Test Retest Reliability And Internal Consistency

Since our personalities aren’t influenced by one factor The MMPI with some revisions influenced the development of tests and measurements by providing the ability to conduct objective testing across 10 clinical scales which assess 10 major categories of abnormal human behavior, and four validity scales, which assess the person’s general test-taking attitude

When discussing the accuracy of personality tests, there is no test, which will provide perfect precision. According to Dr. O'Neil, “an individual's personality is the complex of mental characteristics that makes them unique from other people” (2006, Para 1). O’Neil believes that the potential factors involved in shaping personality include values, beliefs, and expectations that are genetic and environmental (O’Neil, 2006).

Why is internal consistency such an easy way to assess reliability from a methodological perspective?

The five-factor model (FFM) is a contemporary construct describing personality. It incorporates five traits – openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism also referred to as OCEAN. Within each dimension, there are specific personality attributes, for example, openness includes subcategories of feelings and actions. The FFM was influenced by Cattell’s 16-factor model (1957) and shares traits with many other personality theories such as Eysenck’s PEN model. There has been an ongoing debate discussing how many factors appropriately represent the brain structure of personality, suggestions have varied from 2-7, recently Almagor et al. (1995) advocated that a 7-factor model unfolds when evaluative traits are involved. Costa & Mcrae (1992) claim that the FFM is the best theory of personality, however, the model has received much criticism. Through examining different aspects of the model its credibility can be explored.

Bornstein, R. F. (2007). Toward a process-based framework for classifying personality tests [Peer comments on the journal article “Advancing personality assessment terminology: time to retire ”objective“ and ”projective“ as personality test descriptors” by G. J. Meyer, & J. E. Kurtz. Journal of personality assessment, 2 (89), 202-207.

This vastly researched and thriving subfield of psychology is concerned with basic methods used to identify similarities and differences among individual’s personal characteristics and capacities. Assessment involves more than mere administration of tests i.e.: collection and integration of information attained from various sources like interviews, behavioural observations, reports, psychological tests and historical documents in order to attain a complete picture of a person’s state.

Using the text for this course, the University Library, the Internet, and/or other resources answer the following questions. Your response to each question should be at least 200 words in length.

For any measure to be valuable in psychological research, it needs to be both valid and reliable (Goodwin, 2008: 128). Research is reliable when more researchers have found the same results, or, within for instance behavioural research, when the same behaviour occurs at several measurements (Goodwin, 2008: 124). There are different types of validity. Firstly, there is construct validity, which measures whether an operationalisation of a construct actually measures what it is supposed to measure. Secondly, criterion validity determines whether a certain phenomenon is related to another phenomenon, and can accurately determine future developments. Lastly, content validity determines whether a test measures all aspects of the construct that is being measured (Goodwin, 2008: 125-126).

Valid – The test must be shown to measure what it is intended to measure. Unbiased – The test should not place students at a disadvantage because of gender, ethnicity, language, or disability.” Yet, all three requirements for a test to be viable do not apply to standardized testing. Results produced are not consistent, as the day to day lives of students are constantly changing; Issues in the students’ lives may affect their thoughts, emotions, and health that would affect the results of their tests, providing a variety of test scores for one person alone. The validity of the test is also in question as it does not account for differences in students’ backgrounds and personal life so test scores do not accurately measure student’s abilities, but rather, it measures their ability to memorize information and test taking skills. Standardized testing holds a very large amount of bias, as the students of different ethnicities, cultures, and languages, have to confront many biased questions that are present in standardized tests. Therefore, standardized testing, according to Zucker’s analysis of an effective test, should not be used as an effective measure for testing students’ intelligence as it breaks the three requirements that make

A single test cannot determine how smart a student is, no matter how prepared they are. First of all, these tests do not actually help students to understand the material they learned throughout the school year. Instead, it is teaching them to memorize the facts, all so they are able to pass the test (Harris, Smith). As a result, creative thinking comes to a stop (“11 Problems Created by the Standardized Testing Obsession”). Another reason testing is unreliable is because every student is completely different. Individual needs, interests, and abilities cannot be scored, which is why students don’t always do their best, even if they know the information. With large amounts of homework and studying students face each night, they lose hours of sleep, which is the largest factor of low scores on exams.There could also possibly be troubles at home or with one’s health that influence scores (Mooney 47). Even in the classroom individual needs aren’t always met. Perhaps class size, instructional time, curriculum, and the availability of specialists and tutors determine scores (47).

For psychologists, one of the more popular theories espoused is the trait approach to personality, or “the idea that people have consistent personality characteristics that can be measured and studied” (Kalat, 2002, 512). However there are several problems that arise. First, there are significant cross-cultural differences, so one set of personality traits for one culture may differ considerably for another. The next problem would concern the creation of a test that could accurately measure these traits. While psychologists have for the most part addressed these issues, I will focus on the latter of the two. There has been a

The FFM when further split into six facets allows a broader analysis of the personality traits providing an advantage if the questions were translated into the Inuktitut language. The translated single item test when tested

The original International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) focused on Goldberg’s 100-adjective markers of the psycholexical FFM structure (Goldberg, 1990/1992). The current IPIP-50 is a 50-item prototype public domain (the NEO-PI-R is a commercial questionnaire) personality questionnaire (Goldberg et al., 2006; Goldberg, 2011). Since the questionnaire is free of charge over 600 different studies have employed it (Goldberg, 2016). Until 2005 the IPIP big-five factor markers lacked validating evidence, but research conducted in 2005 found that the IPIP-50 had a high internal consistency and related strongly to both Costa and McCrae’s NEO-FFI and Eysenck’s EPQ-R Short Form (Gow et al., 2005). In addition, Gow et al. (2005) found that although Intellect and Openness related less strong, it was still 0.59. A study carried out in New Zealand found that there was hardly any evidence to suggest hidden biases at the item or scale level of the IPIP-50 (Guenole & Chernyshenko, 2005). Before looking at the research examining the relation between the FFM and EI, this literature review first presents some of the current findings in EI.

The historical use of the terms objective and projective to classify a personality test, and the problems with such classification.

Psychological tests or psychological assessments are an important asset in the field of psychology. These tests are designed to measure people’s characteristics which pertain to behavior. There are a variety of different types of tests that can be used to assess different types of behaviors. According to the specific behavior or behaviors being assessed, tests are