measure a psychological function known to be linked to a particular brain structure or pathway. The Beck Depression Inventory is a nominal scale measurement that rates depression scores ranging from mood, self-dislikes, indecisiveness, to loss of libido (Beck & Steer, 1984). Reliability is likely due to how individuals are compared due to their socioeconomic background and cultural differences. There had been some consistencies among the users that found high levels of depression (Beck & Steer, 1984). Validity is questioned because of how the tests were distributed, the design of the test, and the reconstruction of the questions.

Methods used to estimate reliability depends on how the administrators design the test and when tests are administered to the users. Results can also have many factors to form precision outcomes of the tests depending on the errors of tests and the reliability coefficients that can measure behaviors properly. Reference Beck, A.T., & Steer, R.A. (1984). Internal consistencies of the original and revised beck depression inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology 40( 6), .

Britt, M. (2012). Test reliability explained [Video]. YouTube. Play Video Cherry, K. (2020). Why Is the thematic apperception test used in therapy?

VeryWell Mind. Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders (n.d.) Thematic apperception test. Miller, L. A., & Lovler, R. L. (2020).

In Foundations of psychological testing: A practical approach (6th ed., pp. 54–84). SAGE. Response 2 I have chosen to discuss and compare the reliability of the following personality tests: DiSC, Big Five Personality Test (B5T), and Meyers-Brigg Type Indicator (MBTI). In a study conducted by Roodt (1997) on DiSC reliability and validity, the test-retest method was used on 90 randomly-selected employees from several companies in Kwa-Zulu-Natal and Gauteng, South Africa.

No further information is given on the characteristics of the test participants in regards to the actual study. The questionnaire given to the participants consisted of 24 questions each with four options to select: the respondents were instructed to select a response that most closely resembled themselves and a response that was least like themselves for each question (Roodt, 1997). The reliability test conducted for B5T involved interscale correlations (Satow, 2021), which measures internal consistency. The test itself measures attributes by asking similar questions in different ways about the same attributes. Since the test is well-known, it has been taken many times by many different people worldwide.

For this study, test results were taken and used from the online website Psychomeda from the period of June 2019 to July 2020 (Satow, 2021). The test is free and anonymous, and the sample size consisted of 21,048 records, with 13,123 female respondents between 20 and 30 years of age with high school diplomas and jobs (Satow, 2021). Then, of course, this meant that the sample size of men numbered 7,925. Parallel forms were used to test the reliability of the MBTI. The study consisted of mailing 2733 questionnaires to business school alumni who were managers with postgraduate management qualifications (Lamond, 2001).

Of the 2733 questionnaires mailed, 523 questionnaires were received (Lamond, 2001). Most of the respondents were born in Australia, while three quarters of the respondents were male with the modal age group being 40-49 years old (Lamond, 2001). Fifteen percent of the respondents were born in a non-English speaking country, and 40% of the non-Australian born respondents were Asian (Lamond, 2001). In the DiSC study, Roodt (1997) applied the same instrument to the same respondents at a later stage and then the correlation scores were calculated. In regards to the reliability test conducted in the B5T study, Cronbach’s scale was used for interscale correlations with the reliability scores on each of the personality attributes.

Inter-correlation calculations were conducted prior to the gathering of data from tests on the Psychomeda website (Satow, 2021). Additionally, all statistical calculations were conducted with the statistics program R, R Core Team, 2020, version 4.0.3 (Satow, 2021). The reliability of the MBTI was tested using two forms of the research instrument: Form A for MBTI and Form B for the Managerial Style Measure (Lamond, 2001). “To test whether the ordering of the questions had affected the respondents’ answers to the MBTI, the reliability of the MBTI was determined separately for the two forms†(Lamond, 2001, p.19). Different reliability tests were needed for each study due to the methods used and the characteristics of the psychological assessments themselves.

The DiSC study involved the same companies which then allowed the same respondents to participate, so it was feasible to use the test-retest method. In the case of the B5T study, the sample size was extremely large, and it was not possible to perform the other reliability tests with random respondents’ data from the testing website. While both the test-retest method and parallel forms could have been used to test the reliability of the MBTI, the parallel forms method was more suitable given the mode of administration- mail surveys- of the questionnaires to a large pool of recipients. Resources Lamond, D. (2001). The Myers-Brigg Type Indicator: Evidence of its validity, reliability and normative characteristics for managers in an Australian context.

Macquarie University. Roodt, K. (1997). Reliability and validity study on the Discus personality profiling system. University of South Africa. Satow, L. (2021, January 31).

Reliability and validity of the enhanced Big Five Personality Test (B5T). Permalink Show parent Reply untitled1: Type answers, comments and discussion here Javier untitled26: untitled27: untitled28: untitled29: untitled30: untitled31: untitled32: untitled33: untitled34: untitled35: untitled1: untitled2: untitled3: untitled4: untitled5: untitled6: untitled7: untitled8: untitled9: untitled10: untitled11: untitled12: untitled13: untitled14: untitled15: untitled16: untitled17: untitled18: untitled19: untitled20: untitled36: untitled21: untitled22: untitled23: untitled24: untitled25: untitled2: untitled3: untitled4: untitled5: untitled6: untitled7: untitled8: untitled9: untitled10: untitled11: untitled12: untitled13: untitled14: untitled15: untitled16: untitled1: untitled2: untitled3: untitled4: untitled5: untitled6: untitled7: untitled8: untitled9: untitled10: untitled11: untitled12: untitled14: untitled15: untitled16: untitled17: untitled18: untitled19: untitled20: untitled21: untitled22: untitled23: untitled24: untitled25: untitled26: untitled27: untitled28: untitled29: untitled30: untitled31: untitled32: untitled33: untitled34: untitled35: untitled36: untitled37: untitled38: untitled39: untitled40: untitled41: Name: Date: 2.362 aluminum copper iron 78....7 100..6 99..7 99.9 65 Comments, calculations and observations: untitled1: untitled2: untitled11: untitled20: untitled21: untitled24: untitled25: untitled26: untitled28: untitled52: untitled29: untitled30: untitled31: untitled32: untitled33: untitled34: untitled35: untitled36: untitled37: untitled38: untitled39: untitled40: untitled41: untitled42: untitled43: untitled44: untitled45: untitled46: untitled47: untitled48: untitled49: untitled50: untitled51:

Paper for above instructions

Introduction
The concept of reliability in psychological testing is crucial to ensure that assessments yield consistent results across various contexts and populations. This paper will explore three well-established psychological tests that are often used in various fields: the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Each of these tests will be analyzed for their reliability, reliability testing methods used, and the characteristics of test-takers involved in reliability studies.

Part 1: Reliability Analysis of Selected Tests

1. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

The MMPI is a psychological assessment designed to evaluate personality structure and psychopathology (Butcher et al., 2001). Reliability studies for the MMPI have commonly utilized the test-retest method, showing a high reliability coefficient (r = .87 to .90). This suggests that the results are stable over time (Butcher et al., 2001). The test typically consists of various scales assessing different psychological conditions, which makes it effective in clinical settings. The test-taker population often includes adult individuals seeking psychological evaluation for various purposes, including mental health treatment, legal assessments, and employment screening.

2. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)

The WAIS is another integral psychological instrument widely used for measuring adult intelligence (Wechsler, 2008). Reliability testing for WAIS employs methods such as internal consistency and test-retest reliability, with reported reliability coefficients ranging from .90 to .95 for the overall scores (Wechsler, 2008). The test examines cognitive functioning across multiple domains and is frequently employed in educational, clinical, and research settings. The characteristic sample population for WAIS typically includes adults from various socioeconomic backgrounds and educational levels, which is critical for ensuring the test’s applicability across diverse groups.

3. Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)

The BDI is an assessment tool used to measure the severity of depression in individuals (Beck & Steer, 1984). Various studies have examined its reliability using internal consistency methods, reporting a Cronbach’s alpha of .93, indicating excellent reliability (Beck & Steer, 1984). The sample population for the BDI primarily consists of individuals in outpatient and inpatient settings who have been diagnosed with varying severity levels of depression. This sample population is particularly significant as it helps validate the use of BDI across different clinical conditions.

Methods of Reliability Estimation

The methods employed to assess reliability among the MMPI, WAIS, and BDI present both similarities and differences. For example, the MMPI and WAIS utilize both test-retest and internal consistency approaches, while BDI predominantly leans on internal consistency via Cronbach’s alpha. However, all three tests maintain a focus on consistent evaluation of psychological traits or symptoms over time or across different test forms. The consistency measured relates to how well these assessments can reliably predict outcomes in behavioral health contexts, illustrating robust methodologies in psychological measurement (Miller & Lovler, 2020).

Part 2: Discussion Responses

Response to Post 1

In your post, you've aptly highlighted the importance of reliability and validity in psychological testing. The examples you’ve provided—projective tests including the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), achievement tests like the Wechsler Individual Assessment, and neuropsychological tests such as the Beck Depression Inventory—demonstrate the broad spectrum of psychological evaluations.
The TAT, while valuable in exploring an individual’s unconscious thoughts, inherently presents challenges in achieving high reliability because of the variability in interpretations among clinicians (Cherry, 2020). This variability can stem from the subjective nature of projective tests compared to more standardized assessments such as the Beck Depression Inventory, which boasts higher reliability due to its structured format and established scoring procedures (Beck & Steer, 1984). Exploring the trade-offs between qualitative insights offered by projective tests and the quantitative reliability of standardized assessments is crucial in clinical practices where understanding the full scope of an individual's personality and psychological state is essential (Lovler & Miller, 2020).

Response to Post 2

Your comparative analysis of the DIsc, Big Five Personality Test (B5T), and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) highlights critical considerations in assessing the reliability of different psychological instruments. The various methods used—test-retest for DiSC, interscale correlation for B5T, and parallel forms for MBTI—illustrate the necessity of method diversification based on the nature of each test and its intended use.
A point of clarification regarding the sample characteristics of DiSC could strengthen the study’s insights, as understanding demographic influences on reliability can be significant (Roodt, 1997). Furthermore, while the B5T leverages a large anonymous population, it’s essential to consider potential biases associated with online self-reporting, which may influence consistency across different settings or groups (Satow, 2021). The MBTI’s examination through parallel forms is particularly interesting, revealing how score ordering could affect results (Lamond, 2001). Your post emphasizes the importance of using varied methods to ensure robust reliability across assessments, a cornerstone principle in psychological testing.

References

1. Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1984). Internal consistencies of the original and revised Beck Depression Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40(6), 1365-1367.
2. Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A., & Kaemmer, B. (2001). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2nd Edition (MMPI-2) Manual. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
3. Cherry, K. (2020). Why is the Thematic Apperception Test used in therapy? VeryWell Mind.
4. Lamond, D. (2001). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Evidence of its validity, reliability, and normative characteristics for managers in an Australian context. Macquarie University.
5. Lovler, R. L., & Miller, L. A. (2020). Foundations of Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
6. Roodt, K. (1997). Reliability and validity study on the Discus personality profiling system. University of South Africa.
7. Satow, L. (2021). Reliability and validity of the enhanced Big Five Personality Test (B5T).
8. Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) Manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
This comprehensive exploration reflects the significance of understanding test reliability in psychological assessments while showcasing diverse methodologies and their implications in clinical contexts.