Psychology board---national-psychology-examination---assessment-domain-additional-resources-1

National Psychology Examination - Assessment Domain Additional Resources

This document provides additional resources and assistance for candidates preparing for the national psychology examination. Specifically, it provides additional information on Domain 2 of the exam - the Assessment domain.

The national psychology examination supports applications for general registration and ensures a consistent professional standard of psychologists nationally. The Board has published a curriculum to provide guidance to candidates sitting the National Psychology Examination as part of completing the requirements to be eligible for general registration. The competencies for general registration are measured by four examination domains: ethics, assessment, interventions and communication. Further background information relevant to the Assessment domain is provided here.

The Assessment domain of the curriculum specifies six specific tests that require detailed knowledge, and 20 tests of which you need to be familiar.

Six tests you must know well

Competence in the administration, scoring and interpretation is required for the following 6 tests. The rationale for the choice of the six tests lies in their educational value as good examples of tests assessing specific areas of functioning. These tests are:

1. WAIS IV (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale)

2. WISC IV (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children)

3. PAI, 2007 (Personality Assessment Inventory)

4. DASS (Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale)

5. K-10 (Kessler-10)

6. SDQ (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire)

Candidates must be competent in the administration, scoring and interpretation of these 6 tests. Therefore it is recommended that candidates:

Read and study the Test Publisher's manuals for each of the relevant tests.

Practice administering each of the 6 tests and practice scoring and interpreting these tests based on the manuals and relevant published test norms.

Read and study books and journals on each of the tests. The National Psychology Examination Reading List includes relevant supplementary books and readings on each of these tests. Note also that there is a lot of relevant material on websites on each of the tests.

Learn how to report the outcomes of assessments using these tests in written reports.

1Psychology Board of Australia

G.P.O. Box 9958 | Melbourne VIC 3001 | www.psychologyboard.gov.au

20 Tests with which you need to be familiar

Candidates must have familiarity with the use and purpose of the following tests.

1. WPPSI III (Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence)

2. Stanford Binet V (Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales)

3. Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test

4. WASI Wechsler Abbrieviated Scale of Intelligence

5. Woodcock-Johnson Test of Cognitive Abilities – III

6. WIAT-II (Wechsler Individual Achievement Test)

7. ABAS (Adaptive Behavior Assessment System)

8. WMS IV (Wechsler Memory Scale)

9. WRAML 2 (Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning)

10. SDS (Self Directed Search)

11. Strong (Strong Interest Inventory)

12. 16PF, 5th Ed (Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire)

13. NEO-PI-R (NEO Personality Inventory)

14. PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire 9 Item).

15. BDI (Beck Depression Inventory)

16. GAF (Global Assessment of Functioning)

17. STAI (State Trait Anxiety Inventory)

18. ORS (Outcome Rating Scale)

19. MMPI-2 (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory)

20. CBCL (Achenbach Child Behaviour Checklist and Teacher/Youth reports - ASEBA)

You do not need to have detailed knowledge of the administration, scoring and interpretation of the above tests. Studying the following test summaries will give you helpful information on each of these tests. The summaries provide you with essential information required to meet part of the objectives of this assessment domain. Therefore, studying the summaries below will provide relevant information in preparing for the examination. You do not need to memorise all the facts related to these tests. However, you do need to understand when a particular test would be selected for a particular problem, and what kind of information you would get from administering that particular test.

Test summaries

Disclaimer: The following information is provided to assist candidates preparing for the national psychology examination. It is not mandatory material, as such information can be obtained elsewhere, and no responsibility is taken for any errors. Candidates are responsible for checking the relevant original sources and undertaking their own study of these tests. Tests are continuously being updated and new knowledge in the field might supersede material published here. The Board is happy to be informed about errors or corrections that need to be made, or improvements to the material provided below. Please send correspondence addressed to the National Psychology Examination Committee by email to: [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]

Test 1: Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Third Edition (Wechsler, 2002)

Description and Background

The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Third Edition (WPPSI-III) is an intelligence test designed for use with preschool and early primary school aged children. The WPPSI-III is the current edition of the original WPPSI developed in the 1960’s (Wechsler, 1967). The WPPSI is comprised of a series of 14 subtests that are used to calculate a Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (IQ), Verbal IQ and Performance IQ. The WPPSI subtest structure varies according to age groups. There are four core subtests for the younger age group (ages 2-6 through 3-11), and there are 11 core subtests for the older age group (ages 4 through 7-3). Supplemental and optional subtests are also available to replace core subtests or provide optional cognitive functioning information.

Table 1. Subtest structure of the WPPSI-III

Subtest What does it measure? 2-6 through 3-11

4 through 7-3

Information Long-term memory for factual information Core* Core*

Vocabulary Knowledge of words - Core*

Word Reasoning Verbal reasoning - Core*

Block Design Nonverbal reasoning and visual-spatial organisation

Core+ Core+

Matrix Reasoning Visual-perceptual analogic reasoning ability without a speed component

- Core+

Picture Concepts Abstract, categorical reasoning based on visual-perceptual recognition processes

- Core+

Coding Ability to learn an unfamiliar task involving speed of mental operation and psychomotor speed

- Coding

Similarities Verbal concept formation - Supplemental^

Comprehension Practical reasoning and judgement in social situations

- Supplemental^

Object Assembly Visual-perceptual organisation Core+ Supplemental^

Picture completion Visual discrimination involving the ability to distinguish between essential and nonessential details

- Supplemental^

Symbol Search Speed of visual-perceptual discrimination and scanning

- Core^

Receptive Vocabulary

Word knowledge Core* Optional

Picture Naming Knowledge of words Supplemental6 Optional

Subtests mark with an * form the verbal composite for the specified age group. Subtests marked with a + form the performance composite for the specified age group. Subtests marked with a ^ form the supplemental tests for the specified age group.


The WPPSI is often used in school and clinical settings to assess a child’s level of intelligence, or to assess cognitive delay, learning difficulties or giftedness.

Age Range

The WPPSI is for use on children belonging to two age groups: 2 years and 6 months through 3 years and 11 months, and 4 years to 7 years and 3 months. Content of the test and subtests vary for each age group (See Table 1).

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability for the composite scores is good. Across the age groups, reliability coefficients range between .94 and .96 for the Verbal IQ Composite, between .89 and .95 for the Performance IQ Composite, and between .95 and .97 for the Full Scale IQ. Coefficients for the Processing Speed Quotient range between .86 and .92 (for the later age group only – the Processing Speed Quotient subtests are not administered to the earlier age group), and for the General Language Composite between .90 and .94. Average internal consistency reliability coefficients for the 14 subtests range between .83 (Symbol Search) to .95 (Similarities) across the age groups. Stability coefficients over a period of 14 to 50 days (M = 26 days) are .87 for Verbal IQ, .81 for Performance IQ, and .86 for the Full Scale IQ across the age groups. Similarly, across the age groups, stability coefficients for subtests ranged from .61 (Picture Concepts) to .85 (Picture Naming).

Note: Core tests were used to construct the IQ’s used in the reliability analyses. The reliability for the IQ’s resulting when a supplementary test is used to substitute a core test is unknown.

Validity

The WPPSI-III has satisfactory criterion validity, correlating with WPPSI-R, WISC-III, WISC-IV, and other measures of intelligence, achievement, and memory.

Administration

The WPSSI-III is a standardised test and Australian norms are available. The core battery for the younger group takes approximately 30 to 50 minutes to administer, and 40 to 60 minutes for the older group. In the younger age group, only one substitution of tests is permitted, namely Picture Naming for Receptive Vocabulary. In the older age group, Picture Completion or Object Assembly can be used as a supplement for Block Design, Matrix Reasoning or Picture Concepts. Comprehension can be used as a supplement for Information, Vocabulary, or Word Reasoning, and Symbol Search can be used as a supplement for Coding.

WPPSI-III administration procedures are standardised and must be adhered to. Administration involved a one-on-one interview with a combination of questioning and tasks. To administer the WPPSI-III

The WPPSI-II has been translated and adapted for use with different populations, including French, German, Italian, Swedish, Korean, Japanese, Canadian, Australian and Dutch.

Scoring and interpretation

The WPPSI-III can be scored manually or with a software program. The WPPSI-III uses standard scores (M = 100, SD = 15) for the Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and Full Scale IQ. Raw subtest scores are converted to scaled scores (M = 10, SD = 3) for the 14 subtests. Intelligence Quotients and scaled scores are classified as Very Superior, Superior, High Average, Average, Low Average, Borderline, Intellectual Deficient or Extremely Low.


Test Availability

The WPSSI-III is available for purchase from Pearson PsychCorp.

References

Sattler, J.M. (2008). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Third Edition (WPPSI-III): Description. Assessment of Children. San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc.

Sattler, J.M. (2008). WPPSI-III subtests and interpreting the WPSSI-III. Assessment of Children. San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc.

Wechsler, D. (1967). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

Wechsler, D. (2002).WPPSI-III Technical and Interpretive Manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.


Test 2: Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales – Fifth Edition (SB5: Roid, 2003)


The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales-Fifth Edition (SB5) is the latest edition of an intelligence test first developed in 1905 by Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon. The earliest version of the test was primarily used to assess for mental retardation. The test has since been developed to measure very low intellectual functioning as well as very gifted intellectual functioning. The SB5 is comprised of 10 subtests, of which all comprise a Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (IQ), and which various combinations are used to form different scales. These include Verbal and Non-Verbal IQ – each comprised of 5 subtests. Each of the subtests within the verbal domain has a counterpart in the nonverbal domain (e.g. nonverbal working memory and verbal working memory), and pairs of verbal and nonverbal subtests form 5 factor indexes (Fluid Reasoning, Knowledge, Quantitative Reasoning, Visual-Spatial Processing, Working Memory). See Table 1 for the structure of the SB5. The SB5 covers a large age range, thus within the subtests different types of items are utilised (referred to as activities) to suit different age levels. Each subtest has one to three activities and age determines which activity is administered.

There is also an Abbreviated Battery IQ (ABIQ) that can be used when time is limited, and can also provide an estimate of the examinee’s overall functioning level, and can be used as a screening tool or a global estimate of the examinee’s general cognitive level.

Table 1. Structure of the SB5

Factor Indexes Sub-tests

Fluid Reasoning Nonverbal Fluid Reasoning *

Verbal Fluid Reasoning+

Knowledge Nonverbal Knowledge*

Verbal knowledge+

Quantitative Reasoning Nonverbal Quantitative Reasoning*

Verbal Quantitative Reasoning+

Visual-Spatial Processing Nonverbal Visual-Spatial Processing*

Verbal Visual-Spatial Processing+

Working Memory Nonverbal Working Memory*

Verbal Working Memory+

*Subtests marked with * comprise the nonverbal domain

+ Subtests marked with + comprise the verbal domain

Age Range

The SB5 is designed for use on participants aged anywhere between 2 through 89+ years.

Reliability

The SB5 has excellent internal consistency. The average coefficient is .98 for the full scale IQ, .95 for nonverbal IQ, .96 for verbal IQ and .91 for the Abbreviated Battery IQ. The average coefficient for the five Factor Indexes range between .90 (Fluid Reasoning) and .92 (Knowledge, Quantitative Reasoning, and Visual-Spatial Processing). Internal consistency coefficients for the subtests range from .84 (Verbal Working Memory) to .89 (Verbal Knowledge). Test-retest reliability over a median of 5 to 8 days returned stability coefficients across age groups ranging


from .86 to .93 for Nonverbal IQ, .90 to .93 for the Verbal IQ, and from .90 to .94 for the Full Scale IQ. Average stability coefficients across different age groups ranged between .81 (Visual-Spatial Processing) to .90 (Knowledge). Average stability coefficients for the subtests ranged between .76 (Nonverbal Fluid Reasoning and Verbal Visual-Spatial Processing) to .87 for Nonverbal Knowledge and Verbal Quantitative Reasoning.

Validity

Several studies have explored the concurrent validity of the SB5. The median correlation between the Full Scale IQ of the SB5 and other measures of intelligence (i.e. WISC-III, WAIS-III, WPPSI-R, WJ-III, WIAT-II) is r = .84.

Administration

The SB5 is used several contexts and for different purposes, such as, clinical and neuropsychological assessment, educational placement, compensation evaluations, career assessment, adult neuropsychological treatment, forensics, and research on aptitude. The Full Scale Battery normally takes 45-75 minutes to administer, and the Abbreviated Battery IQ up to 15-20 minutes. Testing takes place in a standardised and quiet environment. The examiner sits adjacent to the examinee, and shields the record form by the item presentation book. The record form is filled out by the examiner and in paper and pencil form.

The publisher of the SB5 utilises the American Psychological Associations ‘Guidelines on Test User Qualifications’ to screen individuals who wish to purchase the test (APA, 2001). To purchase in Australia, test users must be a registered psychologist or a probationary psychologist under the supervision of a registered psychologist (ACER, Australia).


The SB5 is a standardised test that can be hand scored or scored using a recommended software package. Raw scores for subtests are converted into scaled scores (M = 10, SD = 3), and normalised standard scores are computed for the Full Scale, Nonverbal and Verbal IQ, and the five factor indexes (M = 100, SD = 15). The instrument has been standardised with sample of 4800 individuals selected to represent the population in the United States during the early twenty-first century. The SB5 does provide labels for categories of the IQ scores (see Table 2), but indicates that the dividing points between categories are arbitrary.

Table 2. Categories of IQ Scores for the SB5

Factor Indexes Sub-tests

145-160 Very gifted or highly advanced

130-144 Gifted or very advances

120-129 Superior

110-119 High average

90-109 Average

80-89 Low average

70-79 Borderline impaired or delayed

55-69 Mildly impaired or delayed

40-54 Moderately impaired or delayed


Australian Norms

This test does not have Australian norms.

Test Availability

The SB5 is available for purchase from ACER Psychology.

References

American Psychological Association (2001). Report of the Taskforce on Test User Qualifications. Washington, DC: Author.

Roid, G.H. (2003). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

Sattler, J.M. (2008). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations (5th ed.). Jermone M. Sattler, Publisher: California.


Test 3: Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT: Kaufman & Kaufman, 1993)

Background and Purpose

The Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT) is a test of intelligence. It is underpinned by an integration of three developmental models of intelligence: Horn and Cattell’s theory of fluid and crystallised intelligence (Horn & Cattell, 1966); (b) the Luria-Golden definition on planning ability (Golden, 1981; Luria, 1980); and (c) Piaget’s stage of formal operations (Piaget, 1972). The core battery of the KAIT comprises six subtests, which are used to generate three Intelligence Quotients (Crystallised, Fluid and Composite Intelligence). The expanded battery includes the six core subtests and four additional subtests. See Table 1 for the KAIT subtests and description of the construct it measures. The KAIT also includes an optional mental status subtest that measures orientation and attention.

Table 1. KAIT sub-tests

Core Battery Expanded Battery

Subtest What does it measure? Subtest What does it measure?

Definitions* Measures word knowledge and verbal concept formation

Famous Faces Measures the fund of acquired information

Auditory Comprehension*

Measures understanding and comprehension of oral information

Memory for Block Designs

Measures the ability to construct geometric designs from memory

Double Meanings* Measures the ability to find a word, given two clues for each of two distinct meanings

Rebus Delayed Recall Measures memory for previously learned visual information

Rebus Learning^ Measures the ability to learn and apply new information

Auditory Delayed Recall

Measures memory for previously learned auditory information

Logical Steps^ Measures logical reasoning and application of logical relationships to solve problems

Mystery Codes^ Measures the ability to detect logical relationships and apply them to novel problems

*Used to generate crystallised intelligence quotient

^Used to generate fluid intelligence quotient

Age Range

The KAIT is test of intelligence for persons aged between 11 and 85 years and over.

Reliability

Test-retest reliability for the three IQ scales is good. Over a test-retest interval ranging between 6 and 99 days (M = 31 days), average stability coefficients for the crystallised, fluid and composite intelligence quotients were .87, .94 and .94, respectively. Mean stability coefficients for the six core subtests ranges from .72 to .95, with a mean of .80. Split-half method for internal consistency generated internal consistency reliability coefficients of .95 for both crystallised and fluid intelligence and .97 for composite intelligence. The six core subtests also demonstrate good internal consistency, with ranging between .87 and .93.


Validity

Concurrent validity is adequate, evidenced by correlations of the Composite Intelligence Quotient and other measures of intelligence (range .63 to .95). The KAIT also demonstrates adequate construct validity. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic studies support the two main domains of intelligence (crystallised and fluid) underpinning the development of the instrument.

Administration

The KAIT core subtests take about 1 hour to administer and the additional subtests take an additional 30 minutes. The KAIT is a standardised test and must be administered in accordance with procedures outlined in the test manual (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1993). The test is administered individually as a structured interview. The KAIT subtests are arranged in two easels in the order of standard administration. The easels let the examiner see the test directions and scoring key on one side while the individual sees the item stimulus on the other side. The examiner must position themselves either adjacent or opposite keeping the individual record form behind the test easel.

KAIT examiners must have professional training in individual assessment. They are expected to understand theory and research in areas such as child development, tests and measurement, cognitive psychology, educational psychology and neuropsychology. They also should have supervised experience in clinical observation of behaviour and formal graduate-level training in individual intellectual assessment (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1993).


Raw scores are converted to scaled scores for the 10 subtests (M = 10, SD = 3), and to standard scores (IQ’s) for the fluid and crystallised scales and for the composite intelligence scale derived from age based norms (M = 100, SD = 15). The test manual offers descriptive categories for IQ scores (upper extreme, well above average, above average, average, below average, well below average, lower extreme,-mild deficit, lower extreme-moderate deficit). Qualitative descriptors for the mental status subtest are provided in the test manual.

Australian norms

This test does not have any Australian norms.

Test Availability

The KAIT is available for purchase from Pearson PsychCorp Australia

References

Horn, J.L., & Cattell, R.B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253-270.

Golden, C.J. (1981). The Luria-Nebraska Children’s Battery: Theory and formulation. In G.W. Hynd & J.E. Obrzut (Eds), Neuropsychological assessment and the school-age child: issues and procedures. (pp. 277-302). New York: Grune & Stratton.

Kaufman, A.S., & Kaufman, N.L. (1993). Kaufman Adolescent & Adult Intelligence Test. Circle Pines. MN: American Guidance Service

Luria, A.R. (1980). Higher cortical functions in man (2nded.). New York: Basic Books.

Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15, 1-12.


Test 4: Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI)

Background and Description

The Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) was developed as a short and reliable measure of intelligence for use in clinical, psycho-educational and research settings. The WASI is comprised of four subtests (Vocabulary, Block Design, Similarities, and Matrix Reasoning) that are similar to their counterparts in the WISC III and WAIS III. The four subtests combine to make the Full Scale IQ (FISQ-4). The Vocabulary and Similarities subtests combine to make a Verbal IQ (VIQ), and the Block Design and Matrix Reasoning the Performance IQ (PIQ). The subtests Vocabulary and Matrix Reasoning can also be combined to comprise another Full Scale IQ (FISQ-2). The four subtests were chosen for their strong association with general cognitive abilities and their relationship to the constructs of intelligence, such as the verbal and performance, and crystallised and fluid dichotomies. Table 1 provides a description of each subscale.

The WASI can be used for differentiating individuals who are gifted or those with mental retardation, as well as individuals whose intelligence falls within the normal range. The WASI is not a substitute for the WISC or WAIS, but can be used as an effective screener to determine the need for more comprehensive assessment.

Table 1. IQ and subtest structure of the WASI

IQ Subtest What does it measure?

Verbal Vocabulary Expressive vocabulary, verbal knowledge, and fund of information

Similarities Verbal concept formation, abstract verbal reasoning ability, and general intellectual ability

Performance Block Design Perceptual organisation and general intelligence

Matrix Reasoning Nonverbal fluid reasoning and general intellectual ability

Age Range

The WASI is intended for use with individual’s aged 6 through 89 years.

Reliability

The WASI has adequate reliability. The average internal consistency reliability for the FSIQ-4 and FISQ-2 for children aged 6 through 16 is .96 and .93 respectively, and .93 and .94 for the VIQ and PIQ, respectively. In the adult sample, average internal consistency reliability coefficients for the FSIQ-4 and FSIQ-2 are .98 and .96 respectively, and .96 for both the VIQ and PIQ. Average internal consistency reliabilities for the subtests are satisfactory in both samples, ranging from .87 (Similarities) and .92 (Matrix Reasoning) for the children’s sample, and from .92 (Similarities and Block Design) and .94 (Vocabulary and Matrix Reasoning).

Test-retest reliability was evaluated over a period of 2 to 12 weeks (M = 31 days) in a sample of 222 (116 children and 106 adults). Stability coefficients for the children sample were .93 for the FISQ-4, .85 for the FISQ-2, .92 for the VIQ and .88 for the PIQ. Subtest stability coefficients ranged between .77 (Matrix Reasoning) and .86 (Similarities). Stability coefficients for the adult sample were .92 for the FSIQ-4, .88 for the FISQ-2, .92 for the VIQ and .87 for the PIQ. Subtest stability coefficients ranged between .79 (Matrix Reasoning) and .90 (Vocabulary).


Validity

The WASI has acceptable correlations with various measures of intelligence (WISC-III = .87, and WAIS-III = .92), ability and achievement.

Administration

The WASI is individually administered, standardised test. It takes approximately 30 minutes to administer all four subtests, and 15 minutes for the two-subtest form. Like many of the Wechsler tests, the WASI has several start, reverse, discontinue and stop rules. The specific rule however, varies according to age group. For example, the stop rule for the similarities subtest for children aged 6-8 is after 20 items, after 24 for children aged 9-11, and there is no stop rule for older individuals. The WASI is a standardised test and requires standardised testing conditions. Testing should take place in a quiet, well-lit room and free from interruption. Assessors should read test instructions verbatim from the administration booklet. The assessor records the participants’ responses on a paper form. There is only one form across the age range.

Persons who have completed formal graduate or professional level training in psychological assessment can administer the WASI. Other professionals may also administer the WASI, including those with a Bachelor’s degree in psychology, education, counselling, speech therapy, and occupational therapy however results can only be interpreted by someone who has training in psychological assessment.


The WASI standardisation sample is 2245 (1100 children and 1145 adults aged 17 to 89) children and adults in the US representative of the US population in the late 1990’s. To score, the WASI subtest raw scores are converted to T scores, which in turn are used to calculate the WASI IQ scores. For each scale (Verbal, Performance, Full Scale), the distribution of sums of the T scores are converted to a scale with a mean of 100 and SD of 15. The WASI manual provides tables for estimating IQ scores ranges on the WISC III and WAIS III, and are similarly categorised as Very Superior, Superior, High Average, Average, Low Average, Borderline or Extremely Low. Based on the standardisation sample, the manual also provided age equivalents and percentile ranks for IQ and subtest scores.

Test Availability

Available for purchase through Pearson PsychCorp Australia.

References

Wechsler, D. (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence: Manual. U.S.A. The Psychological Corporation.

Sattler, J.M. (2008). Assessment of Children: Cognitive Foundations. Dan Diego, Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc.


Test 5: Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001)


The Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III COG) were first developed in 1977, and has since been revised in 1989 and again in 2001. The latter is the third and current version of the tests. The tests were developed based on the theories of Raymond B. Cattell, John Horn and John B. Carroll’s about the structure of intelligence (CHC theory: Schneider & McGrew, 2012). The standard battery is comprised of 10 tests, and the extended of 20 tests (10 tests in the standard battery plus 10 extended tests). The tests cover the seven clusters outlined in the CHC model. See Table 1 for WJ III COG tests and description of the construct it measures.

Table 1. WJ III COG testsStandard Battery Extended Battery

Subtest What does it measure? Subtest What does it measure?

Verbal Comprehension* Word knowledge General Information* Acquired knowledge

Visual-Auditory Learning*

Meaningful memory Retrieval Fluency* Ideational fluency

Spatial Relations* Visual-spatial ability Picture Recognition* Visual recognition memory

Sound Blending* Ability to synthesise sounds Auditory Attention* Auditory discrimination

Concept Formation* Inductive and fluid reasoning Analysis-Synthesis* General sequential reasoning

Visual Matching* Visual perceptual speed Decision Speed* Reasoning speed

Numbers Reversed* Short-term auditory memory Memory for Words* Short-term auditory memory

Incomplete Words Auditory analysis and auditory closure

Rapid Picture Naming Cognitive fluency

Auditory Working Memory

Short-term auditory memory span Planning Sequential reasoning

Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed

Delayed Recall Pair Cancellation Sustained attention and concentration

*Test is included in the General Intellectual Ability (GIA) Score

Age Range

The WJ III COG is designed for use on participants aged anywhere between 2 through 90 + years.

Reliability

Stability coefficients have only been reported for 5 of the 20 WJ III COG tests: Incomplete Words, Concept Formation, Analysis-Synthesis, Visual Matching, and Memory for Words. In this study of 1196 individuals across four age groups (2-7, 8-18, 19-44, 45-95), stability coefficients of .71 (Memory for Words) to .86 (Visual Memory) were reported for a test-retest interval of less than one year. No mean or median test-retest interval was reported. The WJ III COG has satisfactory internal consistency. The internal consistency reliability coefficients for the GIA


standard and extended are .97 and .98 respectively, and the internal consistency reliability coefficients for the 20 WJ III COG tests range between .76 to .97.


Validity

Concurrent validity is satisfactory, evidenced by correlations of the GIA and other measures of intelligence (range .62 to .76). The WJ III COG also demonstrates construct validity. Factor analytic studies support the underpinning Cattell Horn and Carroll model, and correlations between related clusters are higher than correlations between unrelated clusters.

Administration

The WJ III COG is administered individually, and must be administered by a registered psychologist with post-graduate training. The tests may be administered by a registered psychologist with no post-graduate training, however in this instance they must have attended suitable training programs in test administration and interpretation (Psychological Assessments Australia: http://www.psychassessments.com.au/Category.aspx?cID=102). The standard battery of tests takes about 40 minutes to administer and the extended can take up to about 2 hours (Sattler, 2008). The tests include a combination of one-on-one interviewing and paper and pencil tasks.


The WJ III COG is a standardised test and is scored electronically, using the software package provided with the test kit. The scoring software provides standard scores for each test (M = 100, SD = 15), with possible scores ranging between 1 and 200, as well as percentile ranks, age equivalents, grade equivalents, instructional ranges, and discrepancy scores. A Relative Profile Index (RPI) and an overall General Intellectual Ability (GIA) score are also provided. The RPI is a criterion-referenced measure, providing information about the relative ease or difficulty the individual is likely to encounter with age-level tasks. The GIA for the standard battery is formed by scores on 7 of the 10 tests: Verbal Comprehension, Visual-Auditory Learning, Spatial Relations, Sound Blending, Concept Formation, Visual Matching, and Numbers Reversed. For the extended battery, the GIA is formed by the 7 listed above, as well as 7 from the extended battery: General Information, Retrieval Fluency, Picture Recognition, Auditory Attention, Analysis-Synthesis, Decision Speed, and Memory for Words. Each of the tests that comprise the GIA is weighted, and the weights differ across age groups. Verbal Comprehension is weighted the highest at every age level.

The normative sample for the WJ III COG was updated in 2007 to reflect the 2005 U.S Census data (Woodcock, McGrew, & Schenk, 2007).

Australian norms

This test does not have any Australian norms.

Test Availability

The WJ III COG is available for purchase from Psychological Assessments Australia.

References

Sattler, J.M. (2008). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations (5th ed.). Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher: California.

Schneider, W.J., & McGrew, K.S. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence, in D. P. Flanagan & P.L. Harrison, Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (third edition) (pp. 99-144). The Guilford Press: New York.

Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2001). The Woodcock-Johnson® III. Itasca, IL: Riverside

Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Schenk, F.A. (2007). Woodcock-Johnson® III Normative Update Technical Manual. Itasca: Riverside.


Test 6: Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT-II)


The Wechsler Individual Achievement Test – II (WIAT-II) is a revision of the original WIAT developed in 1992 (The Psychological Corporation), and is designed to comprehensively assess achievement in academic areas. The Australian standardised edition WIAT-II has been developed for school-aged children and has modified the original WIAT to reflect changes in curriculum standards and classroom instructional practices. The WIAT-II is used in a variety of settings including, schools, clinics, private practice and residential treatment facilities, and can provide meaningful information to assist examiners in decisions in relation to diagnosis, eligibility, and treatments/interventions. There are four composites of the WIAT-II (Reading, Mathematics, Written Language, and Oral Language), and within each there are two or three subtests. The composite and subtest structure of the WIAT-II is described in the table below.

Age Range

The WIAT-II is suitable for use with persons aged 4 through 85. The original version of the WIAT was only developed for persons aged 5 through 19 years (school-aged). The age range was expanded in the WIAT II to assess pre-academic skills in younger children in order to be able to identify children who may be at risk, and also to assess achievement of adults in the general population. The Australian version however only has norms for pre-school through year 12. The U.S norms are used for college students and adults (17 through 85 years).

Reliability

Test-retest reliability in the school-aged sample has been evaluated on a normative sample of 48 children and adolescents over an average of 23 days (range 7 to 64 days). Stability coefficients for this sample are .88 for the Oral Language and Written Language composites, and .96 for the Reading and Mathematics composites. Stability coefficients for the subtests range between .82 (Oral Expression) and .96 (Word Reading). In a U.S sample of 76, stability coefficients range .75 (Written Language) through .95 (Mathematics) for the composite scores, and .75 (Oral Expression) through .95 (Spelling) for the subtest scores.

Using the split-half method, internal consistency reliability coefficients for the school-aged sample range from .84 (Oral Language) through .97 (Reading) for composite scores, and .8 through.97 (Word Reading) for the subtest scores. For the U.S based college students and adult sample, internal consistency reliability coefficients range from .88 (Oral Language) and .98 (Reading) for the composite scores, and .75 through .96 for the subtest scores.

Validity

The WIAT-II Australian edition demonstrates concurrent validity. Investigations of correlations between WIAT-II subtest and full scale scores with other measures of intelligence and ability tests (eg. WISC-IV, WAIS-III, Differential Ability Scales, Wide Range Reading Achievement Test, PAL-RW, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) have demonstrated adequate validity.

Administration

The WIAT-II is individually administered through structured interview in a quiet, well-lit and well ventilated room, with examinee and examiner sitting opposite or adjacent from one another and the stimulus book between them. Instructions are delivered to the examinee verbatim as printed on the examiner’s pages of the stimulus booklet. The responses are recorded by the examiner on the WIAT-II record form. Participants are required to respond on paper for some items.

The WIAT can be used as a whole battery, or can be used to assess certain aspects of achievement. Administration time depends on the number of subtests being administered and


on the age of the examinee. The full battery takes approximately 45 minutes for children of Preschool/Kindergarten age, 90 minutes for children who are in school year levels 1 through 6, and 1.5 hours for persons in year 7 and above.

Professionals who have knowledge and training in psychological and/or educational testing and the use of individually administered instruments are qualified to administer and interpret the results of the WIAT-II.

Table 1. Composite and sub-test structure of the WIAT-II

Composite Subtest What does it measure?

Reading Word Reading Pre-reading (phonological awareness) and decoding skills

Reading Comprehension

Reading instruction in the classroom

Psuedoword Decoding The ability to apply phonetic decoding skills

Mathematics Numerical Operations The ability to identify and write numbers

Maths Reasoning The ability to reason mathematically

Written Language Spelling The ability to spell.

Written Expression The examinee’s writing skills at all levels of language

Oral Language Listening Comprehension

The ability to listen for details

Oral Expression Range of oral language activities


Interpretation of scores on the WIAT-II Australian edition is based on a standardisation sample of 1261 children, adolescents and young adults who were representative of the Australian population according to 2001 census data. The norms on the WIAT II Australian were established on the basis of standard administration and scoring procedures under uniform testing conditions.

Total subtest raw scores are converted to scaled scores using tables of scores in the scoring and normative supplement, and based year or age. Standard subtest scores are then converted to standard composite scores using the supplemental score conversion worksheets or using a purposefully designed software package that is available for purchase with the test. Normative standard scores are provided by age and year-level, and can be categorised as Very Superior, Superior, High Average, Average, Low Average, Borderline, or Extremely Low.

Test Availability

The test is available for purchase from Pearson PsychCorp Australia.

References

Wechsler, D. (2002). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test – Second Edition: Australian Standardised Edition. Sydney, Australia: PsychCorp.

Wechsler, D. (2002). Scoring and normative supplement for pre-school-year 12. Sydney, Australia: PsychCorp.


Wechsler, D. (2002). Supplement for college students and adults. Sydney, Australia: PsychCorp.


Test 7: Adaptive Behaviour Assessment System – Second Edition (Harrison & Oakland, 2010)


The Adaptive Behaviour Assessment System – Second Edition (ABAS-II) is designed to measure the adaptive behaviour skills of individuals of all ages, and has been designed particularly for use with persons who have intellectual disabilities and those with other difficulties, disabilities and disorders that interfere with daily functioning. The ABAS is often used for diagnosis and classification of disabilities, and for evaluating and monitoring individual’s progress over time. Common settings for use of the ABAS include settings and agencies that provide services to children (eg. schools, community agencies, daycare programs etc) and adults (eg. community programs, vocational and occupational training facilities, prisons etc).

The ABAS covers 10 adaptive skills proposed by the American Association of Mental Retardation (AAMR). Functioning on each skill area can be evaluated, as well as General Adaptive Skills. There are several forms in the ABAS-II: Adult Forms (Self and Other), Parent Form, Teacher/Daycare Provider, and the Parent/Primary Caregiver Form.

Age Range

The ABAS-II can be used in the assessment of persons aged between 0 and 89. The different forms are used to assess adaptive skills across the age groups.

Reliability

The ABAS-II has adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Internal consistency reliability coefficients for the General Adaptive Composite (GAC) is .99 for the Teacher Form, and both Adult Forms (self and other), and .98 for the Parent Form. Coefficients for the 10 adaptive skills areas range between .89 and .96 for the Teacher Form, .86 to .93 for the Parent Form, .88 to .94 for the Adult Form (self), and .93 and .97 for the Adult Form (others). Stability coefficients of the GAC for a sample of 143 children over 11 days are .97 for the Teacher Form and Adult Form (others), .96 for the Parent Form and .99 for the Adult Form (self). In the same sample, stability coefficients for the adaptive skills areas range between .88 and .97 for the Teacher Form, .79 and .96 for the Parent Form, .91 to .97 for the Adult Form (self), and .86 to .96 for the Adult Form (others).

Validity

The ABAS-II is able to differentiate between different clinical groups, and has demonstrated concurrent validity. The correlation between the GAC and the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale – Classroom Edition Composite is .82. Further, correlations between .56 and .79 have been reported for the GAC and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT), and between .42 and .55 for the GAC and other measures of intelligence.

Administration

Each of the forms take approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete, and are completed in paper and pencil format. The Teacher’s Form is completed by either the child’s teacher or a teacher’s aide and the Parent Form by the parent or primary caregiver. The Adult Form (other) is completed by a family member or other adults familiar with the referred individual, and the Adult Form (self) by the referred individual if they have adequate reading comprehension.

To be qualified in the administration of the ABAS-II, users must be trained in the basic principles of psychological and educational assessment and test interpretation, the strengths and limitations of tests, and the use of assessment in data-based decision.



Each form is scored the same. Each item is rated on a 4 point scale (0 = is not able, 1 = never when needed, 2 = sometimes when needed, 3 = always when needed). Raw scores are converted into standard scores for the 10 adaptive skill areas (M = 10, SD = 3), to a General Adaptive Composite (GAC) for the total score (M = 100, SD = 15), and to age equivalent scores. The manual provides confidence intervals and percentile ranks for the GAC. Classifications are used for the adaptive skill areas and the GAC: Extremely Low, Borderline, Below Average, Average, Above Average, and Superior.

Table 1. ABAS adaptive skills areas.

Adaptive Skill Area Description

Communication Speech, language, and listening skills needed for communication with other people.

Community Use Skills needed for functioning in the community (eg. Shopping skills, getting around the community).

Functional Academics Basic reading, writing and other academic skills needed for daily, independent functioning.

Home/School Living Skills needed for the basic care of the home or living setting (eg. Cleaning, property maintenance and food preparation).

Health and Safety Skills needed for protection of health and to respond to illness and injury.

Leisure Skills needed for engaging in and planning leisure and recreational activities.

Self-Care Skills needed for personal care (eg. Eating, bathing, grooming)

Self-Direction Skills needed for independence, responsibility, and self-control (eg. Following directions, making choices).

Social Skills needed to interact socially and to get along with other people (eg. Showing and recognising emotions, using manners)

Work Skills needed for successful functioning in holding a job in a work setting.

Motor Basic fine and gross motor skills needed for locomotion, manipulation of the environment and the development of more complex activities.

*Included in the Adult Forms and Parent Form (for ages 5-21) and only completed when the individuals have a part or full-time job.

+ Included in the Teacher/Daycare Provider and Parent/Primary Caregiver Forms.

The ABAS-II is a standardised test, normed on a sample of 5270 individuals – representative of the US population (US Census 1999). The standardisation sample for the Parent/Primary Caregiver and Teacher/Daycare Provider Forms for children ages birth to 5 years comprised of 2100 individuals.

Test Availability

The WJ III COG is available for purchase from Pearson PsychCorp Australia.

References

Harrison, P.L., & Oakland, T. (2010). Adaptive behaviour Assessment System – Second Edition: Manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services

Sattler, J.M. (2002). Assessment of children: Behavioural and Clinical Applications – Fourth Edition. La Mesa, CA: Sattler Publishing


Test 8: Wechsler Memory Scale IV, Fourth Edition


The WMS-IV has been designed to assess various memory and working memory abilities. As a revised version of the WMS-III, the WMS-IV now also includes a brief evaluation of cognitive status. Similarly, the WMS-IV provides two batteries: the Adult Battery and the Older Adults Battery. The latter has a reduced number of subtests in order to reduce administration time. See Table 1.

The Adult Battery is comprised of 7 subtests: 3 that were retained from the WMS-III (Logical Memory, Verbal Paired Associates, and Visual Reproduction), and four new ones (Brief Cognitive Status Exam, Designs, Spatial Addition, and Symbol Span). Four of the subtests include a delayed memory condition that is administered 20-30 minutes following. See Table 1. Six primary subtests are used to generate five index scores: (1) Auditory Memory and (2) Visual Memory, (3) Visual Working Memory, (4) Immediate Memory, and (5) Delayed Memory. See Table 2 for description of each and the subtests that comprise them. The Brief Cognitive Status Exam is considered optional, and is used to gain additional or supplementary information about cognitive functioning.

The WMS-IV is used by psychologists in a variety of settings (including psychiatric, education, forensic, counselling, neuropsychological, rehabilitation etc) and is generally used to provide comprehensive assessment of clinically relevant aspects of memory functioning.

Age Range

The WMS-IV has been designed for use with persons aged between 16 and 90. The Adult Battery is designed for use with people aged between 16 and 69, and the Older Adult Battery for persons aged between 65 and 90.

Table 1. WMS-IV Subtests

Subtest What does it assess?

Brief Cognitive Status Exam+ A variety of cognitive functions (orientation to time, mental control, clock drawing, incidental recall, automaticity and inhibitory control)

Logical Memory I + Narrative memory under a free recall condition.

Logical Memory II* + Long-term narrative memory with free recall and recognition tasks.

Verbal Paired Associates I + Verbal memory for associated word pairs.

Verbal Paired Associates II* +

Long term recall for verbally paired information with cued recall and recognition tasks.

Designs I Spatial memory for unfamiliar visual material.

Designs II* Long-term spatial and visual memory with free recall and recognition tasks.

Visual Reproduction I + Memory for nonverbal visual stimuli

Visual Reproduction II* + Long-term visual-spatial memory with free recall and recognition.

Spatial Addition Visual-spatial working memory using a visual addition task

Symbol Span + Visual working memory using novel visual stimuli.

*indicates delayed condition for respective subtest

+ indicates the subtests available in the older adult battery


Table 2. WMS-IV Index Scores and Subtests that comprise them

Index Description Subtests

Auditory Memory Ability to remember orally presented information.

Logical Memory I and II, and Paired Verbal Associates I and II.

Visual Memory Ability to remember visually-presented information

Designs I and II, and Visual Reproduction I and II

Visual Working Memory*

Capacity to remember and manipulate visually presented information in short-term memory storage

Spatial Addition and Symbol Span

Immediate Memory Ability to remember both visually- and orally-presented information immediately after it is presented.

Logical Memory I, Verbal Paired Associates I, Designs I, and Visual Reproduction I

Delayed Memory Ability to remember both visually- and orally- presented information after a 20-30 minute delay.

Logical Memory II, Verbal Paired Associates II, Designs II, and Visual Reproduction II

*Note: Visual Working Memory Index is not available in the older battery.

Reliability

The WMS-IV has demonstrated good reliability. Average internal consistency reliability coefficients for Index scores range between .93 (Visual Working Memory Index) and .96 (Visual Memory Index) for the Adult Battery, and between .92 (Delayed Memory) and .97 (Visual Memory) for the Older Adult Battery. Average internal consistency reliability coefficients for the subtests range between .82 (Logical Memory I) and .97 (Visual Reproduction II) for the Adult Battery, and between .74 (Verbal Paired Associates) and .96 (Visual Reproduction II) for the Older Adult Battery.

Test-retest reliability coefficients over an average test-retest interval of 23 days (range 14 to 84 days) for the index scores range between .81 (Visual Memory and Delayed Memory Indexes) and .83 (Auditory Memory and Visual Working Memory Indexes), and between .80 (Visual Memory Index) and .87 (Auditory Memory Index) for the Older Adult Battery. Over the same test-retest interval, stability coefficients for subtests range between .64 (Visual Reproduction II) and .77 (Designs II and Spatial Addition) for the Adult Battery, and between .69 (Visual Reproduction II) and .81 (Verbal Paired Associates II) for the Older Adult Battery.

Validity

The WMS-IV has demonstrated evidence of concurrent validity with other measures of memory, cognitive and intellectual ability, neuropsychological status, achievement, activities of daily life, and behavioural symptoms (Wechsler, 2009b).

Administration

The WMS-IV is an individually-administered semi-structured interview. It is recommended the interview is carried out well lit and quiet room that is free from distractions, and the examinee and examiner should sit directly opposite one another. The WMS-IV is a standardised test and subtests must be administered as ordered on the record form. Depending on ability, as well as medical and personality factors, most persons are able to complete the full battery (Adult Version) in less than 2 hours. The examiner records responses and observations on the record form and participant response booklets are used the Brief Cognitive Status Exam and the Visual Reproduction subtests.

Users of the WMS-IV must have graduate level training and experience in the administration and interpretation of standardised clinical instruments.



The WMS-IV is a standardised test based on a normative sample of 1400 individuals representative of the U.S population, based on 2005 U.S. Census data.

The WMS-IV can be scored either by hand on the record form or electronically using an optional software package. Subtest raw scores are converted to scaled scores. The sums of scaled scores are then used to derive the index scores which have a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. Percentile ranks and confidence intervals for scaled subtest scores and index scores are provided in the Administration and Scoring Manual (Wechsler, 2009a).

Test Availability

The Australian Language Adapted Edition of the WMS-IV is available for purchase through Pearson PsychCorp Australia

References

Wechsler, D. (2009a). Wechsler Memory Scale, Fourth Edition: Administration and scoring manual. Sydney: Pearson

Wechsler, D. (2009b). Wechsler Memory Scale, Fourth Edition: Technical and interpretive manual. Sydney: Pearson


Test 9: Wide Range Assessment of Learning – Second Edition


The Wide Range Assessment of Learning, second Edition (WRAML2) is designed to assess memory functioning. Specifically, it assesses immediate and/or delayed recall as well as the differentiation between verbal, visual and more global memory deficits. The WRAML2 is comprised of six core subtests that yield three index scores: Verbal Memory Index, Visual Memory Index, and Attention/Concentration Index. The three indexes combine to form a General Memory Index. There are also several optional subtests of the WRAML, which can be used to provide an extended assessment of memory with regards to Working Memory, Verbal Recognition and Visual Recognition. Table 1 provides a description of the six core subtests. A screening battery may also be administered, and is comprised of the four verbal and visual memory subtests.

Table 1. WRAML 2 Core Subtests and Indexes

Index Subtest Description^

Verbal Memory Index Story Memory* + Evaluates auditory memory of extended meaningful verbal material

Verbal Learning* + Evaluates auditory memory of verbal information that is without context

Visual Memory Index Design Memory*+ Evaluates short-term visual retention of quasi-meaningful visual information

Picture Memory* + Evaluates visual memory using skill to detect changes in specific features or details within meaningful visual arrays

Attention/Concentration Index

Finger Windows* Evaluates short-term memory of rote, visual sequential pattern.

Number/Letter* Evaluates ability to repeat sequence of orally presented numbers and letters.

*indicates core subtest

^ Adams & Reynolds, 2009+ Comprise Screening Battery

The WRAML is used in a variety of settings such as psychiatric, schools, rehabilitation units, vocational counselling, hospital clinics and private practice, and is often used to help understand memory deficits associated with brain injury, dementia and learning disabilities.

Age Range

The WRAML has been designed for use with persons aged 5 through 90 years.

Reliability

The WRAML2 demonstrates good internal consistency reliability. The median internal consistency reliability coefficient is .93 for the General Memory Index and Screening Memory Index, and .92, .89 and .86 for the Verbal Memory, Visual Memory and Attention Concentration Indexes, respectively. The median internal consistency coefficients for the core subtests, range between .81 (Finger Windows) and .92 (Story Memory). Test-retest reliability was based on a sample of 142 individuals, with a median interval testing time of 49 days (ranging from 14 to 401 days). Stability coefficients for the General Memory Index and Memory Screening Index are .81 and .78, respectively. For the Verbal Memory, Visual Memory and Attention/Concentration Indexes, stability coefficients are .85, .67 and .68, respectively. Finally, stability coefficients for the subtests range between .53 (Design Memory) and .78 (Verbal Learning).


Validity

Correlations with other memory and learning scales such as the WMS-III, CMS, TOMAL and CVLT have demonstrated modest to good concurrent reliability.

Administration

The WRAML2 is an individually administered and standardised test. Core subtests must be administered in the order presented in the Manual. The interview should be conducted in a quiet, well-lit room that is free from distraction. Subtests should be administered by reading verbatim the dialogue provided in the manual. The core battery of subtests takes up to one hour to administer and the screening battery takes up to 20 minutes.

The WRAML2 should only be administered by trained clinicians and/ or researchers who have experience in the administration of psychometric instruments, and who are familiar with the age group of the participant being examined. Interpretation of results however is restricted to persons with graduate level training and supervised clinical experience in the area of cognitive assessment.


The WRAML2 can be scored manually on the Examiner Form or electronically using the optional software package. Raw subtest scores are obtained by summing responses, and are subsequently converted to scaled scores. Scaled scores are converted to Index composite scores which range from 55 through 45 (M = 100, SD = 15). General Memory Index is computed based on the sum of scaled index scores, and also has a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. Results are interpreted based on the percentile ranks and confidence intervals for the normative sample.

Test Availability

The WRAML2 is available for purchase through ACER Psychology

References

Adams, W., & Reynolds, C.R. (2009). Essentials of WRAML2 and TOMAL-2 Assessment. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Adams, W., & Sheslow, D. (2003). Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning (WRAML2): Administration and Technical Manual. Wide Range

Strauss, E., Sherman, E.M.S., & Spreen, O. (2006). A compendium of neuropsychological tests. Oxford University Press.


Test 10: Self Directed Search (Shears & Harvey-Beavis, 2001)


The Self Directed Search (SDS) was first developed in the early 1970’s as a career counselling tool. The instrument is used in over 25 countries and is available in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, French and Braille forms. The Australian version was originally developed in mid 1980’s, and revised in 2000, and again in 2012 to reflect changes in society in relation to work and technology. The SDS has been designed to assist individuals in making career decisions that are related to their own skills and interests. The instrument is underpinned by John Holland’s theory of personality types and work environments (1973; 1997), and the instrument is based on the four working assumptions at the centre of his theory.

(1) Most people can be categorised predominantly as one of six personality types: Realistic (R), Investigative (I), Artistic (A), Social (S), Enterprising (E), and Conventional (C).

(2) Work environments can be categorised in terms of the same six types. Each environment is dominated by a given type of personality.

(3) People tend to seek environments that correspond with their personality type.

(4) Behaviour is determined by interaction between personality and environment.

Based on these assumptions, individuals respond to items and they are able to generate a code that demonstrates the respondent’s resemblance to the personality types. The code is used to identify congruent work occupations.

The SDS assessment booklet has 5 sections: Occupational Daydreams, Activities, Competencies, Occupations, and Self-estimates. Within each of these there are items relating to each of the six personality types.

Age Range

The SDS is suitable for persons aged 15 years and older. The suitability for younger persons has not been well investigated. Although a form of the test has been developed for younger groups (‘Career Explorer’), it has not been adapted for an Australian audience.

Reliability

Internal consistency for secondary and tertiary education samples is satisfactory to high. For the Activities, Competencies and Occupations scales, internal consistency reliability coefficients range between .76 to .88 for secondary school samples and .75 to .86 for tertiary samples. On the summary scales (personality types across the scales) coefficients range from .87 to .91, for both secondary and tertiary samples.

Validity

Concurrent validity has been assessed by comparing the incidence of agreement between the individual’s ‘high-point’ code (the first letter of a person’s summary code), and the first letter of the code of the most recent daydream or aspiration. The percentage of occurrence was 44.6% for girls and 54.0% for boys.

Administration

The task is generally self-administered and scored, and can be administered in the school setting, individually or small groups. Although only the Form R has been adapted for use in Australia, three other U.S based forms exist: ‘Form CP’, ‘Form E’, and ‘Career Explorer’. ‘Form


CP’ was designed for professionals and adults in transition, focusing on long-term career planning and professional activities that require a high level of education. ‘Form E’ was developed for adults and adolescents with limited reading abilities, and the ‘Career Explorer’ form has been designed for use with junior secondary students.

The SDS is generally completed using paper and pencil however the U.S versions can also be completed online http://www.self-directed-search.com/. The full test takes about 50 minutes to complete. Using an assessment booklet, the individual will: list occupational aspirations; indicate preferred activities in the six areas (RIASEC: see below); report competencies in the six areas; indicate occupational preferences in the six areas; and rate abilities in the six areas.

Scoring and Interpretation

The SDS is intended to be self-scored and self-interpreted. To score the SDS, an individual sums the responses for each of the personality types in the Activities, Competencies and Occupations sections, transcribes the tallies together with the ratings assigned in the Self-Estimates section, and adds the part scores to obtain a total for each of the personality types. The three highest scoring personality types combine to make the 3 letter summary code. A Summary Aspiration Code is obtained by weighting the code letters of the respondent’s expressed day dreams according to their position in the three-letter code as 3, 2 or 1, and summing the results from each letter across aspirations.

The Summary Aspiration Code generated demonstrates the respondents’ resemblance to the six personality types described by Holland. The respondent then uses this summary code to locate recommended occupational possibilities in an occupational classification booklet (the ‘Occupations Finder’). The booklet lists over 1000 occupations, with their corresponding three letter code. The individual will identify the occupations that match or strongly resemble the occupation classification code. The SDS booklet offers suggestions to help choose and steps to help obtain the desired career.

Australian norms

N/A

Test Availability

The SDS is available for purchase from ACER Psychology

References

Holland, J.L. (1973). Making vocational choices. A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Holland, J.L. (1997). Making vocational choices. A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. (3rd edition). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Shears, M., & Harvey-Beavis, A. (2001). Self-directed search: Australian Manual. Melbourne, Australia: ACER Press


http://www.self-directed-search.com/

Test 11: Strong Interest Inventory


The Strong Interest Inventory was originally published in 1927 by E.K. Strong, and known as the ‘measurement of interests’. Since then, the instrument has undergone several revisions. The Strong Interest Inventory was designed as a ‘career-planning’ tool, and is used to aid people in making decisions about their career and education. Often, it is used in high school and college/university setting, and also for those in transition periods. The questionnaire measures interest in a broad range of occupations, work and leisure activities, and compares how these interests are similar to those who are successfully employed in these positions.

The Strong Interest Inventory is comprised of four scales, as outlined in Table 1.

Table 1. Scales of the Strong Interest Inventory and what they measure. Scale Number of

ItemsWhat does it measure?

General Occupational Themes (GOTs)

6 Measure basic categories of occupational interests based on John Holland’s (1959) theory – Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional (RIASEC)

Basic Interest Scales (BITs)

30 Measure clusters of interest related to the GOTs in areas such as Arithmetic, Science, Performing Arts, and Sales.

Personal Style Scales (PSSs)

5 Measures preferences for and comfort levels with styles of living and working. Includes: Work Style, Learning Environment, Leadership Style, Risk Taking and Team Orientation.

Occupational Scales (OSs)

244 (122 for men, 122 for women)

Measure the extent to which a person’s interests are similar to the interests of people of the same gender working in 122 diverse occupations (ie. Accountant, Corporate Trainer etc).

Age Range

The Strong Interest Inventory is designed for use by individuals who are currently considering career options (ie. adolescents/adults in high school or college), and adults in career transition periods.

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability of all scales are high. Specifically, coefficients for the General Occupational Themes range between .90 and .95, and between .80 and .92 for the Basic Interest Scales. Similarly, coefficients for the Personal Style Scales range between .82 and .87 (Donnay & Borgen, 1996).

Validity

Several studies have demonstrated the validity of the Strong Interest Inventory. Specifically, some studies have found the General Occupational Themes to be predictive of work-related variables (Donnay & Borgen, 1996; Rottinghaus et al., 2002), and the Basic Interest Scales to be accurate in discriminating between occupation (Borgen & Lindley, 2003). Similarly, the Strong Interest Inventory has demonstrated concurrent validity with similar instruments such as the Skills Confidence Inventory (Tuel & Betz, 1998) and the MBTI (Hammer & Kummerow, 1996). Finally, the Occupation Scales have been found to be predictive of subsequent occupations (Dirk a& Hansen, 2004).


Administration and Scoring

The Strong Interest Inventory is a self-reported questionnaire that can be completed either by paper and pencil or electronically, and takes about 30 minutes to complete. It is suggested that results are interpreted with a counsellor to help clients understand scores. It can be scored manually or electronically.

Normative Sample

Norms for the 1994 version of the Strong Interest Inventory (Harmon et al., 1994) are referred to as the general reference sample (GRS). The GRS were comprised of 18,951 employed adults who were selected on the basis of a set of criteria including job satisfaction, job experience, typicality of job description and age (see Harmon et al., 1994 for more information). The GRS is generally representative of the racial and ethnic makeup of the U.S. workforce. All scales of the Strong Interest Inventory are measured using the GRS, excluding the OSs.

Test Availability

The test is available for purchase and can also be completed online at http://www.psychpress.com.au/psychometric/default.asp.

References

Borgen, F. H., & Lindley, L. D. (2003). Optimal functioning in interests, self-efficacy, and personality. In W. B. Walsh (Ed.), Counseling psychology and optimal human functioning (pp. 55-91). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Press.

Dirk, B. J., & Hansen, J. C. (2004, February). Development and validation of discriminant functions for the Strong Interest Inventory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64 (1), 182-197.

Donnay, D. A. C., & Borgen, F. H. (1996). Validity, structure, and content of the 1994 Strong Interest Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 275-291.

Hammer, A. L., & Kummerow, J. K. (1996). Strong and MBTI® career development guide (rev. ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Harmon, L.W., Hansen, J.C., Borgen, F.H., & Hammer, A.L. (1994). Strong Interest Inventory applications and technical guide. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Holland, J.L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 6, 35-45.

Rottinghaus, P. J., Lindley, L. D., Green, M. A., & Borgen, F. H. (2002). Educational aspirations: The contribution of personality, self-efficacy, and interests. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 1-19.

Tuel, B. D., & Betz, N. E. (1998). Relationships of career self-efficacy expectations to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Personal Style Scales. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 31, 150-163.


http://www.psychpress.com.au/psychometric/default.asp

Test 12: The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) Fifth Edition


The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF Fifth Edition) is the most recent edition of the original test published in 1949, and is a broad measure of personality based on Raymond Cattells sixteen primary personality factors (Cattell, 1946). Containing 185 items, the 16PF generates scores for the sixteen primary personality factor scales, as well as an Impression Management Index (IM), which assesses social desirability. The latter provides insight into the degree of willingness to admit undesirable behaviours or attributes. Table 1 lists the sixteen primary personality factors, and provides a description of what low and high scores might indicate on these scales. In addition to the primary scales, the 16PF also contains a set of five scales that combine related primary scales into five global factors of personality: Extraversion, Anxiety, Tough-Mindedness, Independence and Self-Control.

The 16PF is used in a variety of settings and generally used to aid in clinical decision-making, guiding vocational and occupational preferences and suitability, and by human resource managers to assist in selecting suitable personnel.

Table 1. The 16 primary personality factors

Factor Descriptors of low range (Left Meaning) Descriptors of high range (Right Meaning)

Warmth Reserved, Impersonal, Distant Warm, Outgoing, Attentive to Others

Reasoning Concrete Abstract

Emotional Stability Reactive, Emotionally Changeable Emotionally Stable, Adaptive, Mature

Dominance Deferential, Cooperative, Avoids Conflict Dominant, Forceful, Assertive

Liveliness Serious, Restrained, Careful Lively, Animated, Spontaneous

Rule-Consciousness Expedient, Nonconforming Rule-Conscious, Dutiful

Social Boldness Shy, Threat-Sensitive, Timid Socially Bold, Venturesome, Thick-Skinned

Sensitivity Utilitarian, Objective, Unsentimental Sensitive, Aesthetic, Sentimental

Vigilance Trusting, Unsuspecting, Accepting Vigilant, Suspicious, Sceptical, Wary

Abstractedness Grounded, Practical, Solution-Oriented Abstracted, Imaginative, Idea-Oriented

Privateness Forthright, Genuine, Artless Private, Discreet, Non-Disclosing

Apprehension Self-Assured, Unworried, Complacent Apprehensive, Self-Doubting, Worried

Openness to Change Traditional, Attached to Familiar Open to Change, Experimenting

Self-Reliance Group-Oriented, Affiliative Self-Reliant, Solitary, Individualistic

Perfectionism Tolerates Disorder, Unexacting, Flexible Perfectionistic, Organised, Self-Disciplined

Tension Relaxed, Placid, Patient Tense, High Energy, Impatient, Driven

Age Range

The 16PF is designed for use with adults, aged 16 and older. The High School Personality Questionnaire is an adolescent version of the 16PF, which is suitable for persons, aged 12 through 18 (Schuerger, 2001). The 16PF has been translated into 35 different languages and dialects.


Reliability

Internal consistency and test-retest reliability for the 16 PF is adequate. In the normative sample of 2500 adults, internal consistency coefficients for the primary factor scales range between .64 (Openness to Change) to .85 (Social Boldness). Internal consistency coefficients for the global factors were not conducted with the normative sample. Test-retest reliability over a period of two months was examined in a university sample of 159 students (34 male, 125 female). Over the period, stability coefficients averaged .70, ranging .56 (Vigilance) through .79 (Social Boldness) for the primary factors. Stability coefficients ranged .70 (Anxiety) through .82 (Tough-Mindedness) for global factor scores.

Validity

Evidence of convergent and discriminant validity has been demonstrated through comparisons of the sixteen primary factor and five global scales with other tests of normal personality (see Russell & Karol, 1997). Specifically, standardised scores have been correlated with scores on the Personality Research Form (PRF), the California Psychological Inventory (CPI), the NEO PI-R, and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).

Administration

The 16PF is a multiple choice self-report instrument and can be administered individually or in a group setting, and can be administered by paper and pencil or electronically with the test software. The test is comprised of 185 items and takes approximately 35 to 50 minutes to complete by hand or 25 to 35 minutes to complete electronically. A shorter version of the test, the 16PF Select (Cattell et al., 1999) was developed to for use in time sensitive settings (eg. employee screening).


The 16PF is a standardised test. The original norms for the 16PF were based on a US census representative sample. In 2002, Australian normative data based on 1000 persons aged 17 through 62 and representative of the Australian population was released (Maraist, 2002).

The 16PF can be hand-scored with a set of scoring keys or electronically using computer software. For hand-scoring, translucent scoring keys are held over the answer sheet to obtain raw scores for each of the primary personality factors and the Impression Management Index. Raw primary factor scores are converted to standardised scores using a norm table. A norm table is also used to convert the raw score for the Impression Management Index, however the latter is converted into a percentile as rather than a standardised score. If the Impression Management Index exceeds the 95th or is below the 5th percentile of the normative sample, the examiner might consider re-testing. A worksheet for hand-calculating global factor scores is used to obtain standardised scores for the five global factors. The five global factors and sixteen primary personality factors are graphed to achieve a profile of an individual’s personality pattern. Lower standardised scores indicate left meaning direction, and higher standardised scores represent right meaning direction (See Table 1).

Test Availability

The 16PF Fifth Edition is available for purchase from Pearson PsychCorp Australia.

References

Cattell, R.B. (1946). The description and measurement of personality. New York: World Book.


Cattell, R.B., Cattell, A.K., Cattell, H.E.P., & Kelly, M.L. (1999). 16PF Select Questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.

Maraist, C.C. (2002). 16PF5-AUS Questionnaire: Norm update supplement Release 2002. Melbourne: Psych Press.

Russell, M.T., & Karol, D.L. (1997). The 16PF fifth edition administrator’s manual. Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.

Schuerger, J.M. (2001). 16PF Adolescent Personality Questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.


Test 13: NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R; McCrae & Costa, 2010)


The NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R) is one of a series of several inventories designed to measure five broad domains of normal personality in adults (McCrae & Costa, 2010). The development of the NEO PI-R is based on decades of research on the Five Factor Model of Personality. Comprised of 240 items, the NEO PI-R consists of five global domains (Neuroticism; Extraversion; Openness to Experience; Agreeableness; Conscientiousness), and six facets within each domain. Table 1 provides a description of the five global domains and the facets that comprise them.

Domain Description Facets

Neuroticism (N) Measures proneness to psychological distress Anxiety (N1); Angry Hostility (N2); Depression (N3); Self-Consciousness (N4); Impulsiveness (N5); Vulnerability (N6)

Extraversion (E) Measures quantity and intensity of energy directed towards the outside world

Warmth (E1); Gregariousness (E2); Assertiveness (E3); Activity (E4); Excitement Seeking (E5); Positive Emotions (E6)

Openness to Experience (O)

Measures active seeking and appreciation of experiences for one’s own sake

Fantasy (O1); Aesthetics (O2); Feelings (O3); Actions (O4); Ideas (O5); Values (O6)

Agreeableness (A) Measures the kinds of interactions the individual prefers

Trust (A1); Straightforwardness (A2); Altruism (A3); Compliance (A4); Modesty (A5); Tender-Mindedness (A6)

Conscientiousness (C)

Measures degree of organisation, persistence, control and motivation

Competence(C1); Order (C2); Dutifulness (C3); Achievement Striving (C4); Self-Discipline (C5); Deliberation (C6)

Table 1. NEO PI-R five global personality domains and facets within

There are two forms of the NEO PI-R. Form S (Self) is completed by the individual being evaluated, and Form R (Rater) is completed by a person who is well acquainted with the individual being evaluated. Clinicians can compare scores obtained on each form to contrast and understand personality for the different perspectives. The NEO PI-R is neither a diagnostic instrument nor measure of psychopathology, and is most often used in clinical, educational, organisational and research settings.

Age Range

The NEO PI-R is suitable for adults aged 17 years and older. A similar instrument NEO PI-3 (McCrae & Costa, 2010) is suitable for persons as young as 12 years.

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability was examined in 1539 individuals using scores on Form S. Coefficients for the five personality domains range from .86 (Agreeableness) to .92 (Neuroticism), and from .56 (Tender-Mindedness A6) to .81 (Depression N3) for the facet scales. Test-retest reliability was examined in a smaller subset of college students over an average 3 month period. Stability coefficients for the domain scores range from .75 to .83, with an average of .79. Long term stability of the NEO PI-R scores has been examined by Costa &


McCrae (1988). Over a 6 year period and in a large sample, the stability coefficients were .83, .82 and .83 for the domains of Neuroticism, Extraversion and Openness, respectively. Stability coefficients over a three year period for Agreeableness and Conscientiousness were .63 and .79, respectively.

Validity

The NEO PI-R has demonstrated convergent validity through correlations between facet scores and alternative measures of different constructs. For example, A1 (Trust) is positively correlated with the trusting scale of the Interpersonal Style Inventory (see McCrae & Costa, 2010).

Administration

The NEO PI-R is a self-report questionnaire that may be administered individually or in a group setting, electronically or by paper and pencil. Reading level of the questionnaire is levelled at grade 6, and generally takes about 30 to 40 minutes to complete, but may take longer for individuals who have limited reading ability.

Two other forms of the NEO also exist. The NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI-3: McCrae & Costa, 2010) is an authorised shorter version of the NEO PI-R, and is designed for use when time is limited or only scores on the five personality domains are required. The NEO-PI-3 is also a revised version of the NEO PI-R, which replaces 37 of the 240 items with items that are easier to read than those on the NEO PI-R. Subsequently, the latter is suitable for adolescent populations as well as adults. Similarly, the NEO PI-R has 9 published translations, and 25 validated translations.


The NEO inventories are scored electronically if administered on the computer. Data from pen and paper questionnaires can also be inputted, and scored electronically. Alternatively, the questionnaires can also be scored manually using the hand-scorable answer sheet.

Responses to the questionnaire are given on a 5 point likert scale (0 through 4). Total raw scores for the facets are obtained by summing the responses for each of the facet items (range 0 through 32), and raw scores for the five personality domains are obtained by summing the raw scores for the relevant facet items. Domain scores can range 0 through 192. Raw domain and facet scores are then plotted on gender and age based profile forms, and T scores are also presented. On the profile sheet, scores are also classified as very low, average, high and very high. Factor scores that are based on the normative sample can also be generated using the software, or by applying formulae to T scores. The profile sheet can also be used to compare and contrast the scores obtained on the parallel forms (Form R and Form S).

The NEO inventories can be administered and scores by individuals with no formal training in clinical psychology or related fields. However, interpretation of the results requires professional training in psychological testing and measurement.

Test Availability

The test is available for purchase from ACER Psychology

References

Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1998). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO-PI. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 853-863.


McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T. (2010). NEO Inventories for the NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3), NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3 (NEO-FFI-3) and NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R): Professional Manual. Lutz, Florida: PAR.

Weiner, I.B., & Greene, R.L. (2008). Handbook of Personality Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.


Test 14: Patient Health Questionnaire PHQ-9 for Depression


The PHQ-9 refers to the 9 item depression module of the full PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ: Spitzer, Kroenke & Williams, 1999), used in primary care settings as a screener and diagnostic tool for common mental disorders, such as depression, anxiety, alcohol, eating and somatoform disorders. The 9 items of the PHQ-9 are based directly on the DSM-IV (APA, 1994) criteria for Major Depression (see Table 1 for items), and can be either as a diagnostic and/or severity measure of depression, as well as a means for informing and monitoring treatment. The brevity of the PHQ-9 makes it quick and easy to administer in primary care settings. The PHQ-9 is freely available. The items and response scale are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. PHQ-9Over the past 2 weeks, how often have you been bothered by any of the following problems?

Not at all Several Days

More than half the days

Nearly everyday

1. Little interest or pleasure in doing things 0 1 2 3

2. Feeling down, depressed or hopeless 0 1 2 3

3. Trouble falling asleep, staying asleep or sleeping too much

0 1 2 3

4. Feeling tired or having little energy 0 1 2 3

5. Poor appetite or overeating 0 1 2 3

6. Feeling bad about yourself – or that you’re a failure or have let yourself or your family down.

0 1 2 3

7. Trouble concentrating on things, such as reading the newspaper or watching television

0 1 2 3

8. Moving or speaking so slowly that other people could have noticed. Or, the opposite – being so fidgety or restless that you have been moving around a lot more than usual

0 1 2 3

9. Thoughts that you would be better off dead or of hurting yourself in some way.

0 1 2 3

Age Range

The PHQ-9 is designed for use with adults, as is the full PHQ.

Reliability

The psychometric properties of the PHQ-9 have been well studied in two large samples of 3000 primary care patients and 3000 obstetrics-gynaecology patients. The internal consistency reliability coefficient for the PHQ-9 was .89 for the primary care sample, and .86 for the obstetrics-gynaecology sample. Similarly, the test-retest reliability was also good. Over a period of up to 48 hours, the mean stability coefficient was .84.

Validity

The PHQ demonstrates adequate construct validity. Specifically, there is a strong association between increasing scores on the PHQ-9 and lower scores on all SF-20 scales (Kroenke,


2001). The PHQ-9 most strongly correlates with the SF-20 Mental Health scale (.73), followed by general health perceptions (.55), and social functioning (.52). Similarly, PHQ-9 scores are positively related to symptom-related difficulty, the number of sick days and health care utilisation (Kroenke, 2001).

Administration

The PHQ-9 was designed as a self-administered self-report questionnaire to be administered in the primary care setting. However, clinicians can also administer if necessary. PHQ-9 is generally administered as part of the larger PRIME MD PHQ, which is three pages long and takes approximately 5-10 minutes to administer. Although the PHQ-9 is available in 31 languages, the translations have not been validated as depression screeners.


Patients respond on a four point scale of 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). See Table 1. The total score is calculated by summing responses. As a severity measure, scores can range 0 through 27. Scores of 0-4 are indicative of minimal depressive symptoms, 5-9 of mild depressive symptoms, 10-14 of moderate depressive symptoms (or mild depression), 15-19 of moderately severe major depression, and scores 20 or greater of severe major depression. As a diagnostic measure, major depression is diagnosed if at least 5 of the nine depressive symptoms have been present at least “more than half of the days”, however one of these symptoms must be items 1 or 2 (anhedonia or depressed mood, respectively). The 9th item (“thoughts that you would be better off dead of hurting yourself in some way”) counts if it is present at all, regardless of frequency.

Australian norms

No Australian norms are available.

Test Availability

The PHQ-9 is publicly available online. See:

http://www.depression-primarycare.org/clinicians/toolkits/materials/forms/phq9/

References

Kroenke, K., & Spitzer, R.L. (2002). The PHQ-9: A new depression diagnostic and severity measure. Psychiatric Annals, 32(9), 1-7.

Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R.L., & Williams, J.B.W. (2001). The PHQ-9: Validity of a Brief Depression Severity Measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16, 606-613.

Spitzer, R.L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J.B.W. (1999) Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ Primary Care Study. JAMA, 282,1737-1744.


http://www.depression-primarycare.org/clinicians/toolkits/materials/forms/phq9/

Test 15: Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI II)


The BDI-II (Beck, Steer & Brown, 1998) is a 21 item self-report instrument for measuring the severity of depression in adolescents and adults. The BDI-II is the second revision of the original BDI developed in 1961 (Beck et al.). Originally developed to reflect descriptive statements regarding symptoms frequently reported by psychiatric patients with depression, the BDI was revised in 1987 (BDI-IA: Beck & Steer), and again in 1998 with the BDI-II. Unlike the BDI-IA, the BDI-II is considered to be a substantial revision of the original BDI. With regard to the latter, four items (weight loss, body image change, somatic preoccupation, and work difficulty) were replaced by four new items (agitation, worthlessness, concentration difficulty and loss of energy). Similarly, two items were modified to allow for increases as well as decreases in appetite and sleep. The development of the BDI-II was based around the assessment of symptoms that correspond to the DSM-IV criteria for diagnosing depressive disorders. See Table 1 for a list of items.

Age Range

The BDI-II is intended for use with adolescents and adults aged 13 through 80.

Psychometric Characteristics of the BDI

There has been a multitude of research studies carried out over the past 35 years investigating the psychometric properties of the BDI. A comprehensive review (Beck et al., 1988) of these studies has demonstrated high internal consistency in both psychiatric and non-psychiatric samples (mean internal consistency reliability coefficient of .87), adequate test-retest reliability and high concurrent validity with other measures of depression.

Reliability of the BDI-II

Internal consistency of the BDI-II on a sample of 500 individuals, representing psychiatric outpatients and college-students, was high (.92 for college students and .93 for psychiatric outpatients). The latter are higher than those reported for the BDI-IA. Similarly, in a subsample of 26 outpatients, the BDI-II demonstrates good test-retest reliability across two therapy sessions, one week apart (r = 93, p < .001).

Validity of the BDI-II

Convergent validity of the BDI-II has been investigated by comparisons with earlier versions of the BDI-IA and other measures of depression and anxiety. Specifically, the correlation between total scored on the BDI-II and BDI-IA is .93. Similarly, depression measures such as the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), Revised Hamilton Psychiatric Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-R) and the Scale for Suicidal Ideation (SSI) were positively and significantly correlated with scores on the BDI-II (.68, .71 and .37 respectively). The BDI-II has also demonstrated significant correlations with measures of anxiety, such as the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI, .60) and the Revised Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS-R, .47)

Administration

Although originally developed to be administered by trained interviewers (Beck et al., 1961), the BDI-II is a self-report instrument that is most often self-administered (Beck et al., 1998). The BDI-II record form includes the self-administration directions. The latter differ from those given in the BDI-IA. Specifically, the time-frame has been extended from the past week to the past two weeks, to ensure consistency with DSM-IV criteria for major depression. The BDI-II takes approximately 5-10 minutes to complete, however may take longer depending on severity of


depression and other psychiatric symptoms. For persons who have difficulty reading or concentrating, test items can be read aloud.

The BDI-II, along with the BDI and BDI-IA is simple to administer. Thus, while it can be administered by paraprofessionals, it is recommended only those with appropriate clinical training and experience should interpret the data obtained.

Table 1. BDI-II items

1. Sadness 12. Loss of Interest

2. Pessimism 13. Indecisiveness

3. Past Failure 14. Worthlessness

4. Loss of Pleasure 15. Loss of Energy

5. Guilty Feelings 16. Changes in Sleep Pattern

6. Punishment Feelings 17. Irritability

7. Self-Dislike 18. Changes in Appetite

8. Self-Criticalness 19. Concentration Difficulty

9. Suicidal Thoughts or Wishes 20. Tiredness or Fatigue

10. Crying 21. Loss of Interest in Sex

11. Agitation


Each item of the BDI-II is rated on a 4 point scale ranging from 0 to 3. To obtain the total score, the indicated responses for the 21 items are summed, with scores ranging 0 through 63. The BDI-II can also be scored electronically, with an optional software package. Total scores indicate the overall severity of depression, with scores of 0-13 indicating minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression and 29-63 severe depression.

Australian norms

No Australian norms are available for the BDI-II, BDI-IA or BDI.

Test Availability

The BDI II is available for purchase through Pearson PsychCorp Australia.

References

Beck, A.T., Steer, R.A., & Garbin, M.G. (1988). Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 77-100.

Beck, A.T., Ward, C.H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561-571.

Beck, A.T., & Steer, R.A. (1987). Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

Beck, A.T., Steer, R.A., & Brown, G.K. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory – Second Edition: Manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.


Test 16: Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF)


The DSM IV is a multiaxial diagnostic system, with each axis representing different information about individuals. Axis V, which reflects global functioning, is assessed with the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) clinician rating scale. The GAF is a single item rating, representing the clinician’s global judgement of the individuals overall level of psychological, social and occupational functioning. The GAF is used to supplement existing symptomatic and diagnostic information about the patient covered in Axis I and II, and can be used for treatment planning and monitoring.

The single clinician rating is made on a scale of 1 to 100, with higher scores representing better functioning. The rating of overall psychological functioning on such scale was operationalised by Luborsky (1962), and Endicott et al., (1976). A modified version of Endicott et al (1976) ‘Global Assessment Scale’ (GAS) was used included in the DSM-III-R (date) as the GAF, and modified again for the DSM-IV and DSM-IV-TR (1994; 2001). The GAF is similar to the GAS in that it has similar criteria and the same interval design (ie scores from 1 through 100, with 10 point anchor intervals).

Age Range

The GAF can be administered on school aged children and adults. For children, occupational functioning is interchanged with school functioning. The Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) has also been developed for use with children.

Validity

Several studies (eg. Moos & colleagues, 2002) have demonstrated that GAF scores are significantly associated with current symptoms and functioning as measured with standardised instruments. For example, Startup, Jackson & Bendix (2002) examined the correlation between GAF scores and measures of psychiatric symptoms (ie. SANS, SAPS) and social behaviour (ie. Social Behaviour Schedule) at intake, 6 month follow up and 12 month follow up. Although they reported few significant correlations at intake, almost all were strongly and significantly correlated at the 6 month and 12 month follow-up. This pattern is similar to that reported by Endicott et al., (1976) for the GAS. Studies (Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2005) have also demonstrated the discriminant validity of the GAF, with significant change scores at various points during treatment (ie. upon admission to an inpatient unit, and on discharge).

Reliability

The GAF demonstrates high internal consistency, with one study reporting Cronbach’s alpha values of .85 to .86 across several years (Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2005). Similarly, reliability studies have demonstrated adequate inter-rater reliability for the GAF, with coefficients ranging .53 to.66 (Rey et al., 1995).

Administration

The GAF is simple to administer and involves assigning a rating based on interactions with the client during a diagnostic interview or treatment session. Clinician ratings should reflect level of functioning at the time of the evaluation. Similarly, ratings should only represent psychological, social and occupational functioning, and not impairment in functioning due to physical (or environmental limitations).

Inter-rater reliability studies suggest mental health professionals need only brief training in order to use the scale reliably (Startup et al., 2002; Jones et al., 1995)



The DSM-IV GAF comprises 10 intervals, each representing different levels of functioning and symptom severity. To assign a GAF score, the clinician is advised to begin at the top level of the scale, until a range is identified that matches the client’s symptom severity, or level of functioning (whichever is worse). The clinician’s selection of rating should by examining and eliminating other ranges. Within the 10 point range, clinicians assign a specific number rating (ie. 64 in the 70-61 range). Scores are interpreted by examining the descriptions provided for each interval in the DSM-IV, and are used to inform treatment selection and to monitor the client’s progress.

In the DSM-III-R, the rating is made on a scale from 1 to 90, and from 1 to 100 for the DSM-IV.

Test Availability

The scale forms part of the DSM-III, DSM-IV and DSM-IV-TR, and is readily available within these (i.e. p.32 of the DSM-IV), and readily available online.

References

American Psychological Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th edition). Washington, DC: Author.

Endicott, J., Spitzer, R.L., Fleiss, J.L., & Cohen, J. (1976). The global assessment scale: A procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33, 766-771.

Greenberg GA, Rosenheck R: Using the GAF as a national mental health outcome measure in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Psychiatric Services 56:420–426, 2005

Jones, S.H., Thornicroft, G., Coffee, M., & Dunn, G. (1995). A brief mental health outcome scale: reliability and validity of the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). British Journal of Psychiatry, 166, 654-659.

Luborsky, L. (1962). Clinicians’ judgement of mental health. Archives of General Psychiatry, 7, 407-417.

Moos RH, Nichol AC, Moos BS: Global Assessment of Functioning ratings and the allocation and outcomes of mental health services. Psychiatric Services 53:730–737, 2002.

Reh, J.M., Starling, J., Wever, C., Dossetor, D.R., & Plapp, J.M. (2006). Inter-rater reliability of Clobal Assessment of Functioning in a clinical setting, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36, 5, 787-792

Startup. M., Jackson, M.C., & Bendix, S. (2002). The concurrent validity of the Global Assessment of Functioning. The British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41, 4, 417-423.


Test 17: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Adults (STAI: Spielberger et al., 1983)


The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Adults (STAI) is a self-report questionnaire for evaluating ‘state’ and ‘trait’ anxiety, and is based on research by Cattell (1966) and Spielberger (1979). The current form of the STAI (Form Y) has been developed on the basis of insights gained from extensive research on the original form of the STAI (Form X). The STAI is comprised of two 20 item scales: (1) the S-Anxiety scale for measuring ‘state’ anxiety (how respondents feel ‘right now’), and (2) the T-Anxiety scale for measuring ‘trait’ anxiety (how respondents generally feel). The S-Anxiety scale can also be used to evaluate how respondents felt at a particular time in the past, and how they anticipate they would feel in a given situation. The STAI is generally used in psychiatric settings to aid in clinical diagnosis and differentiate between depression and anxiety. The STAI is also used for assessing clinical anxiety in medical, surgical and psychosomatic patients.

Age Range

The STAI is designed for use on adults. Another version, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC) is recommended for use with children.

Reliability

Test-retest reliability for Form X of the STAI scales was evaluated using a 118 college students. Over a period of 20 days, stability coefficients for males were .54 and .86 for the S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scale, respectively. Similarly, stability coefficients for females were .27 and .76 for the S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scale, respectively. The test-retest reliability o f Form Y has been evaluated in a sample of high-school students over a period of 30 days. Stability coefficients were .62 and .71 for males, and .34 and .75 for females on the S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scale, respectively.

Internal consistency reliability coefficients for the S-Anxiety scale of Form Y in a large sample of working adults ranges from .92 to .93, and .90 to .94 for males and females, respectively. Similarly, coefficients for the T-Anxiety scale of Form Y range from .90 to .92, and .89 to .92 for males and females respectively.

Validity

Correlations between the STAI and other measures of State and Trait Anxiety have provided evidence for concurrent validity. The IPAT Anxiety Scale and Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale have positive correlations with the T-Anxiety Scale of Form X ranging from .75 to .76 and .79 to .80, respectively.

Administration

The STAI was designed to be self-administered either individually or in groups. Although there are no time restrictions, the full questionnaire generally takes 10 minutes tom complete. Repeated administrations of the S-Anxiety form take approximately 5 minutes. A 10-item S-Anxiety scale also exists for when time is restricted (Spielberger, 1979). The STAI was standardised based on the administration of the S-Anxiety followed by the T-Anxiety scale, thus the manual recommends following this order of administration. During administration, it is critical examinees have a clear understanding of differing instructions for each form. Specifically, examinees are required to report how they feel “right now... at this moment” for the S-Anxiety scale and how they “generally” feel for the T-Anxiety scale.


Responses on both forms are provided on a four-point scale. The S-Anxiety asks examinees to describe the intensity of their feelings (1, not at all; 2, somewhat; 3, moderately so; 4, very much so) and the T-Anxiety scale asks examinees to rate the frequency of their feelings (1, almost never; 2, sometimes; 3, often; 4, almost always).

The STAI requires a 4th or 5th grade reading ability, and has been adapted in more than 40 languages


Each STAI item is given a weighted score of 1 to 4, and raw scores for the S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety are generated by summing the weighted items. Ten S-Anxiety and 11 T-Anxiety items are reversed scored. Scores for each scale range between 20 and 80. The manual provides percentile ranks form comparisons against several normative samples: working adults, college students, high school students and military recruits.

Test Availability

The STAI (Form X and Y) is available for purchase from Mind Garden, Inc.

References

Spielberger, C.D. (1983). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Form Y). California: Mind Garden, Inc.

Spielberger, C.D. (1966). Theory and research on anxiety. In C.D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety and Behaviour. New York: Academic Press.


Test 18: Outcome Rating Scale (ORS)


The Outcome Rating Scale (ORS: Miller, Duncan, Brown, Spakrs & Claus, 2003) was developed as a brief alternative to the Outcome Questionnaire 45.2 (Lambert et al., 1996). It is a four-item visual analogue scale designed to track client well-being and therapy outcomes over a period of time. Specifically, the four items were adapted from the three areas of client functioning as assessed by the OQ-45.2 – individual, interpersonal and social functioning. The ORS has been designed to discriminate between normal and clinical levels of distress, and similarly, it provides a means of detecting change in the severity of distress over time. Thus, when treatment is successful, scores on the ORS will increase over time.

The ORS is generally integrated into ongoing treatment as part of a Feedback-Informed Treatment model, and often used in conjunction with the Session Rating Scale. Two other versions of the ORS are also used for different age groups: the Children’s Outcome Rating Scale (CORS) and the Young Children’s Outcome Rating Scale (YCORS).

Age Range

The ORS is designed for use with adolescents and adults aged 13 years and older. For children aged under 6, and 6 through 12, clinicians can use the CORS and YCORS, respectively.

Reliability

Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated a non clinical sample, comprised on 86 adults. Each participant was completed the scale four times. The average coefficient alpha for internal consistency was .93 across all administrations (N = 336). The latter was equivalent the larger scale OQ-45.2. Test-retest stability coefficients were .66, .58 and .49 for the second, third and fourth administrations, respectively. These were significantly lower than those of the OQ-45.2, which were .83, .75 and .74 for the second, third and fourth administrations, respectively.

Validity

The ORS demonstrates moderate concurrent validity with the OQ-45.2. The overall correlation between the two scales is .59. The ORS demonstrates ability to discriminate between non clinical and clinical samples, with scores for non clinical samples significantly higher (M = 28.0, SD = 6.8) than those of clinical samples (M = 19.6, SD = 8.7: Miller et al., 2003).

Administration

The ORS is administered at the beginning of every session, or once a week if treatment is more frequent. The test is completed by the client with the therapist present, by pencil and paper. Each of the four items requires participants to reflect on the prior week (or since last visit) and place a hash mark (or X) on a line indicating the degree of functioning in relation to the different areas (ie. interpersonal, individual, social and overall wellbeing). The ORS takes only 1-2 minutes to complete each session, however it is recommended therapists thoroughly initiate their clients to the ORS at the first session (Bargmann & Robinson, 2011). For some clients, engaging in a dialogue that assists them to remember the events of the past week (or since the last session), can help ensure responses are based on the weekly average, rather than the way they are feeling right at the moment of administration (Bargmann & Robinson, 2011).

Taking less than a minute, the ORS is scored by the therapist immediately following administration and openly discussed with the client. Specifically, the therapist engages in dialogue with the client about how their score relates to (1) the clinical cut-off and (2) scores of previous sessions.



The ORS is very simple to score and interpret. To score the ORS, the therapist measures the distance in centimetres between the left pole of the response line and the clients’ marking on individual items, to the nearest millimetres (i.e. 5.7 mm is equivalent to a score of 5.7.). The four scores are summed to obtain the overall score. Based on a sample of 34,790, the clinical cut-off was determined to be 25 for adults (Miller et al., 2003). Because children and adolescents tend to report higher scores, the cut-off for adolescents aged 13 through 18 is 28 (Miller et al., 2003). Therapists can monitor scores across sessions by plotting on a paper graph or by entering scores into one of the computer-based applications that are available. Scores can be aggregated with the SRS.

To attribute changes on the scale to non-random, substantial therapeutic changes the difference between any two scores must exceed the Reliable Change Index (RCI) or 5 points (Miller et al., 2003). Scores that exceed both the RCI and the clinical cut-off (25), it is referred to as a ‘clinically significant change’. If using the computer technology, therapists can also compare their clients scores to a computer-generated “expected treatment response” (ETR), that that particular session. The latter is determined using a large and diverse normative sample of more than 300,000 administrations of the ORS.

Test Availability

The ORS is freely available from http://scottdmiller.com/?q=node/6

References

Bargmann, S., & Robinson, B. (2011). Manual 2: Feedback-Informed Clinical Work. The Basics. International Center for Clinical Excellence.

Lambert, M. J., Hansen, N.B., Umphress, V., Lunnen, K., Okiishi, J., Burlingame, et al. (1996). Administration and scoring manual for the OQ-45.2. Stevenson, MD: American Professional Credentialing Services.

Miller, S.D., Duncan, B.L., Brown, J., Sparks, J.A. & Claud, D.A. (2003). The outcome rating scale: A preliminary study of the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a brief visual analog measure. Journal of Brief Therapy, 2(2), 91-100.

Miller, S.D. & Duncan, B.L. (2004). The Outcome and Session Rating Scales: Administration and Scoring Manual. Chicago, IL: ISTC


http://scottdmiller.com/?q=node/6

Test 19: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2: Butcher, Dahlstron, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989)


The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) is a standardised questionnaire that broadly measures the major dimensions of psychopathology found in Axis I and some Axis II disorders of the DSM. Based on the original version of the MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1940), the MMPI-2 was revised to provide better coverage of topics and areas than the original item pool. The current version (MMPI-2) is comprised of 567 items that form multiple scales. Specifically, there are 9 validity scales, 10 clinical scales, 15 content scales, 9 restructured clinical scales and 20 supplementary scales. The validity scales provide a means of detecting whether respondents are answering in a manner that might invalidate the overall test results (ie. faking bad). See Table 1. The clinical scales are the core scales used in the test, and measure abnormal behaviour and personality traits. Several clinical subscales can also be generated. The content scales can be used to supplement or extend interpretations derived from the clinical scales. Similarly, there are several component scales within the content scales. See Table 1 for clinical scales/subscales, and content/component scales. More than 120 scales and subscales exist within the MMPI-2.

The MMPI-2 is generally used in psychiatric settings to assist with diagnosis and inform the selection of appropriate treatment approaches.

Table 1. MMPI-2 Validity ScalesValidity Scales Purpose

Cannot Say (?) A count of the number of items left unanswered or marked as both True and False

Variable Response Inconsistency (VRIN)

Measures tendency to respond to items in ways that are inconsistent or contradictory

True Response Inconsistency (TRIN)

Measures tendency to respond to items in ways that are inconsistent or contradictory

Infrequency (F) Measures extent to which a person answers in an atypical and deviant manner

Back F (FB) Identifies a “fake-bad” mode of responding

Infrequency-Psychopathology (FP) Measures infrequent responding that is less sensitive than F to the presence of severe psychopathology

Lie (L) Measures the tendency to lie in response to items to deny minor faults and character flaws

Correction (K) Detects persons who are describing themselves in overly positive terms.

Superlative Self-Presentation (S) Identifies persons attempting to be overly virtuous.

F-K Index Measure of test response simulation or endorsing an excessive number of problems

Age Range

The MMPI-2 is designed for use with adults aged 18 years and older. Another version, the MMPI-A has been developed for use with adolescents aged 14 to 18 years of age.

Reliability

Using data from the normative sample, internal consistency reliability coefficients for the clinical scales ranged between .34 (Pa) and .85 (Pt and Sc), and between .37 (Mf) and .87 (Pt) for males and females, respectively. Similarly, internal consistency reliability coefficients for content


scales ranged between .72 (FRS & TPA) and .86 (CYN) for males, and between .68 (TPA) and .86 (DEP) for females. In a sub-sample of 193 individuals from the normative sample, test-retest reliability was examined over an average interval of 8.58 days (median 7 days). Stability coefficients for the clinical scales ranged between .67 (Pa) and .93 (Si), and between .54 (Sc) and .92 (Si) for males and females, respectively. Similarly, stability coefficients for content scales ranged between .77 (BIZ) and .91 (SOD) for males, and between .78 (BIZ) and .91 (SOD) for females.

Table 2. MMPI clinical scales/subscales and content/component scalesClinical Scales Content Subscales Content Scales Component Scales

1 (Hs: Hypochondriasis)

Nil Anxiety (ANX) Nil

2 (D: Depression) Subjective Depression (D1); Psychomotor Retardation (D2); Physical Malfunctioning (D3); Mental Dullness (D4); Brooding (D5)

Fears (FRS) Generalised Fearfulness (FRS1); Multiple Fears (FRS2)

3 (Hy: Hysteria) Denial of Social Anxiety (Hy1); Need for Affection (Hy2); Lassitide-Malaise (Hy3); Somatic Complaints (Hy4); Inhibition of Aggression (Hy5)

Obsessiveness (OBS)

Nil

4 (Pd: Psychopathic Deviate)

Familial Discord (Pd1); Authority Problems (Pd2); Social Imperturbability (Pd3); Social Alienation (Pd4); Self-Alienation (Pd5)

Depression (DEP) Lack of Drive (DEP1); Dysphoria (DEP2); Self-Depreciation (DEP3); Suicidal Ideation (DEP4)

5 (Mf: Maculinity-Femininity)

Nil Health Concerns (HEA)

Gastrointestinal Symptoms (HEA1); Neurological Symptoms (HEA2); General Health Concerns (HEA3)

6 (Pa: Paranoia) Persecutory Ideas (Pa1); Poignancy (Pa2); Naivete (Pa3)

Bizarre Mentation Psychotic Symptomatology (BIZ1); Schizotypal Characteristics (BIZ2)

7 (Pt: Psychasthenia)

Nil Anger (ANG) Explosive Behaviour (ANG1); Irritability (ANG2)

8 (Sc: Schizophrenia)

Social Alienation (Sc1); Emotional Alienation (Sc2); Lack of Ego Mastery, Cognitive (Sc3); Lack of Ego Mastery, Conative (Sc4); Lack of Ego Mastery, Defective Inhibition (Sc5); Bizarre Sensory Experiences (Sc6)

Cynacism (CYN) Misanthropic Beliefs (CYN1); Interpersonal Suspiciousness (CYN2)

9 (Ma: Hypomania)

Amorality (Ma1); Psychomotor Acceleration (Ma2); Imperturbability (Ma3); Ego Inflation (Ma4)

Antisocial Practices (ASP)

Antisocial Attitudes (ASP1); Antisocial Behaviour (ASP2)

0 (Si: Social Introversion)

Shyness/Self-Consciousness (Si1); Social Avoidance (Si2); Alienation – Self and Others (Si3)

Type A (TPA) Impatience (TPA1); Competitive Drive (TPA2)

Low Self-Esteem (LSE)

Self-Doubt (LSE1); Submissiveness (LSE2)

Social Discomfort (SOD)

Introversion (SOD1); Shyness (SOD2)

Family Problems (FAM)

Family Discord (FAM1); Familial Alienation (FAM2)

Work Inference (WRK)

Nil

Negative Treatment Inferences (TRT)

Low Motivation (TRT1); Inability to Disclose (TRT2)


Administration

The MMPI-2 is a standardised self-report questionnaire that takes approximately 60 to 90 minutes to administer. The test can be administered in paper and pencil format, requiring examinees to read the item booklet and record responses on the answer sheet. Similarly, examinees with limited vision or reading difficulties can listen to the items on a CD Rom and record responses on the answer sheet. The latter is also useful for administration with large groups. Electronic administration is also available through National Computer Systems. The test generally takes approximately 60 to 90 minutes to administer, with all items requiring a true/false response. Items in the test are written at a 6th-8th grade level and have been translated into more than 50 languages.

To administer the MMPI-2, graduate level training in psychological testing is required.


The MMPI-2 can be scored electronically or manually by hand. If administered electronically, it is automatically scores electronically. Similarly, responses from answer sheets can be inputted and also scores electronically. If manually scored, all subscales except the ‘Cannot Say’ validity subscale are scores using plastic scoring templates which are placed over the answer sheet. The ‘Cannot Say’ scale is scored by simply totalling the number of items not marked and double marked. Raw scale scores are plotted on gender specific norm-based profile sheets, with each column on the profile sheet representing a different scale. Raw scores can be converted to T scores using a T score conversion table provided in the Manual. T scores on the clinical scales and subscales can be categorised as very high (75 and above), high (65 to 74), Moderate (55 to 64), average (45 to 54) and low (below 45).

Australian Norms

The MMPI2 was standardised on a sample of 2600 individuals across the US, to reflect national census parameters. There are no published Australian norms for this test.

Test Availability

The MMPI-2 is available for purchase from Pearson PsychCorp Australia.

References

Butcher, J.N., Graham, J.R., Ben-Porath, Y.S., Tellegen, A., & Dahlstrom, W.G. (2001). MMPI-2: Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation (Revised Edition). Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.

Weiner, I.B., & Greene, R.L. (2008). Handbook of Personality Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Groth-Marnat, G. (2009). Handbook of Psychological Assessment (5th Ed). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.


Test 20: Achenbach Child Behaviour Checklist (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001)

Purpose

The Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL) forms part of an integrated set of three forms for assessing competencies, adaptive functioning, and internalising and externalising problems in children. The set of forms is referred to as the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA). Because children can behave differently in different situation, it is an assumption that the most comprehensive assessment can only be made when multiple informants independently complete separate forms describing the child’s behaviour. Thus, the Teacher’s Report Form (TRF) and Youth-Self Report (YSR) Form are recommended to supplement the parent/caregiver completed CBCL. All forms have parallel syndromes scales, as well as internalising, externalising and total problems scales. Profiles also include DSM oriented scales. See Table 1 syndromes scales and DSM oriented scales.

Table 1. Cross informant syndromes and DSM oriented scales

Cross Informant Syndromes DSM Oriented Scales

Anxious/Depressed Affective Problems

Withdrawn/Depressed Anxiety Problems

Somatic Complaints Somatic Problems

Social Problems Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems

Through Problems Oppositional Defiant Problems

Attention Problems

Rule-Breaking Behaviour

Aggressive Behaviour

The CBCL and associated forms are used in many different contexts, including mental health, educational, medical, child and family service, and forensic settings.

Age Range

The CBCL and associated forms is designed for use by parents of children aged between 6 and 18 years. A pre-school aged version of the CBCL also exists for children aged between 18 months and 5 years. The TRF is completed by teachers, and the YSR is completed by adolescents aged between 11 and 18 years. The latter has a fifth grade reading level.

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability coefficients for the syndrome scales range between .78 to .97 on the CBCL, .71 to .95 on the YSR and .72 to .95 on the TRF. The only reliability coefficients below .75 were on the YSR Withdrawn/Depressed and Social Problems Syndromes, and the TRF Somatic Complaints and Thought Problem Syndromes. For the DSM oriented scales, coefficients ranged from .72 to .91 on the CBCL, .67 to .83 on the YSR, and .73 to .94 on the TRF. Over a period of 8 to 16 days, test-retest reliability coefficients the syndrome scales range between .78 (Somatic Complaints and Thought Problems) to .94 (Aggressive Behaviour) on the CBCL, .71 (Withdrawn/Depressed) to .86 (Aggressive Behaviour) on the YSR, and .72 Somatic Complaints and Thought Problems) to .95 (Attention Problems, Rule-Breaking Behaviour and


Aggressive Behaviour) on the TRF. Test-retest reliability coefficients for the DSM-oriented scales range between .72 (Anxiety Problems) and .91 (Conduct Problems) for the CBCL, .67 (Anxiety Problems) and .81 (Affective Problems) for the YSR, and .73 (Anxiety Problems) and .94 (ADH Problems) for the TFR.

Validity

Correlations between the ASEBA forms with other instruments have been performed to determine concurrent validity. Correlations between the ASEBA and the Behavioural Assessment System for Children (BASC) scales ranged between .38 and .89. All correlations exceeded .70 for Somatic Complaints, Attention Problems, and Rule-Breaking Behaviour Syndromes. Correlations for Thought processes and Aggressive Behaviour Syndromes ranged from .60 to .85. Correlations between ASEBA DSM oriented scales and the corresponding BASC scales ranged between .52 to .85.

Administration

The CBCL is completed by parents/carers or others who see the child in home-like environments, the TRF by the child’s teacher and the YSR by the child if aged between 11 and 18 years. All forms are completed by pencil and paper, and items are scored on a 3 point scale (0 = not true, 1 = somewhat or sometimes true, 2 = very true or often true). Each of the forms takes about 15 to 20 minutes to complete. Items are read to respondents if reading skills are poor. Administration requirements differs for according to specific applications of the forms, but graduate training of at least the masters degree level or at least 2 years of relevant experience is generally required.


The forms can be scored manually using scoring template or can be electronically scored using computer software. Each syndrome scale, DSM oriented scale, and the total score can be categorised as normal, borderline, or clinical behaviour. These categorisations are based on T scores and percentile ranks for all samples (M = 50, SD = 10).

Australian Norms

This test does not have Australian norms.

Test Availability

This test is available for purchase from ACER Australia.

References

Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age forms & profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth & Families.

Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2002). Manual for the ASEBA preschool forms and profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth and Families.


Health & Medicine

Psychology board---national-psychology-examination---assessment-domain-additional-resources-1