Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)

OPAC HELP

Titolo:
Psychological testing and psychological assessment - A review of evidence and issues
Autore:
Meyer, GJ; Finn, SE; Eyde, LD; Kay, GG; Moreland, KL; Dies, RR; Eisman, EJ; Kubiszyn, TW; Reed, GM;
Indirizzi:
Univ Alaska, Dept Psychol, Anchorage, AK 99508 USA Univ Alaska Anchorage AK USA 99508 Dept Psychol, Anchorage, AK 99508 USA Ctr Therapeut Assessment, Austin, TX USA Ctr Therapeut Assessment Austin TX USA rapeut Assessment, Austin, TX USA US Off Personnel Management, Washington, DC USA US Off Personnel Management Washington DC USA gement, Washington, DC USA Georgetown Univ, Med Ctr, Washington, DC 20057 USA Georgetown Univ Washington DC USA 20057 Med Ctr, Washington, DC 20057 USA Massachusetts Psychol Assoc, Boston, MA USA Massachusetts Psychol Assoc Boston MA USA Psychol Assoc, Boston, MA USA Amer Psychol Assoc, Practice Directorate, Washington, DC 20002 USA Amer Psychol Assoc Washington DC USA 20002 rate, Washington, DC 20002 USA
Titolo Testata:
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST
fascicolo: 2, volume: 56, anno: 2001,
pagine: 128 - 165
SICI:
0003-066X(200102)56:2<128:PTAPA->2.0.ZU;2-5
Fonte:
ISI
Lingua:
ENG
Soggetto:
DSM-III-R; DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW SCHEDULE; PERSONALITY-DISORDER EXAMINATION; OUTPATIENT GERIATRIC EVALUATION; STRUCTURED CLINICAL INTERVIEW; SELF-PEER AGREEMENT; BEHAVIORAL EMOTIONAL-PROBLEMS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; CORONARY-ARTERY DISEASE; PROGNOSTIC RATING-SCALE;
Tipo documento:
Review
Natura:
Periodico
Settore Disciplinare:
Social & Behavioral Sciences
Citazioni:
434
Recensione:
Indirizzi per estratti:
Indirizzo: Meyer, GJ Univ Alaska, Dept Psychol, 3211 Providence Dr, Anchorage, AK 99508 USA Univ Alaska 3211 Providence Dr Anchorage AK USA 99508 99508 USA
Citazione:
G.J. Meyer et al., "Psychological testing and psychological assessment - A review of evidence and issues", AM PSYCHOL, 56(2), 2001, pp. 128-165

Abstract

This article summarizes evidence and issues associated with psychological assessment. Data from more than 125 meta-analyses on test validity and 800 samples examining multimethod assessment suggest 4 general conclusions: (a)Psychological test validity is strong and compelling, (b) psychological test validity is comparable to medical test validity, (c) distinct assessmentmethods provide unique sources of information, and (d) clinicians who relyexclusively on interviews are prone to incomplete understandings. Following principles for optimal nomothetic research, the authors suggest that a multimethod assessment battery provides a structured means for skilled clinicians to maximize the validity of individualized assessments. Future investigations should move beyond an examination of test scales to focus more on the role of psychologists who use tests as helpful tools to furnish patientsand referral sources with professional consultation.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 31/05/20 alle ore 12:33:18