1994
DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology.

Abstract: In the context of the development of prototypic assessment instruments in the areas of cognition, personality, and adaptive functioning, the issues of standardization, norming procedures, and the important psychometrics of test reliability and validity are evaluated critically. Criteria, guidelines, and simple rules of thumb are provided to assist the clinician faced with the challenge of choosing an appropriate test instrument for a given psychological assessment. Clinicians are often faced with the critical … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

125
5,422
15
151

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7,611 publications
(6,012 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
125
5,422
15
151
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall treatment integrity was 89.6% across 26 sessions (SD = 9.94, range = 65.4 -100%). Observers double-coded 23.1% (n = 6) sessions and inter-rater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation = .81; Cicchetti, 1994).…”
Section: Feasibility Measuresmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Overall treatment integrity was 89.6% across 26 sessions (SD = 9.94, range = 65.4 -100%). Observers double-coded 23.1% (n = 6) sessions and inter-rater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation = .81; Cicchetti, 1994).…”
Section: Feasibility Measuresmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Positive and negative mood were created by summing the five mood ratings for a given day: happy and calm for positive; angry, anxious, and sad for negative. Internal consistency for the two composite mood variables was fair (Positive mood: Cronbach α = .71, Negative mood: Cronbach α = .75; Cicchetti, 1994). For this set of multilevel regressions, day of week, represented by six indicator variables (with Monday functioning as the reference category) were included in the Level 1 model.…”
Section: Data Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Intraclass correlations in the patient sample ranged from .74 (Well-Being) to .99 (Appetite Gain), with a mean value of .90 and a median value of .89. Intraclass correlations in this range indicate good to excellent interrater reliability (see Cicchetti, 1994). …”
mentioning
confidence: 96%