Psychodiagnostics

UNIT 1
• a branch of psychology concerned with the use of tests in the
evaluation of personality and the determination of factors underlying
human behavior.
- Merriam- Webster Medical
- Psychological assessment is crucial to the definition, training, and
practice of professional psychology.
HISTORY
• The history of psychological testing dates back to the late 19th
century when the field of psychology was still in its infancy. Pioneers
such as Alfred Binet and Charles Spearman laid the foundation for
modern psychological testing by developing early intelligence tests
and statistical techniques for analyzing test data.
• Psychological tests are standardized instruments used to measure
individuals' mental functions and behaviors. They provide
quantitative data on various psychological attributes such as
intelligence, personality traits, and mental health status.
• Psychological testing constitutes administration of psychological tests.
• Psychological tests can be described as tools that can be used to measure
psychological entities like intelligence, personality, attitude, interest, achievement
motivation and so on.
• Psychological test was defined by Gregory (2010, page 16) as “a standardised
procedure for sampling behavior and describing it with categories or scores”.
• Psychological test can be described as measurement of sample of behaviour that is
standardised and objective (Anastasi, 1969).
• Kaplan and Saccuzzo (2013) explained psychological test a device or technique used
in quantification of behaviour that helps in not only understanding behaviour but
also to predicting it.
• Cohen and Swerdlik defined psychological testing “ as the process of measuring
psychology-related variables by means of devices or procedures designed to obtain a
sample of behavior”.
To highlight these properties,
• psychological tests are objective in nature.
• They also have predictive and diagnostic value.
• A psychological test is also standardised, meaning that the procedure followed while
administering and scoring the test is uniform and the instructions and scoring are provided in the
manual of the test.
• Any psychological test measures a sample of behaviour pertaining to certain psychological entity
or variable.
• A psychological test also needs to be valid and reliable, that again is stated in the manual along
with details of method used to establish them.
Assumptions
There are some of the assumptions in this regard, that we need to highlight as well, they are as follows:
1) A psychological test needs to be valid or should measure what it is supposed to measure.
2) It should be reliable or consistent.
3) It should be objective and it is assumed that the individuals taking the test, understand the test items in a
similar manner.
4) It is assumed that the individuals taking the test will answer the test and will be able to accurately express
their feeling in that regard.
5) It is assumed that individuals will answer the items honestly. Though there is always a possibility that
individuals are answering in a certain way due to social desirability.
6) Error variance is assumed to occur due to administrator ( bias, expectations), test taker (anxiety, fatigue) as
well as testing conditions (temperature, distractions).
Applications
Psychological tests have a vast scope and application as it is used in varied set ups from clinical, counselling,
industrial and organisational to forensic set up.
• In clinical set up it can be used for diagnosis of psychological disorders. For example, Beck’s depression
inventory can be helpful in diagnostic process of depression.
• In counselling set up, it can be used to make career decisions and also understand one’s aptitude and
interest. Tests like Differential Aptitude Test, Career Preference Record and Vocational Interest Inventory can
be used in this context.
• Psychological tests can also be used in industrial and organisational set up for selection purpose as well as to
understand stress related issues etc. in employees. Job Stress Scale, Organisational Citizenship Behaviour, Job
Satisfaction Scale and so on can be used in this setup.
• In forensic psychology as well, psychological tests can be used to understand the psychological state of the
individual.
Psychological tests thus can be used to measure a wide range of psychological entities including intelligence,
personality, creativity, interest, aptitude, attitude values and so on. There are even psychological tests that
measure variables like internet addiction, resilience, mental health, psychological wellbeing, perceived parental
behaviour, family environment etc.
Some of the characteristics of a good psychological test are discussed as follows:

1) Psychological tests are objective in nature: Any good psychological test needs to be objective and not
subjective. There should be no place for any kind of bias. An objective psychological test also denotes that it is
valid and reliable.
2) Validity of a psychological test: The next characteristic that a good psychological test should possess is
validity. Validity can be explained as the ability of the test to measure what it is supposed to measure. A
weighing machine is a valid tool to measure weight and it is not valid to measure length.
3) Reliability of a psychological test: A good psychological test is also reliable or consistent. For example, if you
measure length of a table with a ruler on certain day and if you measure the length of the same table with
same ruler after six months, the length obtained in centimetres will remain same, thus indicting that this ruler
is reliable.
4) A good psychological test will have discriminant feature: The test should be able to denote any difference
between one individual from the other on a given aspect or variable. For example, if two individuals differ in
their music aptitude, the the test should be able to differentiate between the two on this aptitude.
5) A good test will be comprehensive: This denotes that the test measures all the dimensions or aspects of the
construct that it measures.
Role of the Clinician
• The central role of clinicians conducting assessments should be to answer specific questions and
aid in making relevant decisions.
• clinicians must integrate a wide range of data and bring into focus diverse areas of knowledge.
Thus, they are not merely administering and scoring tests. (psychometrist vs clinician)
• Psychometrists: Psychometrists tend to use tests merely to obtain data, and their task is often
perceived as emphasizing the clerical and technical aspects of testing. Their approach is primarily
data-oriented, and the end product is often a series of traits or ability descriptions. These
descriptions are typically unrelated to the person’s overall context and do not address unique
problems the person may be facing.
• psychological assessment attempts to evaluate an individual in a problem situation so that the
information derived from the assessment can somehow help with the problem.
• Tests are only one method of gathering data, and the test scores are not end products, but merely
means of generating hypotheses. Psychological assessment, then, places data in a wide
perspective, with its focus being problem solving and decision making.
• PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT VERSUS PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING
• The use of tests for making decisions about a person, a group, or a program
should always take place within the context of psychological assessment.
• Psychological assessment is a flexible, not standardized, process aimed at
reaching a defensible determination concerning one or more psychological issues
or questions, through the collection, evaluation, and analysis of data appropriate
to the purpose at hand ( Maloney & Ward, 1976).
Historical and methodological reasons for the development of the psychometric
approach.

• When psychological tests were originally developed, group, measurements of intelligence met with early
and noteworthy success, especially in military and industrial settings where individual interviewing and case
histories were too expensive and time-consuming.
• An advantage of the data-oriented intelligence tests was that they appeared to be objective, which would
reduce possible interviewer bias.
• More important, they were quite successful in producing a relatively high number of true positives when
used for classification purposes. Their predictions were generally accurate and usable.
Single test and Battery of tests
• A further development consistent with the psychometric approach was the strategy of using a “test battery.
• It was reasoned that if a single test could produce accurate descriptions of an ability or trait, administering a
series of tests could create a total picture of the person.
• The goal, then, was to develop a global, yet definitive, description for the person using purely objective
methods. This goal encouraged the idea that the tool (psychological test) was the best process for achieving
the goal, rather than being merely one technique in the overall assessment procedure
• Behind this approach were the concepts of individual differences and trait
psychology. These assume that one of the best ways to describe the differences
among individuals is to measure their strengths and weaknesses with respect to
various traits. Thus, the clearest approach to the study of personality in- volved
developing a relevant taxonomy of traits and then creating tests to measure
these traits. Again, there was an emphasis on the tools as primary, with a de-
emphasis on the input of the clinician.
TYPES
• the term test should be used only for those proce- dures in which test takers’
responses are evaluated based on their correct-ness or quality. Such instruments
al- ways involve the appraisal of some aspect of a person’s cognitive functioning,
knowledge, skills, or abilities.
• On the other hand, instruments whose responses are neither evaluated nor
scored as right-wrong or pass-fail are called inventories, questionnaires, sur- veys,
checklists, schedules, or projective techniques, and are usually grouped under the
rubric of personality tests.
• These are tools designed to elicit information about a person’s motivations, preferences, attitudes, interests,
opinions, emotional make- up, and characteristic reactions to people, situations, and other stimuli.
• Typically, they use questions of the multiple-choice or true-false type, except for projective techniques,
which are open ended. They can also involve making forced choices between statements representing
contrasting alternatives, or rating the degree to which one agrees or disagrees with various statements.
• Most of the time person- ality inventories, questionnaires, and other such instruments are of the self-report
variety but some are also designed to elicit reports from individuals other than the person being evaluated
(e.g., a parent, spouse, or teacher)
TYPES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS
• TYPES OF TESTS
• There are various types of psychological tests. These are discussed as follows:
• Individual test: Tests that are administered on a single individual. For example, Wechsler Adult
Intelligence Scale (WAIS), Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (SB), Bhatia battery.
• Group test: Such tests can be administered to a group of individuals at the same time. For
example, NEO PI and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
• Speed test: A speed test constitutes items that are of same difficulty level, however a certain time
period is provided to complete the test.
• Power test: A power test constitutes items that increase gradually in terms of their difficult level.
Though there is no time limit to complete the test.
• Verbal test: A paper pencil test can be termed as a verbal test where the items are mentioned using
language. For example: 16 PF and Eysenck’s Personality Inventory.
• Non-verbal test: In this type of test certain figures and symbols are used. For example, Raven’s Progressive
Matrices. In this the language may be used only to provide instructions to the individual taking the test.
• Performance test: In performance test, the individual taking the test has to perform certain tasks. For
example: Alexander’s passalong test and Koh’s block design test.
• Objective tests: In objective tests, the individual will choose from certain correct answers that are decided in
advance. This avoids any subjectivity on behalf of the scorer. The responses could be in terms of true or false
or multiple choices or even a rating scale like Likert scale or Thurston’s scale may be used. For example: NEO
PI.
• Projective Tests: These are subjective in nature. Here, the test taker may be asked to respond to certain
semi-structured or unstructured stimuli. The responses are then to be interpreted by the administrator,
where subjectivity may creep in. Examples of projective tests are Rorschach Inkblot test, Somatic Inkblot
Series, Sentence Completion Test, Thematic Apperception Test and Children’s Apperception Test.
• Intelligence tests: There are various intelligence tests that are used to measure intelligence of
individuals. Intelligence can be described as one’s ability to adjust and cope with the
environment. Binet and Simon (1960) defined intelligence as an individual’s capacity to make
adequate judgements, carry out reasoning and ability to comprehend.
• Wechsler (1944, page 3) defined intelligence as “the aggregate or global capacity of the individual
to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment”. These tests
are often used in educational and clinical set ups.
• Examples of intelligence test are Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), Stanford-Binet
Intelligence Scale (SB), Bhatia battery, NIEPID Test for intelligence.
• Personality tests: These are used to measure personality of individuals. Larsen and Buss (2018)
defined personality as a collection of psychological traits and mechanisms that are stable and
organised and that have an influence an individual’s interaction and also has an impact on how
he/she modifies his/ her physical, social and psychological environment. It can also be explained
as differences amongst individuals with regard to their patterns of thinking, feeling and the way
they behave (American Psychological Association, 2019).
• Personality tests are used widely in varied setups including clinical, educational, counselling,
industrial and organisational setup and so on.
• Examples of personality test are Eysenck’s Personality Inventory, Thematic Apperception Test
(TAT).
• Aptitude tests: There are tests that measure the potential/ abilities possessed by an individual in
certain area. These find their application in schools and even in industrial set up for selection
purpose. They denote whether a person will be able to perform effectively if he/ she is given
training in that area. For instance, a person with aptitude for dance or music will do well in the
area if given training. Examples of aptitude tests are Differential Aptitude Test.
• Interest inventories: These measure interests of individuals. Interest is important as aptitude in
making career decisions and thus these tests are also used often in educational setup. Example of
interest inventory is Vocational Interest Inventory.
• Attitude tests: These tests measure attitude of an individual towards events, other individuals,
objects and so on. Often in attitude tests, Thurston and Likert scales are used. These could
measure attitude towards women, health and so on.
Application of Psychological Testing
Educational Settings:
1. Identifying special children, assessing achievement, and diagnosing deficiencies in
students.
2. Categorizing the children based on their ability (differentiation of instructions)
3. Detecting of learning capacity
4. Providing occupational counseling to the students of high school and college
students.
5. Selecting the applicants for professional and vocational courses.
In Counseling: The Psychological tests help in understanding the emotional well-
being of an individual for the counselling process (Adoga,2020)
• In Diagnosis and Planning for Treatment: The use of psychological tests aids in the identification
of various psychological problems (stress, depression), learning difficulties(dyslexia), behavioural
disorders (ADHD), and other disorders, as well as the evaluation of therapeutic effectiveness.
• In Self-Knowledge: The usage of testing is becoming increasingly popular as a means of improving
self-awareness and personal growth.
• In Theoretical and Applied Branches of Behavioral Research: Psychological tests provide basic
information about various problems related to lifespan development.
• In Legal Settings: The legal setting utilizes results from clinical psychologists’ especially when
settling cases that rely on eye witness testimony.
• In An Industrial Setting: Tests are widely used in industries and organisations to assess job
motivation, competence, commitment, staff selection, job recruitment, promotion, transfer, and
even termination can also be done through the testing method.
The objectivity of tests and personality tests
• The objective psychometric approach is most appropriately applicable to ability
tests such as those measuring intelligence or mechanical skills. Its usefulness
decreases, however, when users attempt to assess personality traits such as
dependence, authori- tarianism, or anxiety.
• Personality variables are far more complex and, therefore, need to be validated in
the context of history, behavioral observations, and interpersonal relationships.
For example, a T score of 70 on the MMPI-2 scale 9 (mania) takes on an entirely
different meaning for a high-functioning physician than for an individual with a
poor history of work and interpersonal relationships. When the purely objective
psychometric approach is used for the evaluation of problems in living (neurosis,
psychosis, etc.), its usefulness is questionable.
Central Role of Clinician
• Psychological assessment is most useful in the understanding and evaluation of per- sonality and especially
of problems in living. These issues involve a particular problem situation having to do with a specific
individual.
• The central role of the clinician performing psychological assessment is that of an expert in human behavior
who must deal with complex processes and understand test scores in the context of a person’s life.
• The clinician must have knowledge concerning problem areas and, on the basis of this knowl- edge, form a
general idea regarding behaviors to observe and areas in which to collect relevant data. This involves an
awareness and appreciation of multiple causation, inter- actional influences, and multiple relationships.
• As Woody (1980) has stated, “Clinical assessment is individually oriented, but it always considers social
existence; the objec- tive is usually to help the person solve problems.”
• Clinicians should be familiar with core knowledge related to measurement and clinical prac- tice. This
includes descriptive statistics, reliability (and measurement error), validity (and the meaning of test scores),
normative interpretation, selection of appropriate tests, administration procedures, variables related to
diversity (ethnicity, race, age, gender), testing individuals with disabilities, and an appropriate amount of
supervised experience
• Persons performing psychological assessment should also have basic knowledge related to the
demands, types of referral questions, and expectations of various contexts—particularly
employment, education, vocational/career, health care (psychological, psychiatric, medical), and
forensic
• Clinicians should know the main interpretive hypotheses in psychological testing and be able to
identify, sift through, and evaluate a series of hypotheses to determine which are most relevant
and accurate. For each assessment device, clinicians must understand conceptually what they are
trying to test. Thus, rather than merely knowing the labels and definitions for various types of
anxiety or thought disorders, clinicians should also have in-depth operational criteria for them.
For eg: BKT in rural settings is more appropriate and children from urban settings might not be
able to answer certain items.
• With psychological assessment, the goal is not merely to describe the person, but rather to
develop relevant answers to specific questions, aid in problem solving, and facilitate decision
making.
•
Theoretical
• Clinicians should research the construct that the test is supposed to measure and then examine how the test
approaches this construct
• Clinicians can frequently obtain useful information re- garding the construct being measured by carefully
studying the individual test items.
Practical
• The examinee must be able to read, comprehend, and respond appropriately to the test. Sec- ond, some
tests are too long, which can lead to a loss of rapport with, or extensive frus- tration on the part of, the
examinee. Administering short forms of the test may reduce these problems, provided these forms have
been properly developed and are treated with appropriate caution
Standardization
• Each test has norms that reflect the distribution of scores by a standardization sample.
• If a similarity exists between the group or individual being tested and the standardization sample, adequate
comparisons can be made. For example, if the test was standardized on college students between the ages
of 18 and 22, useful comparisons can be made for college students in that age bracket (if we assume that the
test is otherwise sufficiently reliable and valid). The more dissimilar the person is from this standardization
group (e.g., over 70 years of age with low educational achievement), the less useful the test is for evaluation.
• Three major questions that relate to the adequacy of norms must be answered.
1. The first is whether the standardization group is representative of the population on which the examiner
would like to use the test.
(The ideal and current practice is to use stratified random sampling. However, because this can be an
extremely costly and time-consuming procedure, many tests are quite deficient in this respect )
2. The second question is whether the standardization group is large enough. If the group is too small, the
results may not give stable estimates because of too much random fluctuation.
3. A good test has specialized subgroup norms as well as broad national norms. These subgroups can be based
on fac- tors such as ethnicity, sex, geographic location, age, level of education, socioeconomic status, or urban
versus rural environment
Standardization can also refer to administration procedures. A well-constructed test should have instructions
that permit the examiner to give the test in a structured manner similar to that of other examiners and also to
maintain this standardized ad- ministration between one testing session and the next
• CLINICAL JUDGMENT
• Any human interaction involves mutual and continually changing perceptions.
• Clinical judgment is a special instance of perception in which the clinician attempts to use
whatever sources are available to create accurate descriptions of the client.
• These sources may include test data, case history, medical records, personal journals, and ver- bal
and nonverbal observations of behavior.
• Relevant issues and processes involved in clinical judgment include data gathering, data synthesis,
the relative accuracy of clini- cal versus statistical/actuarial descriptions, and judgment in
determining what to in- clude in a psychological report. This sequence also parallels the process
clinicians go through when assessing a client.
Data Gathering and Synthesis
• One of the most essential elements in gathering data from any source is the development of an
optimum level of rapport. Rapport increases the likelihood that clients will give their optimum
level of performance. If rapport is not sufficiently developed, it is increasingly likely that the data
obtained from the person will be inaccurate. (poor insight, aggressive patients,
neuropsychological cases, personality disorders)
• Another important issue is that the interview itself is typically guided by the client’s responses
and the clinician’s reaction to these responses. A client’s responses might be nonrepresentative
because of factors such as a transient condition (stressful day, poor night’s sleep, etc.) or
conscious/unconscious faking. The client’s responses also need to be interpreted by the clinician.
• The clinician typically develops hypotheses based on a client’s responses and combines his or her
observations with his or her theoretical understanding of the issue. These hypotheses can be
further investigated and tested by interview questions and test data, which can result in
confirmation, alteration, or elimination of the hypotheses. Thus, bias can potentially enter into
this process from a number of dif- ferent directions, including the types of questions asked, initial
impressions, level of rapport, or theoretical perspective.
• Unstructured approaches in gathering and interpreting data provide flexibility, focus on the
uniqueness of the person, and are ideographically rich. In contrast, an important disadvantage of
unstructured ap- proaches is that a clinician, like most other persons, can be influenced by a
number of personal and cultural biases.
• clinicians might develop incorrect hypothe- ses based on first impressions (primacy effect). They
might end up seeking erroneous confirmation of incorrect hypotheses by soliciting expected
responses rather than ob- jectively probing for possible disconfirmation.
• clinicians might be unduly influenced by their preferred theory of personality, halo effects, self-
fulfilling prophecies, expectations, and cultural stereotypes.
 Accuracy of Clinical Judgements
• After collecting and organizing their data, clinicians then need to make final judg- ments regarding the
client. Determining the relative accuracy of these judgments is crucial.
• A possible source of inaccuracy is that clinicians frequently do not take into account the base rate, or
the rate at which a particular behavior, trait, or diagnosis occurs in the general population
• A further source of error is that information obtained earlier in the data collection process is frequently
given more importance than information received later (primacy effect). This confirmatory bias can be
especially likely to occur in a hypothesis- testing situation in which clinicians do not adequately seek
information that could disconfirm as well as confirm their hypothesis
• Relatively higher rates of accuracy were achieved when clinical judgments based on interviews were
combined with formal assessments and when statistical interpretive rules were used. When subjective
test inter- pretation was combined with clinical judgment, it was questionable whether any increase in
accuracy was obtained (Garb, 1984, 1989).
• Paradoxically, as knowledge and experience in an area increase, there is generally a decrease in
confidence regarding judgments. This observation was found to be true unless the clinicians were very
knowledgeable, in which case they were likely to have a moderate level of confidence (Garb, 1989)
• Objectivity: The term “objectivity of test” refers to that the items being phrased
should be in such a manner that they are interpreted similarly by everyone on
whom the test is administered i.e; it should be free from subjective bias.
Moreover, the scoring method of the test should be uniform when evaluated by
various experts in different circumstances.
• Practicability: A test must also be feasible in terms of the time it takes to
complete it, the length of the test, the scoring, and so on. To put it another way,
the test should not be overly long, and the scoring method should not be
complex or restricted to specialized individuals .
• Standardised Procedure: It is considered an essential trait of a psychological test. The procedure for
administering should be uniform throughout the test. Furthermore, the standardization depends on the
examiner’s skill. To achieve the standardization of the test, the instructions of the test for administration should
be clearly defined.

• Norms: Refers to a representative sample’s average performance on a specific test. Moreover, it helps in
comparing the score of a person with the comparative group. The most common types of norms used in a
psychological test include Age norms, grade norms, percentile norms, and standard score norms. Without the
test norms, the interpretation of the test score is not possible.

• Reliability: A test must also be reliable. Dependability, stability, consistency, predictability, and correctness are
synonyms for reliability. It is the test consistency that makes a test reliable. In simple words, a reliable test
yields consistent results on several occasions. The appropriate time to yield similar scores is usually a fortnight
Singh (2006 b).
• Validity: It is regarded as the most significant characteristic of a good test. To put
it another way, test validity means that the test must measure what it was
designed to assess. The basic way to determine validity is to look at how test
scores relate to some standard, such as a personal achievement, specific
characteristic, and the behaviour that reflects the traits intended to assess.
Reliability and Validity
• It is comparatively easy to establish the validity and reliability of actual
(machines) tools because the entities that they measure are tangible.
• In psychology, on the other hand, the entities that are studied are intangible, like
intelligence, personality, attitude and so on. Further, human beings may also
change and their behaviour can fluctuate. Thus, it is complex to establish validity
and reliability of psychological tests.
VALIDITY
• Validity can be described as the characteristics of a psychological test that states
whether the test measures what it is supposed to or purports to measure.
• Thus, a test on adjustment needs to measure adjustment and a test on self
esteem needs to measure self esteem.
• A ruler, that measures length, is not a valid instrument to measure weight and a
weighing machine is not a valid instrument to measure length.
• Similarly, a good psychological test needs to be valid and should measure the
entity (or the sample of behaviour) that it was developed to measure.
Face validity
• As the name suggests the focus here is on the face value of the test. If the test seems to measure
what it is supposed to measure then it can be said to have face validity. This is basically based on
judgement (Veeraraghavan and Shetgovekar, 2016). Such a validity may be helpful when deciding
whether the items in the test are suitable in certain situations. Though this can be considered as
initial step in the process of testing the items rather than in drawing conclusions about the validity
of the test.
• Eg: A test designed to measure anxiety should include items that clearly pertain to anxiety
symptoms, like worry or nervousness, rather than unrelated content.
• Unlike other forms of validity (like content or construct validity), face validity is not based on
rigorous empirical evidence but rather on the subjective judgment of how well the test items seem
to represent the construct being measured.
• In clinical settings, a test with high face validity may make clients more comfortable and willing to
participate, as they feel it directly addresses their concerns.
• Explaining to clients that a new psychological assessment tool specifically targets their area of
concern, such as cognitive functioning, based on the appearance of the test items.
• Content validity
• In this validity the focus is on the content of the psychological test. Content validity is established by comparing the
items in the test with the behavioural manifestations. In content validity, whether the construct that the test is
supposed to measure is represented in the test or not is focused on.
• Content validity can be differentiated from face validity as the former includes an examinations of the items that is
comprehensive in nature. Further, quantitative data is also used. Correlation between the items and total score is
computed that provides an idea about the content validity of the test. Thus, a clear idea about how each item
represents the variable measured by the psychological test can be sought.
• In order to obtain content validity, both, the items that relate to the variables measured by psychological test and
the items that do not relate to the variables measured by the test need to be included. A psychological test can be
first measured for content validity during the test construction stage.
• Content validity ensures that the test reflects the theoretical definition of the construct it aims to measure. It aligns
with the theoretical understanding of the construct and its dimensions.
• Content validity ensures that a psychological test comprehensively covers the entire domain of the construct it is
meant to measure. It involves expert evaluation and careful consideration of item relevance to ensure that the test
is both comprehensive and representative of the construct.
• Construct validity: As was discussed in the first unit, a construct can be termed as a concept that
is adopted for empirical purpose (Kerlinger, 1995). Thus, when adjustment or creativity is adopted
in a research for empirical purpose, it will be termed as a construct.
• Construct validity involves looking for evidences that the behaviours reflected by the test to some
extent indicates the construct.
• In this validity, hypotheses are formulated based on theory related to the construct and then
attempts are made to accept or reject the hypotheses based on data collection. Based on the
data then it is concluded whether the the results obtained are explained by the theory or not. If
not then the theory is modified and the process is repeated.
• It involves aligning the test with theoretical models, gathering empirical evidence, and using
methods such as convergent and discriminant validity, factor analysis, and predictive validity to
confirm the test’s accuracy and relevance.
• Convergent validity: Falls under construct validity, focusing on the
correlation with other measures of the same or similar constructs.
• This validity measures the extent to which two tests that measure similar
or same construct overlap. Thus, a correlation is established between two
tests that measure similar or same entity and if there is significant positive
correlation then we can now that the test developed is valid. For example,
a test developed to measure occupational stress has significant positive
correlations with another valid test that also measures occupational stress.
• Used to confirm that a test is measuring the intended theoretical construct
by showing it aligns with related measures.
• Demonstrating that a new measure of social anxiety correlates with
existing social anxiety scales and related constructs like shyness or fear of
negative evaluation.
• Criterion related validity : Criterion-related validity is a type of validity that evaluates how well a test predicts or
correlates with an external criterion or outcome. It assesses the effectiveness of a test in predicting a specific
criterion related to the construct being measured. This form of validity is crucial for determining whether a test is
useful in practical applications.
• This is related to the predictive feature of the psychological test and is scientific in nature (Veeraraghavan and
Shetgovekar, 2016). This can be explained as the extent to which a psychological test covaries with another valid
psychological test measuring the same variable or with the help of gold standard assessment strategies (Haynes
et al., 1999). Gold standard assessment strategies are nothing but a different and accurate criterion or
behavioural evaluation that is carried out by experts using valid psychological tests, observation and interview
(Zolotor & and Mayer, 2004; Rich and Eyberg, 2001),
• Types: concurrent validity, predictive validity
• Predictive validity measures how well a test predicts future performance or behavior related to the criterion. It
involves administering the test and then comparing the results with a future criterion measure. A college
entrance exam’s predictive validity is assessed by comparing students' scores with their future academic
performance in college. If higher test scores accurately predict better college grades, the test has high predictive
validity.
• Concurrent validity: Falls under criterion-related validity, focusing on the correlation with an external criterion
measured at the same time. It comparing the results of a new diagnostic test for depression with those from a
well-established clinical interview conducted simultaneously.
• Predictive validity: This validity can be explained as relationship between performance on the psychological
test developed at a certain time and performance on a criterion measure at some other point of time
(Kazdin, 1998). This validity is established with the help of correlation between the scores that are obtained
from two different tests. Thus, it is similar to concurrent validity. But the only difference is that the tests are
administered at two different points in time and not at the same time.
• Incremental validity
• Incremental validity refers to the extent to which a new psychological measure or test adds value to the
prediction of a criterion above and beyond what can already be predicted by existing measures. It evaluates
whether the new test provides additional predictive power when used alongside other established tests or
predictors.
• Incremental validity assesses whether a new measure improves the accuracy or predictive capability of a
model or test battery. This is determined by adding the new measure to an existing set of predictors and
evaluating whether it significantly enhances prediction.
• In predicting job performance, if cognitive ability tests already explain a large portion of the variance in job
performance, adding a new personality measure like conscientiousness might provide incremental validity if
it explains additional variance in performance that the cognitive tests do not .
• Reliability
• Reliability denotes consistency of the psychological test over a period of time.
• In case of psychological entities that are intangible, establishing reliability or consistency is a difficult task. If
a psychological test on adjustment is developed and it is administered on a group of adolescents, the scores
obtained at a certain point and some time later, say after six months need to be more or less same or similar.
Reliability can be denoted with the help of reliability coefficient, that can be statistically computed.
The reliability of a test refers to its degree of stability, consistency, predictability, and accuracy. It addresses the
extent to which scores obtained by a person are the same if the person is reexamined by the same test on
different occasions.
It should be stressed, however, that a certain degree of error or noise is always present in the system, from
such factors as a misreading of the items, poor ad- ministration procedures, or the changing mood of the
client. If there is a large degree of random fluctuation, the examiner cannot place a great deal of confidence in
an individual’s scores. The goal of a test constructor is to reduce, as much as possible, the degree of
measurement error, or random fluctuation.
• Reliability
Two main issues relate to the degree of error in a test.
1. The first is the inevitable, natural variation in human performance. Usually the variability is less for measurements
of ability (like intelligence) than for those of personality. Whereas ability variables (intelligence, me- chanical aptitude,
etc.) show gradual changes resulting from growth and development, many personality traits are much more highly
dependent on factors such as mood. This is particularly true in the case of a characteristic such as anxiety.
Thus, an examiner should generally expect higher reliabilities for an intelligence test than for a test measuring a
personality variable such as anxiety. It is the examiner’s responsibility to know what is being measured, especially the
degree of variability to be expected in the measured trait.
2. The second important issue relating to reliability is that psychological testing methods are necessarily imprecise.
Many con- structs in psychology are often measured indirectly. For example, intelligence cannot be perceived directly;
it must be inferred by measuring behavior that has been defined as being intelligent. Variability relating to these
inferences is likely to produce a certain de- gree of error resulting from the lack of precision in defining and observing
inner psycho- logical constructs. Variability in measurement also occurs simply because people have true (not because
of test error) fluctuations in performance between one testing session and the next.
• The purpose of reliability is to estimate the degree of test variance caused by error. The
four primary methods of obtaining reliability involve determining
• (a) the extent to which the test produces consistent results on retesting (test-retest),
• (b) the relative accuracy of a test at a given time (alternate forms),
• (c) the internal consistency of the items (split half), and
• (d) the degree of agreement between two examiners (interscorer).
• An- other way to summarize this is that reliability
• can be time to time (test-retest),
• form to form (alternate forms),
• item to item (split half), or
• scorer to scorer (interscorer).
Although these are the main types of reliability, there is a fifth type, the Kuder-Richardson;
like the split half, it is a measurement of the internal consistency of the test items.
• Whereas reliability addresses is- sues of consistency, validity assesses what the test is to be
accurate about. A test that is valid for clinical assessment should measure what it is intended to
measure and should also produce information useful to clinicians. A psychological test cannot be
said to be valid in any abstract or absolute sense, but more practically, it must be valid in a partic-
ular context and for a specific group of people
• Although a test can be reliable without being valid, the opposite is not true; a necessary
prerequisite for valid- ity is that the test must have achieved an adequate level of reliability. Thus, a
valid test is one that accurately measures the variable it is intended to measure. For example, a
test comprising questions about a person’s musical preference might erroneously state that it is a
test of creativity. The test might be reliable in the sense that if it is given to the same person on
different occasions, it produces similar results each time. However, it would not be reliable in that
an investigation might indicate it does not correlate with other more valid measurements of
creativity.
• Establishing the validity of a test can be extremely difficult, primarily because psychological
variables are usually abstract concepts such as intelligence, anxiety, and personality. These
concepts have no tangible reality.
• Test - Retest Method
• In this method, a correlation is computed between the test scores and retest scores of a
particular test. The correlation obtained needs to be obviously positive and lower the correlation,
lower the reliability. Thus, the test is administered to a certain group of individuals at a particular
point in time and then re-administered after a time gap to establish its consistency. Though, error
could occur in test- retest reliability due to issues like practice effect, maturation, learning and
memorisation of items by the participants.
• Alternate or equivalent forms method
• To overcome some of the issues faced in test-retest reliability, alternate form method can be
used. In this method an alternate form of the test is developed. The two forms are then
administered one after the other on same group of individuals and the scores obtained are
correlated to establish consistency or reliability. One of the major challenges in this regard is
creating two equivalent forms of the test.
• Split- half method
• This method mainly focuses on internal consistency. Internal consistency refers to the extent to which
all items or components within a test or measurement tool consistently measure the same construct. It
reflects how well the items on a test are correlated with each other, indicating that they are all
assessing the same underlying concept or trait.
• This can help counter the disadvantage of the alternate forms method as only one test is
developed and administered.
• The test is then split in half as the name suggests. One important question that may arise is how
the test can be split.
• One way that it can be split is in to half, with the above 50% items and the below 50% items.
Though this will not work when the test is a power test with increasing level of difficulty. A better
way is to split on the basis of alternate items, that is even numbered items in one lot and odd
numbered items in another. As the scores are obtained, correlation can then be computed
between the two lots to obtain internal consistency.
• As a general principle, the longer a test is, the more reliable it is be- cause the larger the number of
items, the easier it is for the majority of items to com- pensate for minor alterations in responding to a
few of the other items. As with the alternate forms method, differences in content may exist between
one half and another.
• Interscorer Reliability
• In psychological testing it is also relevant to obtain a scorer reliability as error variance can also
occur due to the test administrator and scorer. Scorer reliability can be established by having two
test scorers score the items for a same test and then, by computing correlation coefficient
between the scores given by the two scorers
• The basic strategy for determining interscorer reliability is to obtain a series of responses from a
single client and to have these responses scored by two different individuals.
• The two sets of scores can then be correlated to determine a reliability coefficient. Any test that
requires even partial subjectivity in scoring should provide information on interscorer reliability.
• Kuder–Richardson Reliability and Coefficient Alpha (á)
• The Kuder–Richardson Reliability indicates inter-item consistency and is
mainly used for psychological tests with dichotomous items (i.e., items
scored as right/wrong, yes/no, true/false). As the focus of this method is
on inter-item consistency, it is important that the test item are
homogeneous in nature. When the items are heterogeneous, the reliability
coefficient obtained will be low.
• The Kuder–Richardson formulas (especially Kuder–Richardson Formula 20,
or KR-20) are measures of internal consistency reliability specifically
designed for tests with dichotomous items
• Coefficient Alpha, also known as Cronbach’s Alpha can be termed as an
extension of Kuder–Richardson Reliability (Veeraraghavan and
Shetgovekar, 2016). This can be used for tests that have more than two
answers and thus can also be used for Likert scale. This also focuses on
internal consistency.
• Cronbach's α is used with tests containing items scored on a range of
scales, such as 1-5 or 1-7. It is the most commonly used measure of
internal consistency in psychological and educational research.
• The best form of reliability is dependent on both the nature of the variable being measured and the
purposes for which the test is used.
• If the trait or ability being mea- sured is highly stable, the test-retest method is preferable,
• whereas split half is more ap- propriate for characteristics that are highly subject to fluctuations.
• When using a test to make predictions, the test-retest method is preferable because it gives an estimate of
the dependability of the test from one administration to the next. This is particularly true if, when
determining reliability, an increased time interval existed between the two ad-ministrations.
• If, on the other hand, the examiner is concerned with the internal consis- tency and accuracy of a test for a
single, one-time measure, either the split half or the alternate forms would be best.
• Another consideration in evaluating the acceptable range of reliability is the format of the test. Longer tests
usually have higher reliabilities than shorter ones. Also, the format of the responses affects reliability. For
example, a true-false format is likely to have a lower reliability than multiple choice because each true-false
item has a 50% possibility of the answer being correct by chance. In contrast, each question in a multiple-
choice format having five possible choices has only a 20% possibility of being correct by chance.
Standardization and Norms
• Standardisation and norms are also important aspects of psychological tests and are stated in the manual
that comes along with the test. Psychological tests denote how individuals are different from each other
with reference to various psychological entities. And in order to adequately measure presence and level of
such entities in an individual, uniformity in procedure, administration and scoring of the test is required. This
is termed as standardisation.
Contd…
• Further, it is also important to have a norm that can be referred to, to suitably interpret the scores obtained
by the individuals. Often after a test is administered and scored, a raw score is obtained which is
meaningless, unless it is compared against a standard or norms. Standardisation and norms are established
after it is ensured that the test is reliable and valid. To obtain the norms, the test is administered to a large
number of individuals. For instance, we can obtain norms for weights of newly born infants in India, by
measuring the weight of a large number of newly born infants in a given period of time. Then based on this,
norms can be created. An average score will also be obtained. Thus, weight of any new born infant can then
be compared with the norms to understand where they fall and make interpretations accordingly.
• In Psychology, when norms are created for various psychological tests, various aspects like gender, culture,
geographical location and so on need to be taken in to consideration and thus separate norms can be
created for different groups.
• Psychological tests are often described as standardized for two reasons, both of which address the need for
objectivity in the testing process. The first has to do with uniformity of procedure in all important aspects of
the administration, scor- ing, and interpretation of tests. Naturally, the time and place when a test is ad-
ministered, as well as the circumstances under which it is administered and the examiner who administers
it, affect test results. However, the purpose of standardizing test procedures is to make all the variables that
are under the con- trol of the examiner as uniform as possible, so that everyone who takes the test will be
taking it in the same way.
• The second meaning of standardization concerns the use of standards for evaluating test results. These
standards are most often norms derived from a group of individuals—known as the normative or
standardization sample—in the process of developing the test. The collective performance of the
standardization group or groups, both in terms of averages and variability, is tabulated and be- comes the
standard against which the performance of other individuals who take the test after it is standard- ized will
be gauged.
Factors Affecting Psychological Test
Performance
• Examiner Variables
• Participant Variables