The Experts below are selected from a list of 267 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Kirk Heilbrun - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Role Forensic of Psychological Testing Assessment in
1992Co-Authors: Kirk HeilbrunAbstract:Despite the apparent widespread use of Psychological tests in evaluations performed by psychologists to assist legal decision makers, there has been little critical but balanced examination of the appropriate parameters for the forensic use of such tests. The following discussion examines the nature of legal decision making, and concludes that the primary legal criterion for the admissibility of Psychological Testing is relevance to the immediate legal issue or to some underlying Psychological construct. Assuming that accuracy is a more consistent concern for psychologists performing such evaluations, the criticisms of various commentators are discussed. Some criticisms appear appropriate and are incorporated into a set of proposed guidelines for the use of Psychological tests in forensic contexts. Other criticisms appear misplaced, however, and the call for a whole sale ban on Psychological Testing in the forensic context is rejected. The appropriate role of Psychological Testing in forensic assessment 1 has been debated for a number of years, and is far from clear at present. Critics have described such assessment procedures as "controversial" and "of doubtful validity and applicability in relation to forensic issues" (Ziskin, 1981a, p. 225; see also Faust & Ziskin, 1988, 1989; Ziskin & Faust, 1988). The major goal of this article is to discuss the research and commentary critical of Psychological Testing
-
the role of Psychological Testing in forensic assessment
Law and Human Behavior, 1992Co-Authors: Kirk HeilbrunAbstract:Despite the apparent widespread use of Psychological tests in evaluations performed by psychologists to assist legal decision makers, there has been little critical but balanced examination of the appropriate parameters for the forensic use of such tests. The following discussion examines the nature of legal decision making, and concludes that the primary legal criterion for the adminissibility of Psychological Testing isrelevance to the immediate legal issue or to some underlying Psychological construct. Assuming thataccuracy is a more consistent concern for psychologists performing such evaluations, the criticisms of various commentators are discussed. Some criticisms appear appropriate and are incorporated into a set of proposed guidelines for the use of Psychological tests in forensic contexts. Other criticisms appear misplaced, however, and the call for a whole sale ban on Psychological Testing in the forensic context is rejected.
Gregory J Meyer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the incremental validity of Psychological Testing and assessment conceptual methodological and statistical issues
Psychological Assessment, 2003Co-Authors: John Hunsley, Gregory J MeyerAbstract:: There has been insufficient effort in most areas of applied psychology to evaluate incremental validity. To further this kind of validity research, the authors examined applicable research designs, including those to assess the incremental validity of test instruments, of test-informed clinical inferences, and of newly developed measures. The authors also considered key statistical and measurement issues that can influence incremental validity findings, including the entry order of predictor variables, how to interpret the size of a validity increment, and possible artifactual effects in the criteria selected for incremental validity research. The authors concluded by suggesting steps for building a cumulative research base concerning incremental validity and by describing challenges associated with applying nomothetic research findings to individual clinical cases.
-
Psychological Testing and Psychological assessment a review of evidence and issues
American Psychologist, 2001Co-Authors: Gregory J Meyer, Stephen E Finn, Lorraine D Eyde, Kevin L Moreland, Robert R Dies, Elena J Eisman, Tom W Kubiszyn, Geoffrey M ReedAbstract:This article summarizes evidence and issues associated with Psychological assessment. Data from more than 125 meta-analyses on test validity and 800 samples examining multimethod assessment suggest 4 general conclusions: (a) Psychological test validity is strong and compelling, (b) Psychological test validity is comparable to medical test validity, (c) distinct assessment methods provide unique sources of information, and (d) clinicians who rely exclusively on interviews are prone to incomplete understandings. Following principles for optimal nomothetic research, the authors suggest that a multimethod assessment battery provides a structured means for skilled clinicians to maximize the validity of individualized assessments. Future investigations should move beyond an examination of test scales to focus more on the role of psychologists who use tests as helpful tools to furnish patients and referral sources with professional consultation.
Roberto J Velasquez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Psychological Testing on the internet new problems old issues
American Psychologist, 2004Co-Authors: Jack A Naglieri, Fritz Drasgow, Mark Schmit, Len Handler, Aurelio Prifitera, Amy Margolis, Roberto J VelasquezAbstract:: The Internet has significantly changed the way people conduct business, communicate, and live. In this article, the authors' focus is on how the Internet influences the practice of psychology as it relates to Testing and assessment. The report includes 5 broad sections: background and context, new problems yet old issues, issues for special populations, ethical and professional issues, and recommendations for the future. Special attention is paid to implications for people with disabling conditions and culturally and linguistically diverse persons. The authors conclude that ethical responsibilities of psychologists and current psychometric standards, particularly those regarding test reliability and validity, apply even though the way in which the tests are developed and used may be quite different.
Geoffrey M Reed - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Psychological Testing and Psychological assessment a review of evidence and issues
American Psychologist, 2001Co-Authors: Gregory J Meyer, Stephen E Finn, Lorraine D Eyde, Kevin L Moreland, Robert R Dies, Elena J Eisman, Tom W Kubiszyn, Geoffrey M ReedAbstract:This article summarizes evidence and issues associated with Psychological assessment. Data from more than 125 meta-analyses on test validity and 800 samples examining multimethod assessment suggest 4 general conclusions: (a) Psychological test validity is strong and compelling, (b) Psychological test validity is comparable to medical test validity, (c) distinct assessment methods provide unique sources of information, and (d) clinicians who rely exclusively on interviews are prone to incomplete understandings. Following principles for optimal nomothetic research, the authors suggest that a multimethod assessment battery provides a structured means for skilled clinicians to maximize the validity of individualized assessments. Future investigations should move beyond an examination of test scales to focus more on the role of psychologists who use tests as helpful tools to furnish patients and referral sources with professional consultation.
Sharon C Slater - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
item response theory models and Testing practices current international status and future directions invited paper presented at the 23rd international congress of applied psychology madrid spain laboratory of psychometric and evaluative research repo
European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 1997Co-Authors: Ronald K Hambleton, Sharon C SlaterAbstract:Psychological Testing has been undergoing major changes. One of the main changes is the transition from the use of classical to modern test models and methods in test development. The purposes of this paper are to describe the shortcomings of classical test models which are overcome with modern test theory, i.e., item response theory, to introduce the basic concepts of item response theory, to describe several important international applications of item response theory models, and finally, to describe some likely IRT directions in the next century.
