Test inventory.................................................................................................................3Australian Scale for Asperger’s Syndrome................................................................3Achenbach Child Behaviour Checklist......................................................................3Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment Ages 6-18.............................4Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule –Revised (ADIS-R) Child............................4Beck Anxiety Inventory.............................................................................................4Beck Depression Inventory –II..................................................................................5Beck Hopelessness Inventory.....................................................................................7Beck Youth Inventories of Emotional & Social Impairment...................................10Bene Anthony Family Relations Test (Test cupboard).........................................10Benton Controlled Oral Word Association Test......................................................11British Ability Scales...............................................................................................11CAVLT.....................................................................................................................12Child’s Auditory Verbal Learning Test...................................................................13Children’s Apperception Test..................................................................................13Children’s atypical development scale.....................................................................14Children’s Depression Scale....................................................................................15Children’s Memory Scale.........................................................................................15Connor’s rating scales..............................................................................................16Connors’ Continuous Performance Test 2.0............................................................17Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory........................................................................17Coping Scale for Adults...........................................................................................18Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System................................................................18Depression Anxiety Stress Scales............................................................................19DES..........................................................................................................................19Eating Disorder Inventory-II....................................................................................19Goldstein-Scheerer Tests of Abstract and Concrete Thinking.................................20Impact of Events Scale (IES)...................................................................................20Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children..............................................................20Key Math Revised....................................................................................................22Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory.......................................................................22MMPI-2....................................................................................................................24MMPI-Adolescent....................................................................................................25NART.......................................................................................................................26NEALE.....................................................................................................................26Pain - OMPSQ..........................................................................................................26P-3 & Pain profile....................................................................................................27Padua inventory........................................................................................................27Piers-Harris 2, Piers Harris Children’s Self Concept Scale.....................................27Post-Traumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale...................................................................28Personality Assessment Inventory...........................................................................29Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)........................................................30Rey Complex Figure Test........................................................................................31Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale...................................................................32Reynolds Child Depression Scale............................................................................33RCMAS....................................................................................................................34Rohde Sentence Completion Method.......................................................................34Rorschach Inkblot Test.............................................................................................35SCL-90-R.................................................................................................................35SCOLP.....................................................................................................................37

Self-Directed Search................................................................................................37SIQ...........................................................................................................................38ASIQ.........................................................................................................................39Social Skills Training: Enhancing Social Competence with Children and Adolescents..............................................................................................................39South Australian Spelling Test.................................................................................40STAXI......................................................................................................................40STAXI-2...................................................................................................................42STROOP TEST........................................................................................................43SYMBOL DIGIT MODALITIES TEST (SDMT)...................................................44Thematic Apperception Test....................................................................................45TRAIL MAKING TEST..........................................................................................45TRAUMA SYMPTOM INVENTORY...................................................................46WAIS-R....................................................................................................................47WASI........................................................................................................................49WIAT.......................................................................................................................50Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised............................................................................50WISC-III...................................................................................................................50WISC-IV..................................................................................................................53Wisconsin Card Sort Test.........................................................................................56Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised............................................................56WPPSI-R..................................................................................................................57WPPSI-III.................................................................................................................59Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning.................................................63

Test inventoryAustralian Scale for Asperger’s SyndromeThis questionnaire is designed to identify behaviours and abilities indicative of

Asperger's Syndrome in children during their primary school years. This is the age at

which the unusual pattern of behaviour and abilities is most conspicuous. Each

question or statement has a rating scale with 0 as the ordinary level expected of a

child of that age.

Achenbach Child Behaviour ChecklistPurpose: Designed to assess "social competence" and "behavior problems" in

children. [Parent, teacher, self-report]

Population: Ages 4-18.

Score: Five scale scores.

Authors: Thomas M. Achenbach and Craig Edelbrock.

Publisher: Thomas M. Achenbach.

Description: The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) was designed to address the

problem of defining child behavior problems empirically. It is based on a careful

review of the literature and carefully conducted empirical studies. It is designed to

assess in a standardized format the behavioral problems and social competencies of

children as reported by parents.

Scoring: The CBCL can be self-administered or administered by an interviewer. It

consists of 118 items related to behavior problems which are scored on a 3-point scale

ranging from not true to often true of the child. There are also 20 social competency

items used to obtain parents’ reports of the amount and quality of their child’s

participation in sports, hobbies, games, activities, organizations, jobs and chores,

friendships, how well the child gets along with others and plays and works by

him/herself, and school functioning.

Reliability: Individual item intraclass correlations (ICC) of greater than .90 were

obtained "between item scores obtained from mothers filling out the CBCL at 1-week

intervals, mothers and fathers filling out the CBCL on their clinically-referred

children, and three different interviewers obtaining CBCLs from parents of

demographically matched triads of children." Stability of ICCs over a 3-month period

were .84 for behavior problems and .97 for social competencies. Test-retest reliability

of mothers’ ratings were .89. Some differences were found between mothers’ and

fathers’ individual ratings.

Validity: Several studies have supported the construct validity of the instrument.

Tests of criterion-related validity using clinical status as the criterion (referred/non-

referred) also support the validity of the instrument. Importantly, demographic

variables such as race and SES accounted for a relatively small proportion of score

variance.

Norms: Normative data, obtained from parents of 1,300 children, were heterogeneous

with respect to race and socioeconomic status and were proportionate to the

composition of the general U.S. population.

Suggested Uses: It is suggested that the CBCL is a viable tool for assessing a child’s

behaviors, via parent report, in a clinical or research environment.

Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment Ages 6-18The Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) includes an

integrated set of rating forms for ages 1.5 to 59:

Ages 1.5-5 Module (Pre-School)

Ages 6-18 Module (School)

new Test Observation Forms for Ages 2-18 (TOF/2-18)

Ages 18-59 Module (Adult)

Ages 60+ Module (Adult) -- Call

ASEBA forms are used and researched worldwide, as reported in some 5,000 studies

across 50 countries.

Features

Multi-informant assessment for ages 1.5-59 with separate forms available for

parents/caregivers, teachers/educators, self-rating

Separate norms by gender and age group for competencies, adaptive functioning,

syndromes, DSM-oriented scales, Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems

Comparable scales across wide age ranges

User-friendly forms for both hand-scoring and key entry (computer-scoring);

scannable forms and direct client entry also available

Specialized Guides illustrate use of the ASEBA in mental health, medical, school, and

child/family service settings

Extensive research on service needs and outcomes; diagnosis; prevalence of problems,

medical conditions, treatment efficacy, genetic and environmental effects,

epidemiology, cross-cultural variatons, child abuse, ADHD, HIV, PTSD

The ASEBA offers a comprehensive approach to assessing adaptive and maladaptive

functioning. ASEBA instruments clearly document clients' functioning in terms of

both quantitative scores and individualized descriptions in respondents' own words.

Descriptions include what concerns respondents most about the clients; the best things

about clients; and details of competencies and problems that are not captured by

quantitative scores alone. The individualized descriptive data, plus competence,

adaptive, and problem scores, facilitate comprehensive, in-depth assessment.

Numerous studies demonstrate significant associations between ASEBA scores and

both diagnostic and special education categories. You can relate ASEBA directly to

DSM-IV diagnostic categories by using the normed DSM-oriented scales that are

available for scoring ASEBA forms.

Ages 1.5-5 Module (Pre-School Age)

Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 1.5-5 (CBCL/1.5-5)

Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF/1.5-5)

Ages 6-18 Module (School Age)

Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 6-18 (CBCL/6-18)

Youth Self-Report for Ages 11-18 (YSR/11-18)

Teacher's Report Form for Ages 6-18 (TRF/6-18)

Test Observation Forms for Ages 2-18 (TOF/2-18) NEW

Direct Observation Form for Ages 5-14 (DOF)

Semistructured Clinical Interview for Children & Adolescents (SCICA)

Ages 18-59 Module (Adult Age)

Adult Behavior Checklist for Ages 18-59 (ABCL)

Adult Self-Report for Ages 18-59 (ASR)

Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule –Revised (ADIS-R) Child(none found yet)

Beck Anxiety InventoryPurpose: Designed to discriminate anxiety from depression in individuals.

Population: Adults.

Score: Yields a total score

Time: (5-10) minutes.

Author: Aaron T. Beck.

Publisher: The Psychological Corporation.

Description: The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was developed to address the need

for an instrument that would reliably discriminate anxiety from depression while

displaying convergent validity. Such an instrument would offer advantages for clinical

and research purposes over existing self-report measures, which have not been shown

to differentiate anxiety from depression adequately.

Scoring: The scale consists of 21 items, each describing a common symptom of

anxiety. The respondent is asked to rate how much he or she has been bothered by

each symptom over the past week on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 to 3. The items

are summed to obtain a total score that can range from 0 to 63.

Reliability: The scale obtained high internal consistency and item-total correlations

ranging from .30 to .71 (median=.60). A subsample of patients (n=83) completed the

BAI after 1 week, and the correlation between intake and 1-week BAI scores was .75.

Validity: The correlations of the BAI with a set of self-report and clinician-rated

scales were all significant. The correlation of the BAI with the HARS-R and HRSD-R

were .51 and .25, respectively. The correlation of the BAI with the BDI was .48.

Convergent and discriminant validity to discriminate homogeneous and

heterogeneous diagnostic groups were ascertained from three studies. The results

confirm the presence of these validities.

Norms: The three normative samples of psychiatric outpatients were drawn from

consecutive routine evaluations at the Center for Cognitive Therapy in Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania. The total sample size was 1,086. There were 456 men and 630 women.

Suggested Uses: Recommended for use in assessing anxiety in clinical and research

settings

Beck Depression Inventory –IIThe Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition (BDI-II) is a 21-item self-report

instrument intended to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression as

listed in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of

Mental Disorders Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; 1994). This new revised edition replaces

the BDI and the BDI-1A, and includes items intending to index symptoms of severe

depression, which would require hospitalization. Items have been changed to indicate

increases or decreases in sleep and appetite, items labeled body image, work

difficulty, weight loss, and somatic preoccupation were replaced with items labeled

agitation, concentration difficulty and loss of energy, and many statements were

reworded resulting in a substantial revision of the original BDI and BDI-1A. When

presented with the BDI-II, a patient is asked to consider each statement as it relates to

the way they have felt for the past two weeks, to more accurately correspond to the

DSM-IV criteria.

Each of the 21 items corresponding to a symptom of depression is summed to give a

single score for the BDI-II. There is a four-point scale for each item ranging from 0 to

3. On two items (16 and 18) there are seven options to indicate either an increase or

decrease of appetite and sleep. Cut score guidelines for the BDI-II are given with the

recommendation that thresholds be adjusted based on the characteristics of the

sample, and the purpose for use of the BDI-II. Total score of 0-13 is considered

minimal range, 14-19 is mild, 20-28 is moderate, and 29-63 is severe.

BDI has been used for 35 years to identify and assess depressive symptoms, and has

been reported to be highly reliable regardless of the population. It has a high

coefficient alpha, (.80) its construct validity has been established, and it is able to

differentiate depressed from non-depressed patients. For the BDI-II the coefficient

alphas (.92 for outpatients and .93 for the college students) were higher than those for

the BDI- 1A (.8 6). The correlations for the corrected item-total were significant at .05

level (with a Bonferroni adjustment), for both the outpatient and the college student

samples. Test-retest reliability was studied using the responses of 26 outpatients who

were tested at first and second therapy sessions one week apart. There was a

correlation of .93, which was significant at p < .001. The mean scores of the first and

second total scores were comparable with a paired t (25)=1.08, which was not

significant.

Validity: One of the main objectives of this new version of the BDI was to have it

conform more closely to the diagnostic criteria for depression, and items were added,

eliminated and reworded to specifically assess the symptoms of depression listed in

the DSM-IV and thus increase the content validity of the measure. With regard to

construct validity, the convergent validity of the BDI-II was assessed by

administration of the BDI-1A and the BDI-II to two sub-samples of outpatients

(N=191). The order of presentation was counterbalanced and at least one other

measure was administered between these two versions of the BDI, yielding a

correlation of .93 (p<.001) and means of 18.92 (SD = 11.32) and 21.888 (SD = 12.69)

the mean BDI-II score being 2.96 points higher than the BDI-1A. A calibration study

of the two scales was also conducted, and these results are available in the BDI-II

manual. Consistent with the comparison of mean differences, the BDI-II scores are 3

points higher than the BDI-1A scores in the middle of the scale. Factorial Validity has

been established by the inter-correlations of the 21 items calculated from the sample

responses.

Beck Hopelessness InventoryDescription: Hopelessness is the experience of despair or extreme pessimism about

the future, and as such, is part of the "cognitive triad" (along with a negative view of

oneself and one's world) described in Beck's (1979) cognitive model of depression.

According to Shneidman (1996), hopelessness-helplessness is the most common

emotion experienced among suicidal persons. The Beck Hopelessness Scale (Beck et

al., 1974; Beck and Steer, 1988; Steer and Beck, 1988) is a 20-item assessment device

designed to measure negative expectations about the future. Individuals completing

the BHS are asked to answer the questionnaire based on their attitudes during the

preceding week. The self-report instrument may be administered in written or oral

form, and each item is scored with a true/false response. Total scores range from 0-20

with higher scores indicating a greater degree of hopelessness. The BHS has been

translated into Dutch (DeWilde et al., 1993) and Hebrew (Pershakovsky, 1985).

Potential Use: Clinical research and assessment.

Populations Studied: The BHS has been used with high school students and other

non-clinically ascertained populations (DeWilde et al., 1993; Osman et al., 1998),

adolescent psychiatric outpatients (Brent et al., 1997; 1998) and inpatients (Enns et

al., 1997; Goldston et al., 2000; Kashden et al., 1993; Kumar and Steer, 1995; Morano

et al., 1993; Rotheram-Borus and Trautman, 1988; Steer et al., 1993a, 1993b; Topol

and Reznikoff, 1982), and adolescent suicide attempters on a pediatrics unit (Swedo et

al., 1991).

Reliability: Among adolescents who have been psychiatrically hospitalized,

hopelessness as assessed with the BHS seems to be a relatively stable construct

(correlation between serial administrations 6 months apart = .63; Goldston,

unpublished data, January 2000). These data dovetail with data from adult samples

suggesting that hopelessness as assessed with the BHS has some "trait characteristics"

(Young et al., 1996).

Internal Consistency: In adolescent psychiatric inpatients (Steer et al., 1993a), the

BHS has been found to be internally consistent (KR-20 coefficient=.86). Both the

Dutch translation of the scale (in three samples of adolescents) and the Israeli version

of the BHS have been found to be internally consistent (alphas from .68 to .75, and

alpha=.89, respectively).

Concurrent Validity: In a United States adolescent psychiatric inpatient sample, and

in Canadian samples of Aboriginal psychiatric inpatient suicide attempters and non-

Aboriginal psychiatric inpatient suicide attempters, BHS scores were found to

correlate (r=.53, .75, and .82, respectively) with severity of depression as measured

with the BDI (Enns et al., 1997). In nonreferred adolescents, BHS scores were

negatively related (as predicted) with Reasons for Living - Adolescent Version total

scores (r=-.65; Osman et al., 1998). In adolescent psychiatric inpatients, severity of

hopelessness was positively related to suicidal ideation (Steer et al., 1993b). Likewise,

changes in hopelessness over one year among high school students were related to

changes in suicidal ideation over the same period of time, after controlling for

changes in depression (Mazza and Reynolds, 1998).

In both Caucasian and Aboriginal adolescent psychiatric inpatient suicide attempters,

BHS scores were related to suicide intent; the relationship between BHS scores and

suicide intent remained significant for Caucasian but not Aboriginal youths after

controlling for concurrent depression (Enns et al., 1997). BHS scores were not found

to be related to suicidal intent among primarily Hispanic and African-American

adolescent psychiatry inpatient suicide attempters (Rotheram-Borus and Trautman,

1988).

In one study, adolescent suicide attempters reported more hopelessness at psychiatric

hospitalization than did adolescents without a history of attempts (Goldston et al.,

2000). In another study, suicidal adolescents as well as depressed nonsuicidal

adolescents reported more hopelessness than nondepressed, nonsuicidal adolescents

(DeWilde et al., 1993). In this study, depressed adolescents also reported more

hopelessness than suicidal youths, although it is worth noting that some of the suicide

attempters made their suicide attempts as long ago as one year before the study.

Psychiatrically hospitalized adolescent suicide attempters had higher hopelessness

scores than nonattempters, both in samples matched for severity of depression

(Morano et al., 1993) and in samples not matched for depression scores (Kashden et

al., 1993; Topol and Reznikoff, 1982). Hopelessness was one of two variables that

were used to discriminate between (or correctly classify) 76% of suicide attempters

hospitalized on a pediatrics unit, other at-risk youths, and normal controls (Swedo et

al., 1991).

Predictive Validity: Among adults, hopelessness has repeatedly been found to be

associated with eventual suicide (Beck et al., 1985, 1990; Fawcett et al., 1990) and

repeat self-harm behaviors (Scott et al., 1997; Brittlebank et al., 1990) in clinically

referred samples.

Among adolescent psychiatric inpatients with a history of suicide attempts, BHS

scores were predictive of suicide attempts following discharge from the hospital

(Goldston et al., 2000). These predictive effects were not apparent among adolescents

without a history of attempts, and were no longer statistically significant after

controlling for depression (Goldston et al., 2000). In a second study (Hawton et al.,

1999), the BHS failed to differentiate between adolescents who made repeat attempts

and adolescents who did not make repeat attempts in a 1-year follow-up after

hospitalization for self-poisoning. However, this study was limited in power because

of the small number of youths attempting suicide in the follow-up. When Hawton et

al. (1999) combined for statistical analyses the adolescents who presented at

hospitalization with repeat suicide attempts and adolescents who made repeat suicide

attempts over the follow-up, the repeaters did on average have higher BHS scores

than the youths with single overdoses.

Adults who prematurely discontinue cognitive therapy have higher hopelessness

scores than adults who remain in therapy (Dahlsgaard et al., 1998). In a controlled

treatment study, Brent et al. (1997) also found that adolescents who dropped out of

therapy had higher hopelessness scores than adolescents who remained in therapy.

Brent et al. (1998) also found higher BHS scores to be associated with failure to

achieve clinical remission of major depression.

Treatment Studies: A suicide prevention program was found to reduce BHS scores

in some but not all schools (Orbach and Bar-Joseph, 1993); however, BHS scores

were generally low in this high school population even before the intervention.

The BHS has been used in multiple treatment studies with adults (e.g., Rush et al.,

1982), but has not been used as a primary outcomes measure in a controlled treatment

trial with youths.

Summary and Evaluation: The Beck Hopelessness Scale is an excellent scale based

on the cognitive theory of depression that has been widely used with adults, but less

used in studies with adolescents. Among adults, the BHS repeatedly has been found to

be associated with repeat suicide attempts and completed suicide in clinically

ascertained samples. Hopelessness also has been found to predict later suicide

attempts (over 5 years) among psychiatrically hospitalized adolescents with a history

of prior attempts (but not among youths without prior attempts). An important

consideration in treatment studies is that BHS scores have been found to be associated

with treatment dropout in both samples of adults and adolescents.

Beck Youth Inventories of Emotional & Social ImpairmentUsed to assess emotional & social impairment in children ages 7 through 14. The new

Beck Youth Inventories five self-report inventories can be used separately or in

combination to assess symptoms of depression, anxiety, anger, disruptive behavior,

and self-concept.

Five Inventories

The five inventories each contain 20 statements about thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors associated with emotional and social impairment in youth. Children

describe how frequently the statement has been true for them during the past two

weeks, including today. The instruments measure a child's emotional and social

impairment in five specific areas:

Beck Depression Inventory for Youth: In line with the depression criteria of the

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders–Fourth Edition (DSM–

IV), this inventory allows for early identification of symptoms of depression. It

includes items related to a child's negative thoughts about self, life and the future,

feelings of sadness and guilt, and sleep disturbance.

Beck Anxiety Inventory for Youth: Reflects children's specific worries about school

performance, the future, negative reactions of others, fears including loss of control,

and physiological symptoms associated with anxiety.

Beck Anger Inventory for Youth: Evaluates a child's thoughts of being treated

unfairly by others, feelings of anger and hatred.

Beck Disruptive Behavior Inventory for Youth: Identifies thoughts and behaviors

associated with conduct disorder and oppositional-defiant behavior.

Beck Self-Concept Inventory for Youth: Taps cognitions of competence, potency, and

positive self-worth.

Child-Friendly

Using the same principles as the widely-used Beck Depression Inventory®–II and

other adult Beck Inventories for anxiety, hopelessness and suicide ideation, the Beck

Youth Inventories focus on children's self-perceived behavior, cognitions and

feelings. Each inventory can be completed in just 5 to 10 minutes.

Items are written at a 2nd grade reading level, with language that is easy to understand

for self-reporting; they may also be administered orally to those who have difficulty

reading at this level. Items have been selected from statements made by children seen

in various treatment settings.

Multiple Uses in School and Clinical Settings

Consistent with IDEA legislation requirements, the Beck Youth Inventories are

intended for screening for emotional and social difficulties that may impair a child's

ability to function in school settings. These inventories are useful in planning and

monitoring educational placement as well as in clinical treatment settings.

For children who are classified as emotionally disturbed, or who are emotionally

volatile, the inventories may be used for routine monitoring.

Flexible Scoring and Profiling

Norms allow comparison with responses of children within age and gender groups

that are ethnically and socio-economically representative of the U.S. population.

Scoring and profiling are adaptable to the clinical needs of and time available to the

user, including:

across inventory profiling for a global picture of the child's experience and

possible diagnostic impression;

inventory analysis for specific understanding of a child's experience in one

affective domain; and

single domain scores for expedient progress monitoring.

Cost-Effective for Treatment Decisions

These inventories offer brief, cost-effective methods for assessing both the severity of

a child's symptoms as well as change during the course of treatment. Initially, all

inventories may be administered to assist in treatment planning, with select ones used

in subsequent sessions as needed to target specific areas of treatment. The inventories

can be completed prior to each session without using valuable treatment time; ease

and flexibility of scoring also allows for problem identification and prevention efforts

without extensive training.

Bene Anthony Family Relations Test (Test cupboard)Purpose: The test assesses the feelings and emotions, negative and positive, that a

child has towards their family.

Benefits: Measures outgoing and incoming negative and positive feelings for each

figure, highlighting relationships which you may need to focus on.

Gives you information about a child's view of their family relationships and thoughts

concerning them, to which you can then focus attention.

Contains an easy-to-use scoring procedure which assesses the feelings associated with

maternal and paternal over-protection and over-indulgence and personality strength

and weakness.

Benton Controlled Oral Word Association TestThe Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) is a measure of a person's

ability to make verbal associations to specified letters (i.e., C, F. and L). This measure

is a useful component of a neuropsychological battery as it is able to detect changes in

word association fluency often found with various disorders.

British Ability ScalesA reliable measure of cognitive functioning over a wide age range, using ability

scales. These are divided into two batteries, available separately or together as a Full

Age Range kit. The assessment enables you to derive a general conceptual ability

score (GCA). Where more specific abilities need investigating, other diagnostic scales

can be used to provide a more detailed profile

Format: Individual

Time: 30-45 mins

Age: 2 years 6 months – 17 years 11 months

Purpose: A cognitive functioning measure that enables you to use scales tailored to a

specific problem.

Benefits: Age-related start points and decision points pinpoint an individual’s ability

range, and terminate the scale as soon as sufficient information is gathered to ensure

manageable testing times and minimise the risk of fatigue.

In addition to presenting profiles and discrepancy scores, it generates two

interpretative narrative reports for you to customise or edit; one for parents/teachers

and a more technical report for psychologists. Microsoft Windows compatible.

Contents

Available in 3 versions:

Full Age Range for 2.6 to 17:11 years

Early Years for 2:6 to 5:11 years

School Age for 5:0 to 17:11 years

Complete Set contains:

Stimulus Items for each scale

Stimulus Booklets

10 Record Forms

10 Assessment Booklets.

CAVLTThe CAVLT-2 measures auditory verbal learning and memory abilities-processes

commonly disrupted in learning disabilities and brain trauma. This test is designed to

be used with children and adolescents ages 6.6-17.11 years as part of a comprehensive

psychoeducational or neuropsychological assessment battery.

The CAVLT-2 is composed of one recognition and two free-recall memory word lists

designed specifically for young people. The first free-recall word list is presented for

five trials. The second free-recall test is presented as an interference list, after which

the individual is asked to recall words from the first list. Following a brief delay,

retention is assessed by a second recall test of the words from the first list. Finally,

words from a new recognition list are presented; the individual must decide whether

each word was included in the original free-recall word list.

The CAVLT-2 yields measures of immediate memory span, level of learning,

immediate recall, delayed recall, recognition accuracy, and total intrusions. The

CAVLT-2 scores for each trial may now be obtained and baserate tables are included

for standard score comparisons. Scores are reported as both percentiles and

normalized standard scores. Performance profiles for both learning trials and CAVLT-

2 summary scores can be plotted on the test booklet.

Normative data are provided for 12 age groups and include learning trial scores.

Results from generalizability and validity studies are contained in the manual. Four

case studies, including a learning-disabled sample, are also presented.

Child’s Auditory Verbal Learning TestType of test: Neuro – Memory / Learning

Ages: 6.5 – 18

Testing time: 45 minutes

Children’s Apperception TestPurpose: Designed as a projective method of describing personality.

Population: Ages 3 to 10 years.

Time: 30 minutes.

Description: The Children’s Apperception Test (CAT-A) is a projective method of

describing personality by studying individual differences in the responses made to

stimuli presented in the form of pictures of animals in selected settings. The 10 items

consist of 10 scenes showing a variety of animal figures, mostly in unmistakably

human social settings. The use of animal rather than human figures was based on the

assumption that children of these ages would identify more readily with appealing

drawings of animals than with drawings of humans. The author discusses

interpretation on the basis of psychoanalytic themes, but there is no compelling reason

that Children’s Apperception Test protocols could not be interpreted from other

theoretical frameworks.

Scoring: This projective technique is not "scored" in a quantitative sense. The gist of

stores is recorded, and the presence or absence of thematic elements is indicated on

the form provided.

Reliability and Validity: No statistical information is provided on the technical

validity and reliability of the CAT.

Norms: Information on norms is not included in the manual.

Suggested Uses: Designed for use in clinical and research settings.

Children’s atypical development scaleJ Abnorm Child Psychol. 1994 Apr;22(2):167-76

Psychometric properties of the children's atypical development scale.

Stein MA, Szumowski E, Sandoval R, Nadelman D, O'Brien T, Krasowski M,

Phillips W.

The Children's Atypical Development Scale (CADS) is a 53-item rating scale

designed to measure unusual behaviors in children. Principal-factor analysis on a

clinic-referred and pediatric sample of 474 children resulted in a four-factor solution:

Communication Deficits, Lability, Social Relatedness Deficits, and Preoccupation.

The CADS is internally consistent and has adequate temporal stability. CADS factor

scores were differentially associated with parent and teacher rating scales, IQ, and

Continuous Performance Test errors. The scale shows promise as a clinical and

research tool for assessing atypical behaviors associated with pervasive

developmental disorder and other neurobehavioral disorders.

Children’s Depression ScaleFirst published in 1978, the CDS is an invaluable tool for identifying depressed

children. Six sub-scales measure affective response, social problems, self-esteem,

pre-occupation with own sickness or death, guilt, pleasure and enjoyment. Children

post responses into one of five boxes: “very right”, “right”, “don’t know / not sure”,

“wrong”, or “very wrong”.

A parent’s questionnaire allows for others to report on the child’s behaviour and

feelings. The questionnaire is intended for use with parents, siblings, teachers and

relatives of the child to provide another index of the child’s depression or well-being.

 The CDS is used by clinicians for therapy as well as assessment. In counselling and

psychotherapy the CDS helps children acknowledge their sadness or depression. It is

also used in family therapy to help children and parents talk to each other about their

feelings. The scale has a game-like quality which facilitates the children’s ability to

communicate more fully their experience.

 For assessment of depression, the CDS provides an indication of the child’s

depression along two continua: depression and the capacity to enjoy life.

Children’s Memory ScaleCompares memory and learning to ability, attention, and achievement. The Children’s

Memory Scale™ (CMS) fills the need for a comprehensive learning and memory test

for children ages five to 16.

Multiple Uses

• Plays a vital role in assessing learning disabilities and attention deficit disorders

• Helps to plan remediation and intervention strategies for school and clinical settings

As a screener or diagnostic instrument, CMS measures learning in a variety of

memory dimensions:

• Attention and working memory

• Verbal and visual memory

• Short- and long-delay memory

• Recall and recognition

• Learning characteristics.

Serves as a process skills screening instrument

For children with learning disabilities, diagnosed with TBI, ADHD, epilepsy, cancer,

brain tumors

Connor’s rating scalesThe Conners' Rating Scales - Revised (CRS-R) are a result of 30 years of research on

childhood and adolescent psychopathology and problem behavior. The CRS-R assess

for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents (aged 3-17),

and can measure treatment changes and outcome assessment purposes. The CRS-R

are composed of the parent rating scale, teacher rating scale and adolescent self-report

scale, all of which come in a long version, taking 15-20 minutes to complete, and a

short version, taking 5-10 minutes to complete. The information below pertains to the

teacher rating scale.

Number of Versions:  3

Version:  Teacher

Author(s):  C. Keith Conners, Ph.D.

Date of Publication:  1997

Material(s) Needed for Test:  Instrument

Manual:  Available

Charge for one form or kit:  Yes

Purpose and Nature of Test

Construct(s) Measured:Conduct Problems, Cognitive Problems, Anxiety

Problems, Social Problems.

Population for which

designed:Age Range: 3 through 17 years old

Method of Administration:  Individual

Source of Information:  Teacher

Subtests and Scores: Oppositional, Social Problems, Cognitive

Problems/Inattention, DSM-IV Symptom Subscales,

Hyperactivity, Conners' ADHD Index, Anxious-Shy,

Conners' Global Index, Perfectionism

Number of Items:  59

Type of Scale:  Likert

Connors’ Continuous Performance Test 2.0(nothing located)

Coopersmith Self-Esteem InventoryThe Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory was developed through research to assess

attitude toward oneself in general, and in specific contexts: peers, parents, school, and

personal interests. It was originally designed for use with children, drawing on items

from scales that were previously used by Carl Rogers. Respondents state whether a set

of 50 generally favorable or unfavorable aspects of a person are "like me" or "not like

me." There are two forms, a School Form (ages 8-15) and an Adult form (ages 16 and

older) (Anastasi, 1988; Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991; Pervin, 1993). Acceptable

reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) and validity (convergent and

discriminant) information exists for the Self-Esteem Inventory (see Blascovich &

Tomaka, 1991).

Coping Scale for AdultsDesigned as a self-report inventory that examines coping behavior. The test comprises

of an administrator’s manual, four test forms, a scoring sheet and a profile chart. The

manual includes guidance for the administration, scoring and interpretation of the test.

The test forms are made up of two short forms, one for general and the other for

specific concerns, and two long forms, also for general and specific concerns. The

forms contain items which describe a coping strategy; the short forms contain 19

items representing each coping scale; the long version contains between three to seven

items representing each scale, making up 73 items in all. The respondents answer each

item on a five point Likert scale that assesses the degree to which each coping strategy

is used. The scale ranges from ‘Used a great deal’ to ‘Doesn’t apply or don’t do it’.

Each form includes an open question at the end.

The forms appear printed back to back and are appointed by colour; purple for general

and green for specific. Hence, the long forms, for example, will be printed on the

same sheet of paper; one side of this sheet will be purple, the other side green.

Accompanying the long forms is a scoring sheet for manual scoring of both general

and specific versions, and a profile chart, which can provide graphic feedback of

results from both the general and specific forms, and for individual scores or group

scores. The long form may be scored by machine using Optical Mark Recognition

(OMR) Scoring Services. The short form cannot be scored in this manner.

All of the forms are non-reusable. The authors give no indication of the order in

which the forms should be presented.

The respondent will need a pen or pencil and eraser to complete the forms and the

administrator will perhaps need a calculator to score the test, the authors suggest using

different coloured pens to mark out the profile chart in order to distinguish between

the profiles for general and specific concerns.

Delis-Kaplan Executive Function SystemThe Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) is the first nationally

standardized set of tests to evaluate higher level cognitive functions in both children

and adults. Assesses key areas of executive function (problem-solving, thinking

flexibility, fluency, planning, deductive reasoning) in both spatial and verbal

modalities, normed for ages 8-89.

With nine stand-alone tests, comprehensively assess the key components of executive

functions believed to be mediated primarily by the frontal lobe.

Engaging Materials: Its game-like format is engaging for examinees, encouraging

optimal performance without providing “right/wrong” feedback that can create

frustration in some children and adults.

Multiple Uses

Assess the integrity of the frontal system of the brain

Determine how deficits in abstract, creative thinking may impact daily life

Plan coping strategies and rehabilitation programs tailored to each patient’s profile of

executive-function strengths and weaknesses..

Depression Anxiety Stress ScalesThe DASS is a 42 item self-report inventory that yields 3 factors: Depression;

Anxiety; and Stress. This measure proposes that physical anxiety (fear

symptomatology) and mental stress (nervous tension and nervous energy) factor-out

as two distinct domains. This screening and outcome measure reflects the past 7 days.

Gamma coefficients that represent the loading of each scale on the overall factor (total

score) are .71 for depression, .86 for anxiety, and .88 for stress. One would expect

anxiety and stress to load higher than depression on the common factor as they are

more highly correlated and, therefore, dominate the definition of this common factor

(Lovibond and Lovibond, 1995). Reliability of the three scales is considered adequate

and test-retest reliability is likewise considered adequate with .71 for depression, .79

for anxiety and .81 for stress (Brown et al., 1997). Exploratory and confirmatory

factor analyses have sustained the proposition of the three factors (p < .05; Brown et

al., 1997). The DASS anxiety scale correlates .81 with the Beck Anxiety Inventory

(BAI), and the DASS Depression scale correlates .74 with the Beck Depression Scale

(BDI).

In the public domain. Can be downloaded for free from the following site

http://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/Groups/Dass/

DESThe Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) was developed by Eve Bernstein Carlson,

Ph.D. and Frank W. Putnam, M.D. The overall DES score is obtained by adding up

the 28 item scores and dividing by 28: this yields an overall score ranging from 0 to

100. Copies of the DES can be obtained through the Sidran Institute.

The following pages from Dr. Ross's book Dissociative Identity Disorder provide

background information on the DES. The papers by Dr. Ross referenced in the text

are listed elsewhere on this Web site.

The Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) is a 28-item self-report instrument that can

be completed in 10 minutes, and scored in less than 5 minutes. It is easy to

understand, and the questions are framed in a normative way that does not stigmatize

the respondent for positive responses. A typical DES question is, "Some people have

the experience of finding new things among their belongings that they do not

remember buying. Mark the line to show what percentage of the time this happens to

you." The respondent then slashes the line, which is anchored at 0% on the left and

100% on the right, to show how often he or she has this experience. The DES contains

a variety of dissociative experiences, many of which are normal experiences.

A newer form of the DES has a format in which the responses are made by circling a

percentage ranging from 0% to 100% at 10% intervals. The advantage of the new

form of the DES is that it is easier to score. It appears to have excellent convergent

validity with the original form of the DES, and to be interchangeable with it (Ellason,

Ross, Mayran, & Sainton, 1994).

The DES has very good validity and reliability, and good overall psychometric

properties, as reviewed by its original developers (Carlson, 1994; Carlson &

Armstrong, 1994; Carlson & Putnam, 1993; Carlson et al., 1993). It has excellent

construct validity, which means it is internally consistent and hangs together well, as

reflected in highly significant Spearman correlations of all items with the overall DES

score. The scale is derived from extensive clinical experience with an understanding

of DID. In the initial studies during its development and in all subsequent studies, the

DES has discriminated DID from other diagnostic groups and controls at high levels

of significance, based on either group mean or group median scores. In most samples,

the mean and median DES scores for DID subjects are within 5 points of each other.

As reviewed in Chapter Six, the higher the DES score, the more likely it is that the

person has DID. In a sample of 1,051 clinical subjects, however, only 17% of those

scoring above 30 on the DES actually had DID (Carlson et al., 1993). The DES is not

a diagnostic instrument. It is a screening instrument. High scores on the DES do not

prove that a person has a dissociative disorder, they only suggest that clinical

assessment for dissociation is warranted. This is how we report DES scores in our

consults, as within or not within the range for DID, and as consistent or not consistent

with the clinical and DDIS diagnosis of DID. DID subjects sometimes have low

scores, so a low score does not rule out DID. In fact, given that in most studies the

average DES score for a DID patient is in the 40s, and the standard deviation about

20, roughly about 15% of clinically diagnosed DID patients score below 20 on the

DES.

Eating Disorder Inventory-IIThe EDI-2 is a widely used 91-item self-report measure of symptoms commonly

associated with AN and BN. It provides standardized subscale scores on 11 clinically

relevant dimensions of EDs. Furthermore, it provides normative and reliability data on

11- to 18-year-old females (18).

(18). Shore RA, Porter JE. Normative and reliability data for 11 to 18 year olds on the

eating disorder inventory. Int J Eat Disord 1990;9:201–7.

Goldstein-Scheerer Tests of Abstract and Concrete ThinkingPsychological test inquiring into aptitudes and interests. Reveals weaknesses in

concept formation and abstract thinking, useful in determination between brain

damage and schizophrenia. Hanfmann-Kasanin Test is also used for this same purpose

Impact of Events Scale (IES)

Note: This is The IES not the revised 22 item version (IES-R).

The IES is a 15 item questionnaire evaluating experiences of avoidance and intrusion

which attempts to "reflect the intensity of the post-traumatic phenomena" (McGuire,

1990). Both the intrusion and avoidance scales have displayed acceptable reliability

(alpha of .79 and .82, respectively), and a split-half reliability for the whole scale

of .86 (Horowitz et al., 1979). The IES has also displayed the ability to discriminate a

variety of traumatised groups from non-traumatised groups (see Brier, 1997 for

review).

The IES was developed by Mardi Horowitz, Nancy Wilner, and William Alvarez to

measure current subjective distress related to a specific event (Horowitz, Wilner, &

Alvarez, 1979). Horowitz observed that the most commonly reported responses to

traumatic stressors fell into 2 major response sets: intrusion and avoidance (Horowitz,

et al, 1979; Weiss & Marmar, 1997). Measurements of responses to traumatic events

at the time were confined to physiological measures such as galvanic skin responses

or to self-reports on more general measures of anxiety, neither of which provided a

measure of the current degree of subjective impact experienced following a specific

traumatic event (Weiss & Marmar, 1997). The IES is considered one of the earliest

self-report measures of posttraumatic disturbance ( Briere, 1997).

Type of Instrument: The IES is a broadly applicable self-report measure designed to

assess current subjective distress for any specific life event (Horowitz, et al 1979;

Corcoran & Fischer, 1994). It is an instrument that can be used for repeated

measurement over a period of time. Its sensitivity to change renders it useful for

monitoring the client's progress in therapy (Corcoran & Fischer, 1994).

The IES scale consists of 15 items, 7 of which measure intrusive symptoms (intrusive

thoughts, nightmares, intrusive feelings and imagery), 8 tap avoidance symptoms

(numbing of responsiveness, avoidance of feelings, situations, ideas), and combined,

provide a total subjective stress score. All items of the IES are anchored to a specific

stressor (Horowitz, et al, 1979; Briere, 1997). Respondents are asked to rate the items

on a 4-point scale according to how often each has occurred in the past 7 days. The 4

point on the scale are: 0 (not at all), 1 (rarely), 3 (sometimes), and 5 (often).

Scoring Method: Each item was scored 0, 1, 3 or 5, with the higher scores reflecting

more stressful impact. The scores for the intrusive subscale range from 0 to 35, and is

the sum of the scores for items 1, 4, 5, 6, 0, 11, and 14. The scores for the avoidance

subscale range from 0 to 40, and is the sum of the scores for items 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13,

and 15. The sum of the two subscales is the total stress score. It is suggested that the

cut-off point is 26, above which a moderate or severe impact is indicated.

Wayne Corneil, Directory of Employee Assistance for the Department of Health and

Welfare, Canada; Randall Beaton, PhD, Professor of Psychological Nursing at the

University of Washington; and Roger Solomon, PhD, Department Psychologist for

the Washington State Patrol, suggest that the IES can be interpreted according to the

following dimensions:

0 - 8 Subclinical range

9 - 25 Mild range

26 - 43 Moderate range

44 + Severe range

Kaufman Assessment Battery for ChildrenPurpose: Designed for assessing cognitive development in children.

Population: Children, ages 2.5-12.5.

Score: 16 subtests.

Time: (40-85) minutes.

Author(s): Alan Kaufman and Nadeen Kaufman.

Publisher: American Guidance Service.

Description: The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) is a clinical

instrument for assessing cognitive development. Its construction incorporates several

recent developments in both psychological theory and statistical methodology. The K-

ABC also gives special attention to certain emerging testing needs, such as use with

handicapped groups, application to problems of learning disabilities, and

appropriateness for cultural and linguistic minorities. The authors rightly caution,

however, that success in meeting these special needs must be judged through practical

use over time. They also point out that the K-ABC should not be regarded as "the

complete test battery"; like any other test, it should be supplemented and corroborated

by other instruments to meet individual needs, such as the Stanford-Binet, Wechsler

scales, McCarthy scales, or neuropsychological tests.

Scoring: The 16 subtests are grouped into a mental processing set and achievement

set, which yield separate global scores. The mental processing set is then grouped into

those requiring primarily sequential processing of information and those requiring

simultaneous processing, with separate global scores for each.

Validity and Reliability: Odd-even reliabilities within one-year age groups averaged

in the .70s and .80s for subtests; for global scores, the averages were in the high .80s

and .90s. Test-retest reliabilities were computed within age groups spanning 3 or 4

years, retested after intervals of 2 to 4 weeks. For subtests, these reliabilities ranged

from .59 to .98, clustering in the .70s and .80s; for global scores, they ranged from .77

to .97. In general, reliabilities were higher for the achievement than for the mental

processing tests. Concurrent and predictive validity (6- to 12 interval) against

standardized achievement tests, were investigated in several small groups of both

normal and exceptional children. The correlations vary widely, but most appear

promising, and the patterns of correlations with subtests tend to fit theoretical

expectations. Analyses by ethnic groups yielded closely similar validities for Blacks,

Hispanics, and Whites.

Norms: Norms for the battery are based on administration of the tests to

representative samples of 100 children at each 6-moth age interval from 2.5 to 12.5, a

total of 2000 individuals. A variety of supplementary norms are provided, some

requiring the testing of additional subjects. Sociocultural norms are provided based on

a cross-tabulation by race (black-white) and by parental education (less than high

school education, high school graduate, and one or more years of college or technical

school).

Suggested Uses: Recommended uses of the K-ABC include integration as a

component of a cognitive assessment battery in clinical situations.

Key Math RevisedThe Revised Key Math is a content-referenced test for children in grades K-9. It can

be used for diagnostic, achievement and curriculum assessment purposes. The 13

domains it measures are: numeration, rational numbers, geometry, addition,

subtraction, multiplication, division, mental computation, measurement, time and

money, estimation, interpreting data, and problem solving. Spring and fall norms are

available for converting raw scores to standard and percentile scores as well as grade

and age equivalents. The test is administered individually and takes between 30 and

50 minutes. The tester, using small flip charts, shows pictures and diagrams to the

examinee and asks progressively harder questions within each domain until three

consecutive errors indicate that a "ceiling level" has been reached. Responses are

recorded by the tester in a score booklet. For the four mathematical operations

sections (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division), and examinee who

progresses beyond the first six basic questions continues within the domain by

working problems by hand at the back of the scoring booklet. Norms for this test were

established on 925 children in 14 states nationwide. Overall alternate-form reliability

averages .90 and split-half reliability is in the high .90s. Cross-validation with the

ITBS yields an overall correlation of .76. Norms are included in the test kit

Millon Clinical Multiaxial InventoryPurpose: Designed as a clinical measure to assist with psychiatric screening and with

clinical diagnosis.

Population: Adult clinical populations.

Score: 10 clinical personality pattern scores.

Time: (25) minutes.

Author: Theodore Millon.

Publisher: National Computer Systems, Inc.

Description: Based on Millon’s theory of personality and psychopathology, the brief

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II (MCMI-II) instrument provides a measure of

22 personality disorders and clinical syndromes for adults undergoing psychological

or psychiatric assessment or treatment. Specifically designed to help assess both Axis

I and Axis 11 disorders, the MCMI-II instrument can assist clinicians in psychiatric

diagnosis, developing a treatment approach that takes into account the patient’s

personality style and coping behavior, and guiding treatment decisions based on the

patient’s personality pattern.

Scoring: The MCMI-II consists of 10 clinical personality pattern scales, 3 severe

personality pathology scales, 6 clinical syndrome scales, 3 modifier indices, 1 validity

index.

Reliability: The reliability of the MCMI II generally has been sound, with the Axis II

scales showing the highest stability as predicted by Millon. Normal subjects also had

noticeably higher stability coefficients than clinical subjects. Millon also tested the

stability of high point and double-high-point configurations. He reports that high point

codes are fairly stable over a month, with nearly two thirds of 168 subjects achieving

the same scale high point. For double-high-point configurations, 25% achieve the

same high scores with another 19% achieving the same two scales but in reverse

order. Based on part of his normative sample, Millon reports quite high internal

consistencies. The average of 22 clinical scales is .89, and the range is from .81 to .95.

Validity: Because of extensive item overlap, we cannot be sure of the factor structure

of this instrument. But there are also overlaps based on the overlap of the constructs;

that is, the personality disorders are by no means distinct entities.

Norms: Norms for the MCMI-II instrument are based on a national sample of 1,292

male and female clinical subjects representing a variety of DSM-III and DSM-III-R

diagnoses. The subjects included inpatients and outpatients in clinics, hospitals, and

private practices. The MCMI-II manual describes the distribution of gender, age,

marital status, religion, and other factors within the sample.

Suggested Uses: The MCMI-II is used primarily in clinical settings with individuals

who require mental health services for emotional, social, or interpersonal difficulties.

 

Qualification Level A

Administer To Individuals 18 years and older

Reading Level 8th grade

Completion Time 25–30 minutes (175 true/false items)

MMPI-2The MMPI-2 test’s contemporary normative sample and extensive research base help

make it the gold standard in assessment for a wide variety of settings. The test can be

used to help:

Assess major symptoms of social and personal maladjustment.

Identify suitable candidates for high-risk public safety positions.

Support classification, treatment, and management decisions in criminal justice and

correctional settings.

Give a strong empirical foundation for a clinician's expert testimony.

Assess medical patients and design effective treatment strategies, including chronic

pain management.

Evaluate participants in substance abuse programs and select appropriate treatment

approaches.

Support college and career counseling recommendations.

Provide valuable insight for marriage and family counseling.

Key Features

Descriptive and diagnostic information relevant to today’s clients.

Tailored reports present interpretive information for specific settings to help meet a

wide range of needs.

Nationally representative normative sample.

Normative sample consists of 1,138 males and 1,462 females between the ages of 18

and 80 from several regions and diverse communities within the U.S.

Flexible administration and scoring.

The test can be administered in several formats: traditional paper-and-pencil,

audiocassette or CD recording, and computer. To help meet the needs of more

individuals, the MMPI-2 test can be administered in English, Spanish, Hmong, and

French for Canada.

Abbreviated format.

The first 370 items of the test can be administered to obtain scores for validity

indicators L, F, and K and the 10 clinical scales. The full MMPI-2 test must be

administered to obtain scores for all the validity indicators, the content scales, and the

supplementary scales.

Quick Facts

Date Published 1989

Qualification Level A

Administer To Individuals 18 years and older

Reading Level 6th grade

Completion Time 60–90 minutes (567 true/false items)

MMPI-AdolescentThe adolescent inventory is shorter than the standard adult version, was developed at

a sixth-grade reading level, and is geared towards adolescent issues and personality

"norms." The MMPI-A has 478 true/false items, or questions, (compared to 567 items

on the MMPI-2) and takes 45 minutes to an hour to complete (compared to 60 to 90

minutes for the MMPI-2). There is also a short form of the test that is comprised of

the first 350 items from the long-form MMPI-A.

The questions asked on the MMPI-A are designed to evaluate the thoughts, emotions,

attitudes, and behavioral traits that comprise personality. The results of the test reflect

an adolescent's personality strengths and weaknesses, and may identify certain

disturbances of personality (psychopathologies) or mental deficits caused by

neurological problems.

There are eight validity scales and ten basic clinical or personality scales scored in the

MMPI-A, and a number of supplementary scales and subscales that may be used with

the test. The validity scales are used to determine whether the test results are actually

valid (i.e., if the test taker was truthful, answered cooperatively and not randomly) and

to assess the test taker's response style (i.e., cooperative, defensive). Each clinical

scale uses a set or subset of MMPI-A questions to evaluate a specific personality trait.

Some were designed to assess potential problems that are associated with

adolescence, such as eating disorders, social problems, family conflicts, and alcohol

or chemical dependency.

NARTTitle: National Adult Reading Test, Second Edition

Author: Nelson, Hazel E.; Willison, Jonathan

Purpose: Developed to estimate "the premorbid intelligence levels of adult patients

suspected of suffering from intellectual deterioration."

NEALEThe Neale Analysis of Reading Ability is an individually administered standardised

diagnostic reading test. It contains a Reader, in book form, comprising six short

graded narratives, each with a limited number of words and having a central theme.

The passages are illustrated.

It consists of four criterion-referenced, supplementary diagnostic tests: Discrimination

of Initial and Final Sounds, Names and Sounds of the Alphabet, Graded Spelling, and

Auditory Discrimination, are provided in the manual, plus Word Lists extracted from

the passages for quick assessment of Accuracy or Word Recognition.

Pain - OMPSQOrebro Musculodkeletal Pain screening questionnaire

Acute pain

Definition: Acute pain is pain that is associated with tissue injury eg, lacerations,

fracture, inflammation, muscle strain.

 

Analgesics are given to provide pain relief allowing patients to move and function as

normally as possible, particularly as evidence shows that too much rest is detrimental.

Analgesics should be given regularly whilst an injury is still healing; as long as an

injury is present, patients will experience pain.

 

A sprain may last 2 days while postoperative pain may last up to a week, but patients

often wait until pain becomes intolerable before taking painkillers. This is not

desirable since severe pain is much more difficult to control than moderate pain.

 

Giving analgesics regularly actually decreases pain before it reaches its peak. For

example, in dysmenorrhea, the pain may be very severe only for the first 2 days.

Therefore, Ponstan® (mefenamic acid, Pfizer), Voltaren® (diclofenac, Novartis) or

other NSAIDs should be taken on a regular basis for 2 days.

 

Multimodal analgesia describes giving different drugs acting at different levels of the

nociceptive (pain) pathway are used concurrently, using opioids, NSAIDs and local

anesthetics for the same patient. This approach will potentiate the analgesic effects

and allow smaller doses of each drug to be used, thus reducing side effects. [Anesth

Analg 1993; 77:1048-1056]

 

For example, NSAIDs act peripherally by reducing prostaglandins but opioids act

centrally on opioid receptors. Furthermore, side effects of both drugs are completely

different. Thus NSAIDs and opioids can be given together in the multimodal

approach. Sometimes we may give one drug regularly while the other is given PRN,

eg, regular NSAIDs with prn opioids if the pain is not relieved with NSAIDs alone.

 

Another important point in treating acute pain is to inform the patient about the

"natural history" of the injury and when he/she can expect the pain to diminish

without analgesics. For example, for muscle strain or sprain, the pain should diminish

after 2 to 3 days; if it does not, the patient should return to the doctor who can then

assess if anything further needs to be done.

 

Chronic pain

Definition: Although chronic pain is classified as pain that lasts 3 to 6 months, this is

an arbitrary duration. Basically, chronic pain is pain that persists beyond the healing

period (ie, once the tissues have healed). Chronic pain may be nociceptive,

neuropathic, or mixed nociceptive-neuropathic. In many types of chronic pain, it is

not possible to eliminate the pain completely and therefore the approach to this

problem must be to teach the patient to manage the pain rather than to focus on

relieving the pain.

 

When assessing patients with chronic pain, it is very important to determine the type

of their pain as medications used for nociceptive pain and neuropathic pain are very

different. We also need to assess the impact of pain on the patient's life, as chronic

pain is something that can consume patients and affect not only them but also their

family and friends.

 

Patient assessment

In assessing patients with chronic pain, history is the most important factor, with

physical examination providing confirmation of the diagnosis; investigations may also

be helpful in eliciting the underlying cause of the pain, eg, diabetes mellitus in a

patient who presents with painful peripheral neuropathy.

 

Red flags that indicate tumors, infection and neurological deficit, need to be ruled out

and “yellow flags” that indicate psychosocial risk factors should also be looked for. If

any red flags are found, the patient must be referred to the appropriate specialist.

Examples of red flags in patients with low back pain are: age of presentation below 20

years or above 55 years; trauma; constant progressive, non-mechanical pain; previous

history of cancer; steroid use; limited lumbar flexion; weight loss and constitutional

symptoms; widespread neurological deficit; cauda equina syndrome and structural

deformity.

 

Yellow flags are psychological factors that increase the risk of developing long

term disability. For back pain, yellow flags include the belief that back pain is

harmful and is potentially severely disabling and the fear of becoming paralyzed

in the future. Patients with yellow flags are at higher risk of developing chronic

pain related disability unless these factors are appropriately addressed.

 

During history taking, a detailed description of the pain will help the doctor to make a

diagnosis. Important questions include asking how the pain started, how long the pain

has lasted, how frequent the episodes of pain are, where the pain is and where it goes,

what the pain feels like ie, pricking, burning, cramping, shooting. Neuropathic pain is

usually burning and shooting or lancinating and nociceptive pain may be cramping,

pricking or sharp.

 

Patients should be asked to score their pain when they are at rest and during

movement. There are many pain scales available today. A simple scale that can be

used is the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) where the pain score ranges from 0 (no

pain at all) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). Once patients understand the concept of

pain score, it is easier to assess their level of pain and to monitor their progress after

treatment.

 

Some doctors use a body chart, which is useful for patients to indicate where they feel

the pain. Sometimes this helps to indicate the level of distress of the patient, for

example if the patient puts crosses or lines all over the body, (“pain all over”) it

usually means that the patient is greatly distressed and that psychosocial factors need

to be addressed as well.

 

During assessment, the Pain Self Management Checklist devised by Dr. Michael

Nicholas, a clinical psychologist at the Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney, is

useful. If patients score very high on the questionnaire, they are probably at high risk

of becoming chronic pain sufferers and need help.

 

Another useful questionnaire is the Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening

Questionnaire (OMPSQ) from Steven Linton in Sweden. This is used to screen

for yellow flags and is reliable. [Clin J Pain 2003; 19:80-86].

P-3 Pain Patient ProfileThe Pain Patient Profile (P-3) assessment, a test from Pearson Assessments, focuses

on the factors most frequently associated with chronic pain. The test can help provide

an objective link between the physician's observations and the possible need for

further psychological assessment.

How to Use This Test

A variety of medical professionals, including anesthesiologists, general practitioners,

rehabilitation specialists, chiropractors, surgeons, neurologists, and nurses can use the

P-3 test to help:

Identify the psychological roadblocks to patient recovery

Assess, document, and justify the need for further psychological evaluation

Facilitate physician-psychologist communication

Evaluate the patient's emotional readiness for surgery

Support evaluations for cases involving vocational readiness; orthopedic,

occupational, and auto injuries; workers' compensation; and long-term

disabilities

Easily and inexpensively measure pre- and post-treatment pain status to

evaluate treatment effectiveness and monitor clinical outcomes

Key Features

The test can help save time and money and reduce frustration for both patient and

medical providers by identifying psychological factors that may be preventing the

patient from reaching a successful medical outcome.

The test report includes an easy-to-understand summary of results to share with

the patient.

Requiring only 12-15 minutes to administer, the test can be easily administered as

part of an initial clinical evaluation.

The test was normed using both pain patients and subjects from the community.

This cross-validating approach helps assure that results are more relevant to pain

patients than more traditional assessments may be.

Quick Facts

Administer To Individuals 17–76 years old

Reading Level 8th grade

Items 44 groups of statements with three statements per group

Formats Paper-and-pencil or computer administration

Report Options Interpretive Report, Progress Report

Scoring Options

Q™ Local Software

Hand Scoring

Mail-in Scoring Service

Fax-in Service

PAD (Patient Assessment Device) Hand-held Electronic Device

Optical Scan Scoring

Scales Somatization, Depression, Anxiety and Validity Index

Norms Pain Patients and Community Samples

Padua inventoryBehav Res Ther. 1990;28(4):341-5.

Obsessions and compulsions: psychometric properties of the Padua Inventory

with an American college population.

Sternberger LG, Burns GL.

The psychometric properties of the Padua inventory, a self-report measure of

obsessive-compulsive behaviors, were examined in a sample of 678 American college

students. Results showed good internal consistency as well as convergent and

divergent validity with the subscales of the Symptom Checklist-90 Revised and the

Maudsley Obsessional-Compulsive Inventory. A principal components analysis

suggested a four factor solution (i.e. 'impaired control of mental activities', 'checking',

'urges and worries of losing control of motor behaviors', and 'being contaminated').

The factor structure was very similar to that found in the original Italian study of the

inventory. Suggestions are made for the use of the Padua Inventory in the study of

obsessions and compulsions in nonclinical samples.

Piers-Harris 2, Piers Harris Children’s Self Concept ScaleThe updated Second Edition of the Piers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale,

one of the most widely used measures of psychological health in children and

adolescents, quickly identifies youngsters who need further testing or treatment.

Comprises a total Score and Six Subscale Scores

 Based on the child’s own perceptions rather than the observations of parents or

teachers, the Piers-Harris 2 assesses self-concept in individuals ages 7 to 18. It is

composed of 60 items covering six subscales:

Physical Appearance and Attributes , Intellectual and School Status, Happiness and

satisfaction, Freedom from Anxiety, Behavioral Adjustment, Popularity.

In addition, two validity scales identify biased responding and the tendency to answer

randomly.   Test items are simple descriptive statements, written at a second-grade

reading level. Children indicate whether each item applies to them by selecting a yes

or no response. This usually requires just 10 to 15 minutes. (A Spanish Test Booklet is

available for children who read Spanish only.)

The Piers-Harris 2 provides a Total Score that reflects overall self-concept, plus

subscale scores that permit more detailed interpretation. Nationally representative

norms are based on a sample of nearly 1,400 students, ages 7 to 18, recruited from

school districts throughout the U.S. Because the scales remain psychometrically

equivalent to those on the First Edition, results from the Piers-Harris 2 can be

compared, for research or clinical purposes, to those obtained using the original test.

Classroom or Clinical Screening: The Piers-Harris 2 is widely used in both schools

and clinics. It is often administered as routine classroom screening, to identify

children who might benefit from further evaluation. And it is commonly used in

clinical settings to determine specific areas of conflict, typical coping and defense

mechanisms, and appropriate intervention techniques. It is an ideal choice when you

need a quick but comprehensive measure of self-concept in children or adolescents.

Post-Traumatic Stress Diagnostic ScaleThe Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale (PDS) is a 49 item paper and pencil or on-

line, self-report instrument that is designed to assist with the diagnosis of Post

Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The PDS is based on the DSM-IV (American

Psychiatric Association, 1994) diagnostic criteria for PTSD. The PDS takes 10-15

minutes to complete and 5 minutes to hand score (Axford, 1999).

The PDS was developed to provide a brief self-report instrument to assist with the

diagnosis of PTSD and it provides a means of quantifying the severity of PTSD

symptoms. It is not intended to replace the structured diagnostic interview (Doll,

1999). The PDS has been validated on a clinical population aged 18 to 65 years.

Nevertheless, clinical judgment may be used in deciding whether to use PDS on

individuals falling outside this age range. However, the PDS is not designed to be

administered to children as the DSM-IV (American Psychiatric Association, 1994)

criteria for PTSD in children are not represented in the PDS. The PDS manual

recommends that the PDS should be used with at least eighth-grade reading level

ability.

The PDS generates judgments on whether the DSM-IV (American Psychiatric

Association, 1994) six diagnostic criteria for PTSD have been met, the level of

impairment and a symptoms severity score.

Personality Assessment InventoryThe PAI is a self-administered, objective inventory of adult personality and

psychopathology. The PAI contains 344 items comprising 22 nonoverlapping full

scales: validity scales, clinical scales, 5 treatment scales and 2 interpersonal scales

(Morey 1991). The PAI has been developed in several computerised forms and can

be used in a shortened form.

The PAI measures manifestation of clinical syndromes which were selected based

upon their historical importance in classification of mental disorder and their

significance in contemporary diagnostic practice (Morey 1991). The PAI provides

information to assist diagnosis, treatment and screening for psychopathology which

parallels DSM-IV categories.

Clinical scales are clustered in Neurotic, Psychotic, Personality Disorders and

Behavioural Disorders. In addition to measurement of clinical constructs,

interpretation of results also provides measures for detecting Malingering; evaluating

potential for Aggression and Suicide; and motivation for Treatment.

The development of the scale used a cluster analysis rather than a two point code type

so that scales would be useful across a number of different applications. Profile

interpretation can be made as a two-point code but the author warns against this

method of assessment, “...the reliability of the small differences that can determine a

two-point code on any psychological instrument is often suspect” (Morey 1996).

The PAI requires a Grade 6 reading level and takes about 40-50 minutes to complete.

The four choice per answer, from False to Very True reduces resistance to forced

choice. Low functioning clients may experience difficulties. It is not designed to

provide a comprehensive assessment of normal personality.

Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)

The Auditory Verbal Learning Test was developed by André Rey and first published

in France in the 1960’s. The list learning format that it utilises has become virtually

the standard for verbal learning tests as can be readily seen when examining the

California Verbal Learning Test, WMS-III Word Lists Test, and Hopkins Verbal

Learning Test. With, perhaps, the exception of the Hopkins, the RAVLT probably has

the largest number of published alternate forms (unfortunately there is little to no

normative data for these versions).

The standard administration format of the RAVLT consists of reading a list of 15

words aloud to the client. While a number of variant procedures exist, these tend to

relate to whether or not a delayed recall trial is administered, and the type of

recognition test used. The format presented here will be for the form I have

standardised in Australia and is used in your assignments.

There are 8 recall trials and a recognition test. The first five trials (I through V) are

termed the learning trials and involve the repeated reading of the test list (sometimes

called List A) followed by free recall of this list by the client. This first trial (I) is

often viewed as a measure of immediate memory and some clinicians have proposed

comparing it to other immediate memory tasks such as Digit Span – Forward. This

sort of comparison can certainly be interesting but the differences between RAVLT I

and DS-F are just as great as their similarities. For example, RAVLT I is a supra-span

task (i.e. the number of words is well in excess of the average person’s immediate

memory span) while DS-F is an incremental measure of immediate memory span,

with more than one trial at each span level. Trials II through V are administered in the

same way, first reading the list and then asking the client to recall as many words as

they can in any order. The next trial is commonly referred to as the interference trial

in which a new list (List B) is read aloud to the client and free recall is requested. This

is essentially a poor man’s measure of proactive interference – the degree to which

old learning can interfere with new learning. Trial VI immediately follows in which

the client is asked to recall as many words as they can from the first List (A). This

recall is conducted WITHOUT reading List A again. As with the interfernece taks,

this simulates a retroactive interference situation where new learning interferes with

the recall of old information. The degree to which these constructs (proactive vs.

retroactive interference) are relevant to clinical testing of memory AND the degree to

which these trials are a valid measure of these constructs, is still a matter for debate.

Trial VII is administered in the same way as trial VI (i.e. no reading of List A) but

following a 20-minute delay, which is characteristically not filled with other verbal or

memory tests.

Rey Complex Figure TestPurpose - Measure visuospatial ability and visuospatial memory

Age range – Child, Adolescent, Adult, Elder Adult

Administration – individual

Time – approx 45mins including 30 min delay interval (timed)

Assess - executive functioning

The RCFT standardizes the materials and procedures for administering the Rey

complex figure. The Recognition trial measures recognition memory for the elements

of the Rey complex figure and assesses the respondent's ability to use cues to retrieve

information.

RCFT Materials: The RCFT materials include the 120-page Professional Manual,

Manual Supplement with data for children and adolescents, the laminated RCFT

Stimulus Card, and the 16-page RCFT Test Booklet. A stopwatch is required for

administration.

The manual provides information on the development of the RCFT materials,

administration and scoring procedures with scoring examples, demographically

corrected normative data, guidelines for interpretation with case illustrations, and

reliability and validity data.

The 8.5" x 11" Stimulus Card contains a computer-rendered replica of the original

Rey complex figure. Prior to this publication, Rey's original figure has not been

available commercially.

The Test Booklet provides all forms necessary to administer and score the RCFT.

Pages for the three freehand drawing trials (Copy, Immediate Recall, and Delayed

Recall) and the Recognition trial are perforated for easy detachment.

Scoring and Interpretation: The RCFT provides an objective and standardized

approach to scoring drawings based on the widely used 36-point scoring system. The

same scoring criteria apply to all three drawing trials. Each of the 18 scoring units is

scored based on accuracy and placement criteria. Unit scores range from two

(accurately drawn, correctly placed) to zero (inaccurately drawn, incorrectly placed,

unrecognizable, omitted).

Normative Data: The normative sample included 601 adults ages 18-89 years and

505 children and adolescents ages 6-17 years. Demographically corrected normative

data for the RCFT copy and memory variables are presented to assist in interpretation

as well as in making comparisons among individuals and various patient groups.

Validity: Intercorrelations between the RCFT and other measures, in samples of both

normal and brain-damaged subjects, establish the convergent and discriminant

validity of the RCFT as a measure of visuospatial constructional ability (Copy trial)

and visuospatial memory (Immediate Recall, Delayed Recall, and Recognition trials).

Results of factor analysis suggest the RCFT captures five domains of

neuropsychological functioning: visuospatial recall memory, visuospatial recognition

memory, response bias, processing speed, and visuospatial constructional ability. It

reliably discriminates among brain-damaged, psychiatric, and normal subjects. In

addition, the Recognition trial provides incremental diagnostic power compared to

using recall trials alone

Reynolds Adolescent Depression ScaleThe RADS-2 is a brief, 30-item self-report measure that includes subscales which

evaluate the current level of an adolescent's depressive symptomatology along four

basic dimensions of depression: Dysphoric Mood, Anhedonia/Negative Affect,

Negative Self-Evaluation, and Somatic Complaints. Interpretation of these four

subscales is based on both the nature of the depression domain and the item content of

the subscale.

The RADS-2 standard (T) scores and associated clinical cutoff score provide the

clinician or researcher with an indication of the clinical severity of the individual's

depressive symptoms (normal, mild, moderate, or severe). Scores are plotted on a

Summary/Profile Form, allowing comparison of elevations across subscales.

Examining item endorsement levels within elevated subscales can provide further

information about the nature of an adolescent's reported symptomatology.

In addition to the four subscale scores, the RADS-2 yields a Depression Total score

that represents the overall severity of depressive symptomatology. An empirically

derived clinical cutoff score helps to identify adolescents who may be at risk for a

depressive disorder or a related disorder. Data demonstrate the ability of this cutoff

score to discriminate between adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder and an

age- and gender-matched control group. The six RADS-2 critical items alert clinicians

that an adolescent (with a Depression Total score below the clinical cutoff) may be

experiencing a significant level of depression

Reynolds Child Depression ScalePurpose - Screen for depressive symptoms in children

Age range - Child

Administration – individual or group

Time – 10 mins

The RCDS was developed to screen for depression in children and can be

used in schools or in clinical settings (grades 3-6). It provides school and

mental health professionals with a straightforward, easily administered

measure for the evaluation of the severity of children's depressive symptoms.

The RCDS can also be used in research on depression and related

constructs.

Written at a 2nd-grade level (items are read aloud to assist students in Grades

3 and 4).

30 items are rated on a 4-point scale.

Hand-Scorable for individual or group administration.

Reliability coefficients range from .87-.91.

Total sample alpha reliability of .90 and split-half reliability of .89.

Validity consistently demonstrated in field testing since 1981

RCMAS The RCMAS (“What I Think and Feel” ) is a 37-item self-report inventory used to

measure anxiety in children, for clinical purposes (diagnosis and treatment

evaluation), educational settings, and for research purposes. The RCMAS consists of

28 Anxiety items and 9 Lie (social desirability) items. Each item is purported to

embody a feeling or action that reflects an aspect of anxiety, hence the subtitle, “What

I think and Feel”. It is a relatively brief instrument, which has been subjected to

extensive study to ensure that it is psychometrically sound. However, it is also

advisable that the RCMAS only be used as part of a complete clinical evaluation

when diagnosing and treating a child’s anxiety (Gerard and Reynolds, 1999, p.323).

The Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale was developed by Reynolds and

Richmond (1978) to assess “the degree and quality of anxiety experienced by children

and adolescents” (Gerald and Reynolds, 1999, p. 323). It is based on the Children’s

Manifest Anxiety Scale (CMAS), which was devised by Casteneda, McCandless and

Palermo (1956). The Revised version of the CMAS deletes, adds and reorders items

from the CMAS to meet psychometric standards. Reynolds and Richmond (1978) also

renamed the instrument, “What I Think and Feel”, although subsequent papers

primarily refer to it as the Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS).

Rohde Sentence Completion Method(nothing found)

Rorschach Inkblot TestThe Rorschach inkblot test is a psychological projective test of personality in which a

subject's interpretations of ten standard abstract designs are analyzed as a measure of

emotional and intellectual functioning and integration. The test is named after

Hermann Rorschach (1884-1922) who developed the inkblots, although he did not use

them for personality analysis.

The test is considered "projective" because the patient is supposed to project his or her

real personality into the inkblot via the interpretation. The inkblots are purportedly

ambiguous, structureless entities which are to be given a clear structure by the

interpreter. Those who believe in the efficacy of such tests think that they are a way of

getting into the deepest recesses of the patient's psyche or subconscious mind. Those

who give such tests believe themselves to be experts at interpreting their patients'

interpretations.

SCL-90-RThe Symptom Checklist-90-R (SCL-90-R) instrument from Pearson Assessments

helps evaluate a broad range of psychological problems and symptoms of

psychopathology. The instrument is also useful in measuring patient progress or

treatment outcomes.

The SCL-90-R instrument is used by clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and

professionals in mental health, medical, and educational settings as well as for

research purposes. It can be useful in:

Initial evaluation of patients at intake as an objective method for symptom assessment

Measuring patient progress during and after treatment to monitor change

Outcomes measurement for treatment programs and providers through aggregated

patient information

Clinical trials to help measure the changes in symptoms such as depression and

anxiety

Quick Facts

Administer To Individuals 13 years and older

Reading Level 6th grade

Completion

Time12-15 minutes (90 items, 5-point rating scale)

Formats Paper-and-pencil, audiocassette, or computer administration

Report

OptionsInterpretive, Profile, and Progress

Scoring

Options

Q Local™ Software

Mail-in Scoring Service

Hand Scoring

Optical Scan Scoring

Scales9 Primary Symptom Dimensions

3 Global Indices

NormsAdult nonpatients, Adult psychiatric outpatients, Adult psychiatric

inpatients, Adolescent nonpatients

SCOLP

The Speed and Capacity of Language-Processing Test (SCOLP)Alan Baddeley, Ph.D., Hazel Emslie and Ian Nimmo-Smith

Description

This test is sensitive to slowing of

language and cognitive functioning

that often occurs following brain

damage. The SCOLP is composed of

two brief tests, Speed of

Comprehension Test and Spot-the-

Word Vocabulary Test.

The first test asks the client to answer

as many simple true/false questions

about the world as he/she can in a two

minute period. This test is sensitive to the effects of closed head injury, normal

aging, Alzheimer's Disease, schizophrenia and alcohol related disorders.

The second test assesses verbal capacity in order to help interpret results obtained

from the first test. Norms are provided for patients 16 to 65 for both tests.

Test results can help identify the discrepancy between comprehension speed and

vocabulary and the extent of cognitive impairment. Administration time is 6 minutes.

This test is intended for use only by OT, SLP and Psychologists

Self-Directed SearchThe Self-Directed Search (SDS) is the most widely used career interest inventory in

the world, having helped more than 14 million people with career planning decisions.

The SDS is an easy-to-use, self-administered test that helps individuals find

occupations that best suit their interests and skills.

Applications

Assist students and adults with career exploration

Educational and career planning

The SDS was designed to assist students and adults with career exploration and

educational and career planning. Individuals answer questions about their aspirations,

activities, competencies, occupations, and other self-estimates and discover

occupations that best fit their interest skills.

Based upon the Holland "RIASEC" theory that people are most satisfied in work

environments that reinforce their personalities, the SDS categorizes people as one of

six (6) personality types: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising or

Conventional.

SIQPurpose – screen for suicidal ideation in adolescents

Age range – adolescent

Administration – individual or group

Time – 10 mins or less

The Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire assesses the frequency of suicidal thoughts in

adolescents and may be used to evaluate or monitor troubled youths. Because not all

depressed adolescents are suicidal and not all suicidal adolescents are depressed, the

SIQ is a valuable component in a comprehensive assessment of adolescent mental

health.

Items rated on a 7-point scale.

Hand-Scorable for individual or small group administration.

Grades 10-12 (SIQ); Grades 7-9 (SIQ-JR).

Use to evaluate large-scale intervention/prevention programs.

Reliability coefficients are .97 for the SIQ; .93-.94 for the SIQ-JR.

Validity consistently supported in many published content, construct, and clinical

studies

ASIQ

Purpose: Screen for suicidal ideation in college students and adults

Age range: adult, elder adult

Administration: individual / group

Time: 10 mins

The ASIQ can be used during intake interviews or during treatment to reduce liability

and take appropriate preventive action whenever there may be a risk of suicide.

Endorsement of critical items alerts you immediately in case of serious suicidal

ideation.

The ASIQ includes a 25-item self-report; items rated on a 7-point scale; and a built-in

scoring key. Norms are based on 2,000 adults ages 18 years and older, including

psychiatric outpatients, normal adults, and college students.

Internal consistency and test-retest reliability coefficients range from .96-.97

and .85-.95, respectively, in various samples.

The ASIQ yields a total score with a corresponding T score and percentile score.

Comparing the total score to a cutoff allows you to identify individuals in need of

further evaluation for suicide risk.

Results of several research studies support the ASIQ as a valid measure of suicidal

ideation.

Social Skills Training: Enhancing Social Competence with Children and AdolescentsSocial Skills Training is a comprehensive, up-to-date resource that helps you assess

the social competence of young people and design appropriate individual intervention

programmes. The programme aims in particular to change negative thinking patterns

and develop self-esteem.

Purpose

Measures social skills problems and helps design appropriate intervention

programmes to enhance young people’s social competence.

Benefits

Accessible and open, designed to put students and their parents at ease

Versatile – can be used as broad guidelines for practitioners who wish to tailor unique

programmes, or as a 16-session programme in its own right.

Informative – gives a detailed overview of the whole area of social skills.

Contents

Complete Set contains:

User’s Guide

Photocopiable Resource Book

Eight Photo CardsResearch and Technical Supplement.

South Australian Spelling TestThis is a test of real word spelling which has been standardised across the

age range 6-15 years. The revised norms for this simple spelling test provide

estimates of spelling age based on a sample of South Australian students

tested in 1993. This test assesses spelling performance from age 6 to over 15

years. It is popular because it has Australian norms however in some places it

may be over-used and some children are developing familiarity with the test

STAXIThe STAXI was developed with two goals in mind. The first was to develop a

measure of the components of anger in the context of both normal and abnormal

personality. The second goal seems rather more specific to a particular research

orientation - in this case examining the contribution of anger to the development or

exacerbation of medical conditions such as hypertension, coronary heart disease, and

cancer.

 

There are two fundamental aspects of anger which are addressed - the experience of

anger, and the expression of anger. The experience of anger can be understood in the

context of state - subjective feelings that vary from irritability to intense rage, and trait

anger which refers to a disposition to perceive situations as annoying and to respond

to these situations by more frequent expressions of state anger. Thus state and trait

anger are unlikely to actually be independent characteristics or components of anger.

 

When expressing anger, it may be focused outward on other people or objects (Anger-

Out), or directed inward (Anger-In). A third component is the degree to which people

attempt to control their expression of anger (Anger Control).

 

The STAXI is designed to be administered to people aged 13 through adulthood with

a minimum fifth grade reading level. The task of administering the test is

straightforward, essentially self-administered, but interpretation of test scores requires

formal training in assessment. There are no time limits imposed on completing the

STAXI, but it is a brief test and most people complete it within 15 minutes.

 

STAXI Scales: The STAXI consists of 44 items which are distributed across the five

main scales. Consistent with the conceptualisation of anger above there are three main

aspects to the STAXI scales: State, Trait, and Anger Expression. Trait contains two

subscales that examine different dispositions in trait anger - temperament and

reaction. Anger Expression is actually an experimental composite of the three

expression constructs -In, Out, and Control.

 

STATE TRAIT ANGER EXPRESSION

(S-Anger) (T-Anger) (AX/EX)

  Angry Temperament Anger-In (AX/In)

  (T-Anger/T) Anger-Out (AX/Out)

  Angry Reaction Anger Control (AX/Con)

  (T-Anger/R)  

 

S-Anger - This is a 10-item stand-alone scale which measures the respondent's

current feelings of anger.

 

T-Anger - This scale also contains 10 items which asks the respondent to answer

questions about his or her disposition towards anger.

T-Anger/T - is a subscale of T-Anger consisting of 4 items that generally

address the disposition to express anger without provocation.

T-Anger/R - is a subscale of T-Anger also consisting of 4 items that ask about

the respondent's disposition to express anger when provoked.

 

AX/In - this 8 item scale measures the frequency with which the respondent holds in

or suppresses his or her anger.

AX/Out - this 8 item scale measures the frequency with which the respondent

expresses her anger to other people or objects.

 

AX/Con - another 8 item scale that attempts to measure the degree to which the

respondent attempts to control his or her expression of anger.

 

AX/EX - this is an experimental composite score that is designed to represent the

combination of AX/In, AX/Out, and AX/Con and essentially examines the overall

frequency of anger expression. AX/EX is computed with the following formula:

AX/EX = AX/Out + AX/In - AX/Con +16.

The addition of 16 at the end may seem unusual but it is designed to ensure that a

negative score cannot be achieved. Since the four possible responses to each item are

assigned a number between 1 and 4 and each of the AX scales has 8 questions, the

minimum total for each scale is 8, and the maximum score is 32. The lowest possible

score would be minimum In and Out and maximum Con which would be 8+8-32 = -

16. Adding 16 to this total would give 0. Similarly if Out and In were at maximum

and Con was at minimum the total would be 32+32-8+16 = 72. For this reason the

raw score range for AX/EX is 0 to 72.

 

All items are rated on a four-point scale and are assigned a score of between 1 and 4.

Raw score totals are converted to percentile ranks and T-scores using normative

tables. There are separate normative tables for males and female adolescents, adults,

and college students.

STAXI-2The State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 (STAXI-2) is a 57-item inventory

which measures the intensity of anger as an emotional state (State Anger) and the

disposition to experience angry feelings as a personality trait (Trait Anger). The

instrument consists of six scales measuring the intensity of anger and the disposition

to experience angry feelings. Items consist of 4-point scales that assess intensity of

anger at a particular moment and the frequency of anger experience, expression, and

control.

Applications

Assess components of anger in the context of normal personality and

psychopathology.

Evaluate the contributions of the various components of anger to the etiology and

progression of medical conditions, particularly hypertension, coronary heart disease,

and cancer.

The STAXI-2 State Anger scale assesses the intensity of anger as an emotional state

at a particular time. The Trait Anger scale measures how often angry feelings are

experienced over time. The Anger Expression and Anger Control scales assess four

relatively independent anger-related traits:

(a) expression of anger toward other persons or objects in the environment (Anger

Expression-Out);

(b) holding in or suppressing angry feelings (Anger Expression-In);

(c) controlling angry feelings by preventing the expression of anger toward other

persons or objects in the environment (Anger Control-Out);

(d) controlling suppressed angry feelings by calming down or cooling off (Anger

Control-In).

Individuals rate themselves on 4-point scales that assess both the intensity of their

anger at a particular time and the frequency that anger is experienced, expressed, and

controlled

STROOP TESTThe Stroop Task is a psychological test of our mental vitality and flexibility. The task

takes advantage of our ability to read words more quickly and automatically than we

can name colors. If a word is printed or displayed in a color different from the color it

actually names; for example, if the word "green" is written in blue ink (as shown in

the figure to the left) we will say the word "green" more readily than we can name the

color in which it is displayed, which in this case is "blue."

The cognitive mechanism involved in this task is called inhibition, you have to inhibit

or stop one response and say or do something else.

SYMBOL DIGIT MODALITIES TEST (SDMT)PURPOSE:  Screen for organic cerebral dysfunction in both children and adults

ADMINISTER TO: 

Children 8-17 years; 

adults 18-78 years

ADMINISTRATION TIME:  20 minutes (107 items)

Brief and easy to administer, the SDMT has demonstrated remarkable sensitivity in

detecting not only the presence of brain damage, but also changes in cognitive

functioning over time and in response to treatment. It is an economical way to screen

apparently normal children and adults for possible motor, visual, learning, or other

cerebral dysfunction.

The SDMT involves a simple substitution task. Using a reference key, the examinee

has 90 seconds to pair specific numbers with given geometric figures. Because

examinees can give either written or spoken responses, the test is well suited for use

with individuals who have motor disabilities or speech disorders. Because it involves

only geometric figures and numbers, the SDMT is relatively culture free as well and

can be administered to individuals who do not speak English. The SDMT AutoScore

Test Form simplifies scoring

The SDMT is effective in a wide range of clinical applications including

differentiation of brain-damaged from psychotic patients; differentiation of organics

from depressives; early detection of senile dementia and Huntington’s disease;

differential diagnosis of children with learning disorders; early identification of

children likely to have reading problems; assessment of change in cognitive

functioning over time and/or with therapy in individuals who have traumatic vascular,

neoplastic, and other brain insults; and assessment of recovery from closed-head

injury

Thematic Apperception TestThe 31 picture cards included in the TAT are used to stimulate stories or descriptions

about relationships or social situations and can help identify dominant drives,

emotions, sentiments, conflicts and complexes.

Key Features

The test can be administered individually, to groups, or self-administered.

Individuals can respond orally or in writing.

Cards include specific subsets for boys, girls, men, and women.

Quick Facts

Qualification

LevelA

Administer To Individuals 10 years and older

Completion TimeVariable (31 picture cards/2 series of 10 cards for boys, girls,

men and women)

Formats Individuals react (orally or in writing) to a series of picture cards

Scoring Option Hand Scoring

TRAIL MAKING TESTThe test consists of two parts, A and B, and since it is a test of speed, the examiner

should stress the importance of time and efficiency. Part A consists of encircled

numbers from 1 to 25 randomly spread across a sheet of paper. The object of the test

is for the subject to connect the numbers in order, beginning with 1 and ending with

25, in as little time as possible.

Part B is more complex than A because it requires the subject to connect numbers and

letters in an alternating pattern (1-A-2-B-3-C, etc.) in as little time as possible.

Because Part B requires more thought processing and attention on behalf of the

subject, it takes longer to complete the test; however, if one works on Part B for more

than two or three minutes, one will become frustrated, and the frustration may

influence performance on other tests (Bradford, 46).

Normally, the entire test can be completed in 5 to 10 minutes. Scores are calculated by

adding the time it takes for the subject to complete Part A with the time it takes to

complete Part B, so it is extremely important for one to understand the directions fully

before the pencil touches the paper and time begins.

If an error is made, the examiner will point it out to the patient for correction and

have them return to and continue from the correct location while the clock remains

running. Errors are recorded and the patient continues with the test. Cutoff scores for

impairment are based on normative data instead of earlier recorded scores suggested

by Matarazzo because there are other factors which may play a role in an individual's

score (ex: age, educational level).

TRAUMA SYMPTOM INVENTORYThe Trauma Symptom Inventory (TSI) is a test containing 100 items claiming to

measure ‘posttraumatic stress and other psychological sequelae of traumatic events’.

It was devised to be used in the assessment of ‘acute and chronic traumatic

symptomatology’, such as rape, physical assault, spouse abuse, major accidents,

combat trauma, natural disasters and the enduring effects of childhood abuse and early

childhood trauma (Briere, 1995).

The TSI has 3 validity scales and 10 clinical scales that assess a broad range of

psychological symptoms including those related to Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

(PTSD) and Acute Stress Disorder (ASD) plus intra and interpersonal difficulties

associated with chronic psychological trauma. The test is self-administered and is

intended for a fifth grade and above reading level (Briere 1995). Items are scored on a

four point scale with 0 = Never through to 3 = Often, and are rated in terms of

frequency of occurrence over the previous six months. Due to this time frame the TSI

was ‘not intended to generate a DSM IV PTSD diagnosis’. The TSI takes

approximately 20 minutes to complete and around 15 minutes to score (Briere and

Elliott, 1997).

Validity scales: Response level (RL); Atypical Response (ATR); Inconsistent

Response (INC)

Clinical Scales: Anxious Arousal (AA); Depression (D); Anger/Irritability (AI);

Intrusive Experiences (IE); Defensive Avoidance (DA); Dissociation (DIS); Sexual

Concerns (SC); Dysfunctional Sexual Behaviour (DSB); Impaired Self-Reference

(ISR); Tension Reduction Behaviour (TRB)

WAIS-RWechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) – intelligence test for individuals 16 years

and over

The WAIS(R) was standardised on a sample of 1,800 U.S. subjects, ranging from 16

to 74 years of age. It was a highly stratified sample, broken down into 9 different age

groups. Equal numbers of men and women were used, as were white and nonwhite

subjects, in line with census figures. It was further broken down into four geographic

U.S. regions and six occupational categories. There was also an attempt to balance

urban and rural subjects. The mean I.Q. for each age group on this test is 100, with a

standard deviation of 15. The WAIS scales have impressive reliability and validity.

There are different adaptations of the scale by country.  For example, in Australia we

have the Australian adaptation of the WAIS-R (1989).  11 separate subtests, which are

broken into the Verbal scale (6 subtests) and the Performance scale (5 subtests).  A

person taking the test receives a full-scale IQ score, a verbal IQ score, a performance

IQ score, as well as scaled scores on each of the subtests.

Verbal WAIS scales

Information: 29 questions - a measure of general knowledge.

Digit Span: Subjects are given sets of digits to repeat initially forwards then

backwards. This is a test of immediate auditory recall and freedom from distraction.

Vocabulary: Define 35 words. A measure of expressive word knowledge. It

correlates very highly with Full Scale IQ

Arithmetic: 14 mental arithmetic brief story type problems. tests distractibility as

well as numerical reasoning.

Comprehension: 16 questions which focus on issues of social awareness.

Similarities: A measure of concept formation. Subjects are asked to say how two

seemingly dissimilar items might in fact be similar.

Performance WAIS scales

Picture Completion: 20 small pictures that all have one vital detail missing. A test of

attention to fine detail.

Picture Arrangement: 10 sets of small pictures, where the subject is required to

arrange them into a logical sequence.

Block Design: Involves putting sets of blocks together to match patterns

on cards.

Digit Symbol: Involves copying a coding pattern.

Object Assembly: Four small jig-saw type puzzles.

Three IQ scores are obtained from the WAIS(R):

1. Verbal IQ

2. Performance IQ

3. Full Scale IQ

Interpretation is fairly systematic and can be broken down into a number of discrete

steps:

1. Obtain the 3 IQ scores. What standardized categories do they fall into?

2. Is there a Verbal-Performance discrepancy? Is it significant?

3. Break WAIS scores down into the factorial sub-structure:

(a) Verbal Comprehension

(b) Spatial Perceptual

(c) Freedom from Distraction

Are individual sub-tests very low or very high? Why?

What is the degree of intra-subtest scatter?

The WAIS-R gives a global IQ and also two separate IQ’s for the two scales: verbal

and performance.  There are 6 verbal subscales and 5 performance subscales.

Wechsler believes that this test is a good measure of “g”. The two scales can be used

separately to see if a person has particular strengths or weaknesses. Wechsler suggests

that if there is more than 15 IQ points difference between the two main scales then

this might be cause for further investigation. The design of the test, with the two

scales, means that the verbal & performance scales can be used alone. The

Performance section alone can be used with examinees who are unable to properly

comprehend or manage language, or the Verbal scale alone can be used with

examinees who are visually or motor impaired. There is little emphasis on speed in

this test with only some subscales having time limits and some subscales having

bonuses for speed.

WASIWechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) – to obtain a reliable brief

measure of intelligence

Age Range: 6 to 89 years

Administration: Individual - Four Subtest Form = 30 minutes; Two Subtest Form =

15 minutes

The WASI meets the demand for a reliable, brief measure of intellectual ability in

clinical, educational and research settings for ages 6 to 89 years.

WIATThis test provides a comprehensive test of reading (word analysis and

comprehension), writing (spelling and written language), language (listening

comprehension and oral expression), and mathematics (numerical operations and

mathematical reasoning).

Wechsler Memory Scale-RevisedThe Wechsler memory test was first developed in 1945 and is the current standard for

memory tests. Scores of four sub-tests were reported in the case study: general

memory, verbal memory, visual memory, and delayed recalled. These scores are

designed to be averaged to obtain a memory quotient (MQ), with scores comparable

to intelligence quotients or lQs. 100 is an average score for both MQ and IQ.

WISC-IIIThe Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, often abbreviated as WISC, is an

individually administered measure of intelligence intended for children aged six years

to 16 years and 11 months.

The WISC is designed to measure human intelligence as reflected in both verbal and

nonverbal (performance) abilities. David Wechsler, the author of the test, believed

that intelligence has a global quality that reflects a variety of measurable skills. He

also thought that it should be considered in the context of the person's overall

personality.

The WISC is used in schools as part of placement evaluations for programs for gifted

children and for children who are developmentally disabled.

In addition to its uses in intelligence assessment, the WISC is used in

neuropsychological evaluation, specifically with regard to braindysfunction. Large

differences in verbal and nonverbal intelligence may indicate specific types of brain

damage.

The WISC is also used for other diagnostic purposes. IQ scores reported by the WISC

can be used as part of the diagnostic criteria for mental retardation and specific

learning disabilities. The test may also serve to better evaluate children with attention-

deficit/hyperactivity disorder(ADHD) and other behavior disorders.

Precautions

The Wechsler intelligence scales are not considered adequate measures of extreme

intelligence (IQ scores below 40 and above 160). The scoring process does not allow

for scores outside this range for test takers at particular ages. Wechsler himself was

even more conservative, stressing that his scales were not appropriate for people with

IQs below 70 or above 130. Despite this restriction, many people use the WISC as a

measure of the intelligence of gifted children, who typically score above 130. The age

range for the WISC overlaps with that of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence

Scale(WAIS) for people between 16 and 17 years of age, but experts suggest that the

WISC provides a better measure for people in this age range.

Administration and scoring of the WISC require a competent administrator who must

be able to interact and communicate with children of different ages and must know

test protocol and specifications. WISC administrators must receive training in the

proper use of the instrument and demonstrate awareness of all test guidelines.

Description

The WISC-III consists of 13 subtests and takes between 50 and 75 minutes to

complete. The test is taken individually, with an administrator present to give

instructions. Each subtest is given separately. There is some flexibility in the

administration of the WISC—the administrator may end some subtests early if the test

taker appears to have reached the limit of his or her capacity. Tasks on the WISC

include questions of general knowledge, traditional arithmetic problems, English

vocabulary, completion of mazes, and arrangements of blocks and pictures.

Children who take the WISC are scored by comparing their performance to other test

takers of the same age. The WISC yields three IQ (intelligence quotient) scores, based

on an average of 100, as well as subtest and index scores. WISC subtests measure

specific verbal and performance abilities. The Wecshler scales were originally

developed and later revised using standardization samples. The samples were meant

to be representative of the United States population at the time of standardization.

The WISC is considered to be a valid and reliable measure of general intelligence in

children. It is regularly used by researchers in many areas of psychology and child

development as a general measure of intelligence. It has also been found to be a good

measure of both fluid and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence refers to

inductive and deductive reasoning, skills that are thought to be largely influenced by

neurological and biological factors. Fluid intelligence is measured by the performance

subtests of the WISC. Crystallized intelligence refers to knowledge and skills that are

primarily influenced by environmental and sociocultural factors. It is measured by the

verbal subtests of the WISC. Wechsler himself did not divide overall intelligence into

these two types. The definition of fluid and crystallized intelligence as two major

categories of cognitive ability, however, has been a focus of research for many

intelligence theorists.

Verbal IQ: The child's verbal IQ score is derived from scores on six of the

subtests: information, digit span, vocabulary, arithmetic, comprehension, and

similarities.

The information subtest is a test of general knowledge, including questions about

geography and literature. The digit span subtest requires the child to repeat strings of

digits recited by the examiner. The vocabulary and arithmetic subtests are general

measures of the child's vocabulary and arithmetic skills. The comprehension subtest

asks the child to solve practical problems and explain the meaning of simple proverbs.

The similarities subtest asks the child to describe the similarities between pairs of

items, for example that apples and oranges are both fruits.

Performance IQ: The child's performance IQ is derived from scores on the

remaining seven subtests: picture completion, picture arrangement, block

design, object assembly, coding, mazes, and symbol search.

In the picture completion subtest, the child is asked to complete pictures with missing

elements. The picture arrangement subtest entails arranging pictures in order to tell a

story. The block design subtest requires the child to use blocks to make specific

designs. The object assembly subtest asks the child to put together pieces in such a

way as to construct an entire object. In the coding subtest, the child makes pairs from

a series of shapes or numbers. The mazes subtest asks the child to solve maze puzzles

of increasing difficulty. The symbol search subtest requires the child to match

symbols that appear in different groups. Scores on the performance subtests are based

on both the speed of response and the number of correct answers.

Results: WISC scores yield an overall intelligence quotient, called the full scale IQ,

as well as a verbal IQ and a performance IQ. The three IQ scores are standardized in

such a way that a score of 100 is considered average and serves as a benchmark for

higher and lower scores. Verbal and performance IQ scores are based on scores on the

13 subtests.

The full scale IQ is derived from the child's scores on all of the subtests. It reflects

both verbal IQ and performance IQ and is considered the single most reliable and

valid score obtained by the WISC. When a child's verbal and performance IQ scores

are far apart, however, the full scale IQ should be interpreted cautiously.

WISC-IV

It is an individually administered clinical instrument for assessing the cognitive ability

of children

aged 6 years through 16 years 11 months.

WISC IV has 4 composite scores (instead of the 2 we had with the WISC III).

Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) is comprises of the four composite scores.

Verbal Comprehension

Index (VCI)

Perceptual Reasoning Index

(PRI)

Working Memory Index (WMI)

Processing Speed Index (PSI)

List of the Subtest under each of the four Indexes:

(key= "(  )" indicated that the subtest is not included in the index total score.)

Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI):

Similarities

Vocabulary

Comprehension

(Information)

(Word Reasoning)

Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI):

Block Design

Picture Concepts

Matrix Reasoning

(Picture Completion)

Working Memory Index (WMI):

Digit Span

Letter-Number Sequencing

(Arithmetic)

Processing Speed Index (PSI):

Coding

Symbol Search

(Cancellation)

The WISC-IV has a total of 15 subtests, 10 are retained from the WISC-III

These are the five new subtests:

Word Reasoning

Matrix Reasoning

Letter-Name Sequencing

Symbol Search

Cancellation

Object Assembly subtest from the WISC III is gone.

On the WISC III there was Picture Arrangement,   now on the WISC IV there is

Picture Concepts, under Perceptual Reasoning Index.  (Not sure if it is testing the

same type of information or not.  Not to be confused with the Picture Completion is

on both versions of the WISC).

Scoring: Current reports show that most students re-tested with the WISC-IV will

have approximately a 5 point discrepancy, lower (to the negative) because of this

newer version of WISC, its novelty and its increased difficulty.

The good news is that the WISC IV has been normed on normal peers and for special

education populations:

Mental Retardation (MR), Attention-Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD),

Learning Disabilities (LD), both AD/HD and LD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), etc.

With 4 composite scores (vs. 2 as is the case with the WISC III), there is no standard

discrepancy formula, it now all has to be evaluated in terms of the child's ability, test

results, current educational functioning, achievement test expectations based on

ability, evaluation of the subtests as well as evaluation of the composite sets.

Some evaluators have suggested that a 19 point discrepancy in the VCI/PRI

composites may warrant further investigation.

Standard deviation is 15 points, it is not clear that these score will tell enough about

the child's areas of weakness.

Wisconsin Card Sort Test  

A test measurement that can be used to measure the level of dopamine activation in

the pre-frontal cortex. The individual is asked to decipher rules, such as shape,

concerning the arrangement of cards, and then must sort the cards according to these

rules. Once they have seen the pattern or rule, the arrangement changes and the

individual must then sort the cards according to the new rule

Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-RevisedAge Range: Grades K-16, ages 5-0 through 75+

Administration Time: 10-30 minutes for each cluster of tests

Scores/Interpretation: Age- and grade-based percentile ranks, standard scores (M =

100 SD = 15), and NCEs (for Chapter I ), age and grade equivalents.

Benefits

Provides thorough coverage of reading readiness, basic skills, and comprehension

Two forms make it easy to test and retest

Wide age range allows you to test young children to older adults

More diagnostic power with a wide array of scores

The Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised-Normative Update provide an

expanded interpretive system and age range to help you assess reading skills of

children and adults. Two forms, G and H, make it easy to test and retest, or you can

combine the results of both forms for a more comprehensive assessment.

Form G

Two readiness tests and four tests of reading achievement:

Visual-Auditory Learning

Letter Identification (and a Supplementary Letter Checklist)

Word Identification

Word Attack

Word Comprehension (Antonyms, Synonyms, Analogies)

Passage Comprehension

Form H

Four tests of reading achievement with parallel test items to Form G:

Word Identification

Word Attack

Word Comprehension (Antonyms, Synonyms, Analogies)

Passage Comprehension

Vocabulary measured in content areas

Reading vocabulary, measured by the Word Comprehension test, may be evaluated in

four areas: General Reading, Science-Mathematics, Social Studies, and Humanities.

WRMT-R includes practice items and training procedures to help you administer the

test to younger children.

The complete kit also includes an audiocassette with pronunciation guides for Word

Attack and Word Identification items in each form.

WPPSI-RThe Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Revised (WPPSI-R) is a

battery of tests for 3-7 year olds that assesses intellectual functioning. Administration

time is approximately 50-75 minutes.

The WPPSI-R has two parts, the Verbal Scale and the Performance Scale. Each of

these scales has several subtests.

The Verbal Scale measures language expression, comprehension, listening, and the

ability to apply these skills to solving problems. The examiner gives the questions

orally, and the child gives a spoken response. The Performance Scale assesses

nonverbal problem solving, perceptual organisation, speed, and visual-motor

proficiency. Included are tasks like puzzles, analysis of pictures, imitating designs

with blocks, and copying.

Scales Percentile Age

Equivalent

Description of subtest

Performance

Subtests

     

Object Assembly     Visual analysis, object construction

Geometric Design     Fine motor co-ordination, copying,

drawing

Block Design     Visual motor problem solving,

spatial relationships

Mazes     Fine motor co-ordination, planning,

following directions

Picture

Completion

    Visual discrimination, alertness to

detail

(Animal Pegs)     Visual-motor co-ordination, speed,

concentration

Verbal Subtests      

Information     Factual knowledge, long term

memory, recall

Comprehension     Social and practical judgement,

common sense

Arithmetic     numerical reasoning, concentration,

attention

Vocabulary     Language development, word

knowledge, verbal fluency

Similarities     Abstract reasoning, verbal categories

and concepts

(Sentences)     short-term auditory memory,

attention

A Percentile rank expresses the relative position of a score. Additional scores, like

quotients based on groups of selected subtests, can be calculated. These scores can

suggest additional hypotheses about factors underlying the young child's performance

on the WPPSI-R.

A percentile rank of 98 means that a child has scored as well as or better than 98% of

students of the same age on that subtest. The confidence interval indicates the

probable range of scores which can be expected when this individual is retested.

IQ Scale IQ Scale

Score

Percentile Confidence

Interval

Classification

Performance

IQ

       

Verbal IQ        

Full Scale IQ        

Conceptual

Index

       

Spatial Index        

Sequential

Index

       

Intelligence tests like this one are samples of problem solving abilities and learned

facts, and are good predictors of future learning and academic success. However,

there are several factors that the tests do not measure. For instance, they cannot

determine motivation, curiosity, or creative talent. At an early age, they are also

limited by the child's experiences and opportunities for formal and informal learning.

WPPSI-IIIWPPSI™-III features shorter, more game-like activities that hold the attention of

children as young as 2-1/2 years. Simplified instructions and scoring procedures

enhance the ease of administration for examiners.

WPPSI™-III has undergone substantial revision to increase the scale's age

appropriate properties. Age range has been lowered to 2 years 6 months, allowing

for earlier testing of children who could benefit from earlier intervention with special

services Scale has been divided into two age bands, 2:6-3:11 years and 4:0-7:3 years.

Younger children take fewer subtests that are designed to measure verbal

comprehension and perceptual organization abilities. Older children take a greater

number of subtests designed to measure verbal comprehension, perceptual

organization, and processing speed abilities

Less emphasis on acquired knowledge

Instructions to children have been simplified

Elimination of time bonuses due to the normal lags in motor skill development

relative to cognitive skills

Use of queries and prompts is generally unrestricted

All stimulus booklet art has been redrawn to be more colorful and more closely

resemble illustrations found in materials familiar to children

WPPSI™-III test materials have been modified to make administration of the scale

as user friendly as possible.

Instructions to the examiner and scoring procedures have been simplified

New stimulus booklet page layout provides greater comfort and efficiency

throughout testing

Elimination of Object Assembly shield makes presentation of puzzle pieces less

difficult and time-consuming

All subtests now feature teaching and practice items

Overall testing time for core subtests has been reduced, especially for children in

the younger age group, with 25-35 minutes required for them and 40-50 minutes

required for the older children

The scale's psychometric properties have significantly improved.

New items have been added to ensure that all existing subtests have adequate

floors, ceilings, and difficulty-level gradients

All items have been reviewed for ethnic, gender, regional, and socio-economic bias

Seven new subtests were developed to enhance the scale's measurement capabilities

of fluid reasoning, receptive and expressive vocabulary, and processing speed

Significantly improved reliability and validity

Norms include Subtest Scaled Score and Composite Scores (e.g. FSIQ, VIQ, PIQ,

PSQ)

Wide Range Assessment of Memory and LearningPurpose:  Designed to evaluate a child's ability for learning and memorizing

information.

Population:  Ages 5 through 17

Scales: Verbal Memory Index, Visual Memory Index, Learning Index, General

Memory Index

Time:  45-60 minutes for Core Battery; 83-102 minutes for Expanded Battery.

Authors:  David Sheslow & Wayne Adams

Publisher:  Jastak Associates Inc

Description:  The Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning (WRAML) is

designed to assess memory and learning functions across the school years.

Scoring:  There are nine subtests each yielding a norm-referenced score. Scores on

three subtests are combined to give a Verbal Memory Index, a Visual Memory Index,

and a Learning Index. The scaled scores for these three indexes are then summed to

yield a General Memory Index.  Four of the nine subtests (Verbal Learning, Story

Memory, Sound Symbol, and Visual Learning) ask for both immediate and delayed

recall. Interpretations are provided, based on the age of the child tested, of the

difference between the immediate and delayed score. Thus, the nine subtests of the

WRAML yield a total of 18 scores. The GMI and Verbal, Visual, and Learning

Indexes can be computed in percentiles and standard scores. Individual subtests yield

scaled scores.

Reliability:  For the nine subtests, the reliability coefficients are usually between .80

and .85. When subtests are combined, reliabilities range from approximately .90

to .96. Test reliability is as high for younger as for older children.

Validity:  Construct validity, used in Rasch measurement, indicates excellent item

definitions of variables measured and internal consistency Comparisons with the

WMS-R for adolescents (16-17 year).  The WRAML appears superior to the WMS-R

for use with adolescents. The WRAML is well validated, and is widely used in

research. Information is also included concerning the standard error of measurement

for each subtest and index for each age group, along with correlations between scores

on the WRAML and other standardized instruments such as the McCarthy Memory

Index, Stanford Binet Short-Term Memory, and the Wechsler Memory Scale.

Norms:  The test was normed and standardized based on samples of children from 5

to 16 years of age.  There were approximately 112 children in each subgroup (half-

year intervals). The total norming group consisted of 2,363 individuals. The norming

samples are representative of the US population with regard to gender, geographic

region, and parental occupation.

Suggested use:  The major use for the WRAML is clinical in terms of providing

incremental information in making an individual diagnosis. The WRAML is used to

evaluate learning and school–related problems.  It is helpful in evaluating the effects

of a language disability or problems with verbal memory retrieval, in identifying the

inefficient or disorganized memory strategies of a bright but under-achieving student,

and in pointing to the functional inefficiency of memory in a child with attention

deficit.   It can be used to assess memory following head injury.