Psychometric Tests Singapore, BPS Level A & B Singapore, Apollo Profile, Identity Self-Perception Questionnaire, Saville Wave, HR Training & Management Consulting, Hong Kong    
Sitemap Search Email PsyAsia International Telephone Numbers & Postal Addresses
Australian Psychological Society Psychologist in Singapore & Hong Kong
Psychometric Test Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Asia Human Resource Training Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Asia HRM & Business Psychology Consulting Asia Support & Accounts About PsyAsia: Asia's Leader in Psychometric Training Miscellaneous Links
Psychometric Testing & HRM Blog

Posts Tagged ‘ online psychometric test training ’

Identity Personality Test – New Reports

Monday, September 27th, 2010

Identity is a self-perception personality
questionnaire that measures important individual differences
between how people prefer to behave in a workplace setting.
It was developed specifically for the world of work
and is supported by robust research proving its effectiveness
for use in many areas of business and personal development.
The questionnaire is available in English, simplified
Chinese and traditional Chinese
.

Developed to be the most comprehensive personality assessment
tool, Identity measures 36 Primary Scales – which
are specific areas of personality related to the world
of work. It is fully validated for making sensitive
selection decisions and found through scientific
research to be more predictive of leadership performance
than even ability tests or interviews
.

Identity Cover

Sample Cover Page

The PsyAsia logo can be replaced with your corporate
logo if you have your own Identity System. Also note
the PTC logo that confirms Identity is a quality
test registered with the British Psychological Society
Psychological Testing Centre
.

Narrative Report

Narrative Report

This report is written in second or third person depending
on whether you are using it as a feedback report for
the candidate or for the decision-maker. Text-based
narrative reports are the only type of report available
to untrained users. All other reports/graphics require
a certification.

Response Style Summary

Quick Look Page

This gives an indication as to the accuracy of the candidate’s
responses and shows you where you need to focus for
additional probing in an interview. For this fake candidate,
the report tells us we need to probe on every competency!
For other candidates you may see “Strong”
and/or “OK” in place of “Further Probing”.

Profile Chart

Profile Chart

This is the first page of a 2-page chart which provides
the candidate’s score for each scale in Identity. Labels
and descriptions on either side assist in accurate interpretation
of each scale score.

Pre-Interview Report

Pre-Interview Report

This is a sample page from Identity’s Pre-Interview
Report. Personality test reports should be followed
up with a good behavioral interview. This report assists
in this process by providing example questions to ask
the candidate based on their profile.

Alternative Assessment to the MBTI for Assessing Jungian Type
Learning Styles Assessment

Derived scales

Assess aspects of the person such as Jungian Type, Learning
Styles, EQ, Team Roles, Leadership Style and so on.
All of these charts come at no additional cost.

The above are just a few examples of
pages from Identity reports. Identity offers a number
of different reports: Pre-Interview, Comprehensive,
Career Focus and Candidate Feedback. Unlike other psychometric
personality tests, clients only pay once for the candidate
rather than for each report generated.

To download full sample reports, please click here

 (note, trained users have access to all of these reports
for a candidate for a single fee!)
 
 Training and Accreditation
If you already hold BPS Level B or a certification
in a substantive personality assessment, you may use
Identity by simply purchasing and reading the manual.
For those who require training, we are pleased to offer
a “new report release” special 15%
discount on our 26-27 October training in Singapore
and 29-30 November training in Hong Kong if you register
by 5 October. This discount increases to 20%
if you send 2 or more people. Use discount
codes IDMAIL15 and IDMAIL20 for the 15% and 20% discounts
respectively when registering
here
. For clients who are not interested in training
we can offer our psychologist-on-call
service
or a very limited text-only report.
 
 

Free Online Psychometric Testing System

All qualified users of Identity get a FREE online system
- so, you can set up test sessions and produce reports
whenever you want – even at night and on weekends!

Identity Pricing

If you would like a copy of our fees list,please email us.

View our multimedia Identity Sales Presentation

View our multimedia Identity Sales Presentation

Click here to view all current public training course dates

Online Psychometric Test Mini-Course: Lesson 6

Wednesday, September 22nd, 2010

In this session we will explore the following:

1. Computer-based scoring of psychometric tests
2. Hand-scoring of psychometric tests
3. Norming of test results
4. The link between scoring of tests and reliability

Converting raw scores to standardised scores and using representative norms will be covered in a later session.

Once a psychometric test has been properly administered, it needs to be scored.  Depending on the test chosen, you may have a few options. 

a. You can opt for computer-based scoring.

This would work if you had administered the test using computer software or if you had asked your candidate to complete an online test. For online tests, this option is good because it is less likely to involve scoring errors! Your candidate completes the test online and then the system immediately and automatically scores the test. There is no additional input required and hence less chance for error. This pre-supposes the publisher has used the correct scoring algorithms of course. Whilst most reputable test publishers will, we do know of one who had an error in a test battery that was not spotted until one of their distributors pointed out that his partner had done poorly on a test for which she was a subject matter expert!!

If you administer the test to your candidate using desktop software, you should be able to automatically score it in the same way as above. 

b. You can opt for hand-scoring or a bureau service or keyed input followed by computer-scoring. You are most likely to use this option if you administered the test to your candidate using hard-copy test booklets and answer sheets. 

Firstly, you’ll need to double-check the answer sheets to ensure that there are no irregularities. Ensure that it’s obvious which answer the respondent selected. Be careful with any “blobs” that may have appeared from ink or pencil smudges etc.  If a respondent has changed their mind after selecting a response and has crossed it out, ensure that you only use the most recent response in scoring. 

For hand-scoring using a scoring key, you’ll next need to align the scoring key with the answer sheet. The exact requirements will vary based on the test you are using, so ensure that you read and fully understand the instructions provided by the test publisher. 

Once you have scored the responses, double-check your scoring. You then need to record the score. The score you calculate at this point is called the RAW SCORE.  On its own, a raw score means nothing. If I tell you that you scored 54 on a numerical reasoning test or 75 on the extraversion scale of a personality assessment, you’ll need to ask me more questions before you truly understand your score. The most important question to ask would be how your score compared to others.  The comparison of your score with others is called norming

It is called norming because we compare a candidate’s score to a group of others (called the norm group) who completed the test in the past.  To undertake this comparison, you can do it by way of a simple calculation or through the use of norm tables either developed by yourself or, more usually, supplied by the test publisher.

Norm tables allow us to use a standard vocabulary for expressing a candidate’s score in relation to others who have taken the test and it is for this reason that we call your new score a standardised score.  A standardised score is simply your candidate’s raw score, compared with the norm group and expressed in terms of how the candidate scored in relation to others.  We’ll consider standardised scores in more detail in a later lesson.  You’ll see by now that your objective is to calculate the candidate’s standard score as this is the way to achieve maximum meaning.  If you opt for paper and pencil tests and hand-scoring, the process can be lengthy. So are there other options?

We have already seen above that we can simply have the candidate complete an online test. However, you may not wish to do this if there are many candidates.  This is because you will need as many computers as candidates if you are going to supervise them.  If you are using an unsupervised test, the candidate can complete on their own PC, but you may be concerned about possible cheating and so on.  This is why you may end up using paper and pencil tests (in a supervised environment).  However, there is an alternative to arduous hand-scoring if you have used paper and pencil tests. 

You can use the bureau service of your psychometric test distributor. You just need to check that the answer sheet is properly completed, clear and free from any irregularities and then send the answer sheet to the distributor by fax or scanned email.  The bureau service will then score the test for you and send you a report. 

Furthermore, you may have another option yet.  If you have access to a computer or online test system, you can probably also enter the candidate’s responses to each question into the system and have the system produce the report. This is essentially what the bureau service above does for you.  Doing it yourself should work out cheaper.  Do be careful when you transpose the responses though – accuracy is far more important than speed unless you want to invalidate the whole process!!

Self-scoring answer sheets: Some psychometric tests are supplied with self-scoring answer sheets. These are much easier to use than non-self-scoring answer sheets. In this case you usually need to open up the answer sheet by tearing off some perforated card. Inside the answer sheet, the candidate’s responses will have been duplicated via carbon or similar onto a scoring card. Usually, you add up the number of responses (often black circles) that appear inside a circle. Those outside of a circle represent incorrect answers so don’t get counted. Once you’ve added up correct responses, you have your raw score.  Slightly different procedures obviously apply for personality assessments and fewer personality assessments provide self-scoring answer sheets due to their scoring complexity.  When using self-scoring answer sheets you need to be especially careful to ensure that the candidate presses hard on the answer sheet when completing the test. If they are light-handed their responses may not come through onto the scoring card!

Finally, let’s consider the link between psychometric test scoring and reliability/validity.  As you know, the test administrator can have a huge impact upon psychometric test reliability throughout the whole process. At the scoring stage you can affect reliability simply by scoring incorrectly. This might happen because you miss the fact that a candidate crossed out their answer and changed their mind. It may also happen because you try to score fast and just don’t add up correctly.  Perhaps you use the scoring key incorrectly or perhaps the scoring is so arduous (often the case for personality assessments) that you simply get lost in the scoring or incorrectly use your calculator! 

Ensure therefore that you fully understand how to score the test, use the scoring key as per the publisher’s instructions, score slowly and double check or have someone else double check your scoring. If possible, use computer based scoring or self-scoring answer sheets. Incorrect scoring reduces reliability and of course that means that a valid test can become invalid and a waste of time or money!

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE. VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Online Psychometric Test Mini-Course: Lesson 5

Thursday, August 19th, 2010
In this session we will explore the following:

1. How to conduct a psychometric test administration session

Previously you were introduced to the importance of ensuring that every test administration session that you run remains the same in order to ensure consistency and hence reliability. By not adhering to this and by not being standardised in your test administration, you run the ultimate risk of invalidating the whole process because reliability is a precursor to validity.  So this means that the company purchasing the tests has wasted money at the very least.  Worse still however is the fact that many candidates may not see the process as fair (leading to problems in attracting applicants in the future) and likewise, the law in some countries may take issue with the way tests were administered leading perhaps to a bias in the process for one group compared to another.  Given this, the following will discuss what is required to ensure you conduct a good, reliable psychometric test administration session.

Be prepared

Firstly, you need to be prepared!

Here is a list of things you need in order to be fully prepared:

1. Find and book an appropriate room. One that is large enough for the group of assessees and one which is in a quiet area. Ensure that on the day there will not be any nearby noise such as construction noise. Ensure that there are no fire drills planned. Consider the room temperature – make sure there is enough time for the room to cool down or heat up to a comfortable temperature before the assessment starts. Layout the room as per regular ‘exam conditions’ whereby desks are separated from each other.

2. Prepare a timetable for the day and send this out to candidates with their invitation letter (which we covered previously). Often, psychometric testing forms only part of a day-long series of assessments, that’s why a timetable is critical.

3. If you are using paper-based assessments, don’t forget to order the right quantity from the publisher or test distributor in good time before the session. We advise you do this at least 2 weeks before the day of assessment to allow for shipping.

4. Whether you are using paper-based or online tests, you must familiarise yourself with the tests and their instructions. Ensure that you fully understand the process of administering the tests. You don’t need to understand the questions in the test, but you do need to know each aspect of the process of administration with the specific test(s) you are using.  You need to know when to pass each item (e.g., question booklet, answer sheet) to the candidate and when to collect it back in. You must also know how long each timed test lasts and have a stopwatch to assist with accurate timing. Also have some rough paper so that you can write down the time the test started. This helps if the stopwatch fails – you’ll know “roughly” when to stop the session. However we want 100% accuracy in the session, so let’s hope this backup is not required.

5. Ensure that you have the correct ratio of qualified test administrators to candidates. The best practice ration is 1:10. So for a room of 50 candidates you need 5 test qualified administrators. One administrator can just about keep their eye on 10 candidates, that’s why it would go against best practice to have only one or two administrators ensuring a room of 50 candidates do not cheat by looking at each other’s work or continuing with the test beyond the time limit.

6. Prepare a test log. This is sheet of paper upon which you will record events that happen during the session. The events range from the ordinary (i.e., 25 question booklets handed out and 25 returned or, test started at 3pm and finished at 3.25pm) to the less expected (i.e., candidate 34 reported that she has dyslexia).

Introducing the Psychometric Test Session to Candidates

Be friendly but professional. Introduce yourself and your role. Then go on to cover everything that you previously covered in your invitation letter to your candidates. This will include:

a) Why are we here today

b) Brief description of the assessments candidates are about to undertake

c) Reason why we are using psychometric tests (i.e., they are objective predictors of work performance)

d) How the tests fit into the overall process of selection or development (they should only be part of the process)

e) How long today’s session will last in total

f) What will happen after today’s session (e.g., you will hear from us within 7 days)

g) When feedback on test results will be given

h) A commitment that the results will remain confidential and be used only for this current purpose

i) Then ask candidates if they have any questions so far and thank them for agreeing to take the tests

j) Continuing with the introduction, convey any special emergency/fire instructions to candidates – this is a legal requirement for public gatherings in many countries.

k) Tell candidates where the washrooms are and that if they need to use them, a good time would be right now as they shouldn’t leave the room once the assessment commences and if they do, they certainly won’t get additional time! Also remind them that they may need their reading glasses to complete the assessments and if they left them outside, now is also a good time to go and get them!

At this point, people may have left the room for a couple of minutes following your advice. Once everybody has reassembled, continue with the more formal part of the test administration session.  At this point you will refer to the publisher’s official instruction card. The publisher expects you to read the instructions and hand out/collect materials in exactly the same way and order presented here for consistency (and therefore reliability).

l) Tell candidates that you will now read from the test instructions and that this may make you sound a little more robotic for the next few minutes and that the reason you are doing this is to ensure that everybody gets the same instructions every time this test is administered. Ask them to listen very carefully to the instructions.

m) Read the instructions word for word. Ensure that you pause in the right places. Ensure that you hand out materials when told to do so.  There are usually example questions which you will need to ask the candidates to complete. Do so and allow them a few minutes to complete. During this time you can walk around ensuring that they are completing the correct section of the answer sheet and are looking at the correct section of the question booklet. Correct anybody who is not but do not correct their answers until the example question time is up for all. Then you’ll need to go through the example question answers with candidates. At this stage you’ll be reading from the instructions. Do not go into lengthy explanations with candidates about why they may have got the answer wrong. Simply tell them not to worry, to do their best and remind them that the test in only part of the process.

o) If you are administering a personality questionnaire, remember to tell the candidates that there are no right or wrong answers – you are who you are! Tell them that personality assessments are used to assess candidate fit with the organisation and are more scientific and objective than interviews. Ask them to be honest and open and tell them that it is usually the first answer them comes to their mind which is most accurate; so do not spend too long deliberating over each question. Some candidates may say that they think their personality is different at work compared with home. Simply ask them to answer from a work perspective. Tell candidates that the test is untimed but that most people take around X minutes to complete.

p) Now it’s time for final questions. Ask candidates if they have any and answer them as best you can. It’s a good idea to consider possible questions before starting the sessions. We’ve put a few together here with answers:

http://www.psyasia.com/supportsuite/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=view&parentcategoryid=33&pcid=0&nav=0

p) That’s it, now it’s time to test.  So, as per your instructions, ask candidates to turn over the page and begin. If you’re administering an aptitude/ability test, remember to start your stopwatch at that point and then write down the time the test started as an independent time check. Now you need to walk around the room adjudicating. Don’t answer any more questions – candidates need to concentrate now. If they need replacement pencils/rough paper, fine, but no talking of any kind! Check candidates are on the right page and responding to questions in the correct section of the answer sheet. If not, correct them quietly.

q) As soon as time is up, call “STOP” or whatever is mentioned in your instructions. For personality assessments, wait until everybody has finished. For aptitude tests, ensure that all pencils are placed on desks as soon as you call time. A candidate who continues beyond time can increase their score unfairly and invalidate the process!

r) Collect all materials in the order instructed by the publisher and remember to note down in your test log everything that comes back. You must also collect all rough paper from candidates. This is because they may have written questions down on the paper and now those questions may get leaked out of the testing room – this would obviously invalidate the test.

s) Once you have ensured that all materials were returned, you may close the session as follows:

  • Thank candidates for attending
  • For aptitude tests, reassure them that they are supposed to be difficult and designed so that not everybody completes all questions
  • Remind candidates that everything will remain confidential
  • Remind candidates about the feedback session
  • Remind candidates about the next part of the selection or development process
  • Ask them if they have any final questions
  • Thank them all again and then dismiss them

Sticking to these guidelines and the publisher’s test administration instructions will help to ensure consistency in your administration sessions. As you know, this means higher reliability and hence you uphold the validity of the test.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE. VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Psychometric Testing in Singapore, Hong Kong and across Asia

Tuesday, August 10th, 2010

Introduction

Psychologist Vincent Wong carried out a review of psychometric tests being used in Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia and throughout Asia.  In this analysis, more than 40 tests were reviewed which involved no less than 20 test developers.  There were several focuses in the analysis which included practical information of the tests (information such as price and practical design issues), construct of the test, report design, technical details and training requirements.

Practical Information

Pricing

There exists a wide pricing range among tests developed by different test developers. In the lower end of the continuum one test provider provides tests for free in their entire product range and a section of the chargeable report will be produced. Obviously for user to obtain useful information they have to pay for the full report and this is certainly a marketing strategy. However in the perspective of psychometric this practice serious harm the integrity of the test as anybody can get access to the tests for unlimited number of times. Therefore it can only been seen as tests for people who are interested in trying out tests, rather than being usable in organizational settings. For more protected tests, prices range from USD$10 to more than USD$120 with some of the providers charge per usage while the others charge for subscription fee as well (usually paid annually).

Design

In this analysis, several design dimensions of the test were considered and they were the split between ipsative and normative measures, the type of scales that were employed, and other practical issue like medium of test administration.

The majority of the personality assessment tools (over 80%) employ normative measures (the type of psychometric tools that compare the respondent with a group of similar others, or the norm group) while the remaining ones employ an ipsative style (the type of psychometric tools that determine the preference among different personality traits within the respondent). Two exceptional case was identified which employs a mixed style, i.e. normative plus ipsative. The reason behind the popularity of normative style might down to the fact that for tests that were designed for selection purpose normative style was the better style to go with as it actually compare the respondents with the others. On the other hand ipsative measures can provide us with better knowledge about the preference or strength within the respondents. In line with this we found that most of the ipsative tests were preference or value tests which were designed for coaching or counselling purposes, although some ipsative measures that were designed for selection purposes were also identified. For the only tests that incorporated both normative and ipsative styles, the underlying connotation of the difference between normative and ipsative scales were utilized and it represented the discrepancy between the real and ideal self of the respondents.

The type of scale used by the tests is actually a function of whether they are ipsative or normative tests. For normative test the most popular scale type used was 5-point Likert Scale (Likert Scale is the type of scale that respondents choose among several options for the one that represent their thought most). 7-point scale was also quite common and there were a few occurrences of 3-point and 9-point scales. Other than using Likert scales, a few normative tests employed true or false scale. For ipsative tests force-choice scale was employed. One of the more popular version of ipsative scales asked the respondents to pick the option that describes them the best (usually termed as ‘most like me’) as well as option that describes them the worst (usually termed as ‘least like me’). Another appearing version of ipsative scale asked the respondents to put the available options into order, although this version was very uncommon.

Most of the surveyed tests, if not all, were designed for completing on computerized environment. While some of the tests can be administered online in an unsupervised manner, there were quite a few that required supervised administration. Whereas there were few test that provided different versions for supervised and unsupervised administration. Having more than one version allowed the result to be checked in a supervised manner after the candidates had passed the unsupervised session. Paper and pencil version of the tests were usually available with similar price of the computerized version although there were a few tests that did not provide paper and pencil version.

Although all the surveyed tests were not designed to be completed in a designated time, timer was identified in one test and it served the function of checking against random or thoughtful responses.

Measured Attributes

Personality

Among the different attributes, personality was the most popular one being measured. The majority of the personality measurements were built on the Big Five model of personality identified by Costa and McCrae (1985). While some of them retained the original five factors within the tests, about half of the surveyed tests restructured the factor compositions based on the result of the factor analysis or other theoretical support, for example one test split the factor of conscientiousness into ‘Industriousness’ and ‘Methodicalness’ while another developer incorporate the five factor model with behavioural tendencies and came up with a seven factor model. Another common phenomenon observed was that under each of the five factors the primary factors (ranges from 3-5 facets, also known as facets) were also measured, and they were actually more commonly used by test developers in report generation and interpretation. This was probably because the primary factors offer more detailed information thus higher flexibility in using them. Besides the Big Five model, another very popular personality model employed by test developers was Jung’s (1920) typology of personality. For instance two of the tests were developed from this theory as their entire theoretical foundation but one employed the original categorical model while the other one developed a continuum model.  Besides building upon one theory, many tests extract personality factors from multiple personality theories and some of them measured as many as 34 personality dimensions. Example of the measured personality dimension includes ambition, initiative, concern for others, flexibility, and energy. Nearly most of the surveyed personality tests served multiple functions which included selection, training/development need analysis, counselling and other related applications such as personal development, conflict management and team building. Test developers further added the applicability of personality tests in different situations by providing multiple versions of reports alongside with a general personality profile.

Value, Motive and Preference

Another popular attributes being measured were value, motive and preference. Although these are three distinct attributes, we found it was common that test publisher combine either two or all three attributes into one test. These tests were less commonly employed in the situation of selection but more widely used in counselling and developmental scenarios, although some of them were also designed to be used in selection as well. For tests that measures value and motive, normative measures were found to be more common and ipsative measures were more common among preference tests.  Another related attribute being measured was interest and they were mainly designed to be a career development tool.

Others

Other measured attributes included measure of leadership styles, team role, behavioural tendency, Emotional Intelligence, self-efficacy, work ethic, interpersonal communication, sales orientation, customer service orientation, learning style and even work effectiveness tendency.

Report Style

Nearly all of the surveyed tests have multiple reports and they are all in narrative form alongside with a graphic representation (usually bar charts) of the measured characteristic. However there was one test that did not employ narrative style in their report at all. Graphical representations with a sentence long description for each factor were employed instead of the narrative format. 2 dimensional typology graphs and score matrix were also employed for some type of reports. Some reports made use of different colours in representing different dimensions being measured yet some others used colour to indicate extreme scores (for example green representing high scores while red representing low scores). Colour was also frequently employed for matching test scores with a standard or an established profile, with green meaning a good match and red representing a poor match.

Report Content

Generic  Personality Profile

For all the surveyed tests, there was at least some form of generic personality profile provided in the report, whether in the form of narrative writing, matrix of scores, 2 dimensional typology graphs, bar charts or broken line graphs. Most commonly the personality profile was consisted of a graphical representation of the test scores on different dimensions with a brief descriptive narrative alongside it. In this generic personality profile the test scores, usually in form of sten scores or percentile were presented. Raw scores were also found in some reports. About half of the survey tests also presented the variation of the test score in the report and a few had an explanation on the meaning behind that. In all cases primary dimensions measured by the tests were reported in this section. Secondary or higher-level composite dimensions were also frequently reported in this section.

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths and limitations were another very popular qualities being reported, although we identified a few tests that do not report them. In reporting strengths and limitations some tests referred them to very specific behavioural terms while there existed some tests simply referred high or low scores in particular dimensions as strengths or limitations. Few tests incorporated contextual factors into the reporting of strengths and limitations were identified and they were more common in purpose-specific reports (for example reports designed for leadership development or team building). Overall tests tended to present information about strengths and limitations of the candidates.

Competencies

Leadership, team work, interpersonal skills or orientation and problem solving orientation were found to be the most popular competencies being tapped. Other competencies being tackled by the surveyed tests included achievement orientation, customer service orientation, management style, decision making, planning and organization, influence and negotiation, delivery, creativity, analytic orientation, coping style and thinking style. Rather than being measured directly in the tests, these competencies were often generated from several primary dimensions of personality. They were found to be written in context of work and behavioural terms were employed heavily in order to aid comprehensibility of the report. Furthermore competency based reports were identified and leadership related reports were the one which appeared most. Competency based reports for sales and managerial positions were also popular.

Interview prompts

Interview prompts were found in some reports. These included general instruction of how to use the report correctly to enhance the effectiveness of a follow-up interview as well as specific suggested interview questions to be asked for a particular candidate. The number of interview prompts varies from three to ten plus suggested questions and some reports even included the expected answer from the candidate. These interview prompts also served as a check or back up of the validity of the tests.

Training (Development) Needs

Several tests with a separated training need or developmental report were identified. For tests that did not have a designated report for training needs, it was surprising to found that the section outlining training was absent for majority of the surveyed tests, given most of them were designed to be used in training need analysis. When present, the training needs outlined (or some tests referred it to be ‘action plans’) were usually generated from the unfit aspects identified or areas that were not up to the normative standard. Simple description about the needs per se was common and a few reports were found to be providing concrete training suggestions.

Cultural Fit

Cultural fit information was identified in a few test reports. This information could include the fit of the candidate with the organizational culture, task nature as well as co-workers and it existed in several forms. The more popular way to compute it was comparing between the candidate’s score with the norm or an ideal profile. One test generated this information by comparing the candidate with the best performers. Yet another test presented the information in light of the candidate himself by stating what culture or environment will be the best fit for the candidate.

Technical Information

Technical information of the test included normative data, reliability and validity data as well as development procedure of the test. They are the most important information to be readily accessible to the public but unfortunately some of them were virtually absent for some of the surveyed tests. Normative data were found to be the most reported information and reliability data followed. However evidence for validity as well as development procedure of the test were absent for some of the tests despite the claim of ‘scientifically validated’ in their marketing materials. For tests that did not provide any of the above mentioned information the integrity of them were seriously in doubt.

Training Requirement

Training requirement of the tests varied from no need training for an extreme case (which was the free online test) to BPS Level B plus additional training (approximately 7 days of training in total). For most of the tests 2-3 days of training for the specific test was common but this type of training would not be recognized by a different test provider. The BPS (British Psychological Society) Competence in Occupational Testing was found to be the most widely accepted qualification by the test providers. Most of the tests could be administered by a BPS Level B qualified user but there existed some tests which required a conversion training (1-2 days long) in order to be a qualified user of them.

Online Psychometric Test Mini-Course: Lesson 4

Wednesday, July 28th, 2010
In this session we will explore the following:

1. The relationship between reliability and validity in psychometric assessment
2. How psychometric test administrators can impact the reliability of tests

Psychometric Test Reliability

When choosing a reputable test, whether it be aptitude or personality, one of the properties of the test you will need to look for is reliability. We’ll consider reliability in appropriate detail in a later section of the course.  For now, think of reliability as consistency.  In order to have absolute confidence in our test scores we need them to be consistent.  However, we can’t test and retest our candidates in the real world. Despite this, reputable test publishers would already have done this for you. This would have been carried out under optimal conditions.  So, now you know that you are using a reliable test (one that produces consistent scores), it’s your task as the test administrator to ensure that the test remains a reliable test.

Why is reliability so important?

Whenever you assess something, you expect the score you get to be reliable. For example, if you assess your weight using bathroom scales, you expect the reading you get to be consistent across at least the short term. If you weigh yourself over 2 consecutive days and get significantly different readings you know something is wrong with the scales!  The same is true of psychometric tests. The publisher first ensures that the test scores will be consistent over time and then you, as the administrator, need to ensure that your actions do not make the test less reliable.

Not only do we want and expect test results to remain reliable over time, but we also know that reliability is a precursor to validity. It sets an upper limit on the test’s validity. In other words, if your test is not reliable then it is not valid. Confusing?  Let’s use the weighing scales example again…

Let’s suppose a medical doctor does some research which shows that those who weight more than 120kg are significantly more likely to suffer a heart attack.  His research shows that weight is a valid indicator for predicting the heart attack.  The scales are fit for the purpose of predicting a heart attack.  Validity is all about being fit for purpose.  Now if those scales are not reliable, they will provide inconsistent data over the time of the research program.  In this case would you have confidence in the doctor’s findings? Of course not!

So, to apply this to psychometric tests let’s take an aptitude test. We’ve carried out research which confirms that a new numerical reasoning test can predict the performance of accountants. Those who score better on the test are rated as better accountants.  This is validity. The test is fit for the purpose of predicting accountant performance.  You will hopefully have full confidence in this finding if you know the test is reliable.  If however you expect the test is coming up with inconsistent scores for your candidates, it is unreliable, and, as in the scales example above, you will not have confidence in the test’s prediction of accountant performance. This is why reliability is a precursor to validity.

And why is all of this so important for this course?  It’s because you as the test administrator can enhance or reduce the reliability of the test by how you administer it in the first place.  Let’s now take a look at what factors you can and can’t influence in terms of reliability.

How psychometric test administrators can impact the reliability of tests

factors affecting psychometric test reliability

Factors Affecting Psychometric Test Reliability (C)2010 PsyAsia International: No Copying

Take a look at the graphic on the left. It shows different factors which can impact the reliability of psychometric tests. This applies to both aptitude tests and personality assessments.

Factors within the test

Generally, a test administrator is not responsible for this. The test publisher must design tests that will be highly reliable. Factors within the test means that the questions chosen must be accessible to all groups for whom the test is intended. If a subsection finds some questions difficult based on their group membership (i.e. non-native-English speaking groups may not understand a colloquialism used in a test question), then the test will be less reliable for that group. Although the publisher needs to ensure a reliable test, not all test publishers are reputable or know what they are doing! This is why the person who purchases the test needs to know how to evaluate it. We’ll show you later how to evaluate the test in greater detail.  Know for now that you do not evaluate a test or validate it by trialling it on yourself or your colleague as many untrained users think!

Factors within the respondent

Whilst the test administrator cannot control all the possible factors within a respondent, you can do your best to ensure you control for a much as possible.  It’s a good idea to think here about how you would like to be treated if you were undergoing a psychometric assessment for the first time. You’d probably like a friendly invitation letter explaining what is going to happen and why. You’d like to know that your data and results will remain confidential and only shared with decision-makers and only for the purpose that you’re undertaking the test. You’d also like to know what you need to bring with you and if possible, a few example questions as approved by the test publisher might help to set your mind at rest.  Finally it would be good to have a number to call should you have any special needs that you wish to convey to the administrators before the day.  So, when you arrive at the test centre you already know what is going to happen and why, you won’t be overly concerned, you’ll have all the right things with you (e.g., reading glasses) and you’ll know how long the session is going to last. If it’s a personality test you’ll be more likely to be open and honest because you know your results won’t go further than the selection or development committee and won’t be used for reasons beyond the reason you’ve already been given.

Ultimately here you are attempting to control for mood and expectations. Ideally you don’t want these to vary between candidates in order to give everybody the same start line.  On the actual day of the test you will go over all of these things again with the candidates in the room to ensure that they are all clear on what will happen and why.  Again, this sets the scene and mood, demonstrates your organisation’s “humanness” in the assessment process and provides candidates with an opportunity to ask questions.  Furthermore, on the day you will need to ensure that you administer the test instructions word for word and then administer the test exactly as intended by the test publisher. Doing all of this enhances consistency and thus increases reliability.  This is essential as we saw before because reliability is the precursor to validity.

Factors within the environment

How well would you be able to complete an aptitude test in a noisy room?  Or how about  room that’s freezing from too much air conditioning or too hot due to broken air conditioning?  Likewise, you need to ensure that the test environment is conducive to candidate performance each and every time.  This applies to personality assessment too. Although there is no right or wrong, your candidate will certainly feel more able to make an effort and respond accurately if you provide them with the right environment!  So, some time before the session you’ll need to check the room, make sure temperature controls work. On the day, switch them on in good time before the test so that by the time candidates arrive the room is just right.  Place a sign on the door to ensure you are not disturbed during the testing session and be sure to silence all phones in the room.  Candidates should of course have phones switched off too.  Ensure that once the session is over, all candidates leave at the same time so that they do not disturb others.  If a candidate really must make a restroom visit, they should be accompanied by an administrator and only one candidate at a time should go. Ensure that upon leaving and rejoining the room the candidate does not disturb others.
(Note: also a good idea to check there is no planned construction nearby and there are no fire drills scheduled on the day of testing. Do this before sending out your invitation to the candidate!)

Summary

By referring to these guidelines you’ll help to ensure that psychometric tests used by your organisation remain as reliable as the publisher intends them to be. By using short-cuts and not following the guidelines you’ll threaten the reliability and therefore the validity of the tests.  If you threaten a test’s validity it becomes unfit for purpose which means your company is wasting its money buying psychometric tools!

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE. VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Online Psychometric Test Mini-Course: Lesson 3

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010

Online Psychometric Testing Mini-Course: Session 3

In this session we will explore the following:

1. Why psychometric tests are used and how they are useful. We will do this by referring mainly to alternative methods of assessment.

The short answer to the first part of the above question is that psychometric tests are used because (assuming they are well designed tests) they are a reliable and valid means of assessing people. We will discuss in a future session exactly what is mean by reliability and validity when applied to psychometrics.

Let’s consider a few alternatives to psychometric tests and highlight this issue further. 

Unstructured Interviews

Most candidates who apply for a job will expect to have an interview at some stage of the process and indeed, most organisations will work an interview into the process. However, how useful is this interview for predicting performance on the job?  This depends a lot on the training of those who will be interviewing. Many people who conduct interviews have never been trained. Perhaps one day a boss asked them to go and interview a candidate for a job and it continued from there. They may have years of experience but experience and competence are not the same. Most people who interview use what is known as the traditional interview. It is also sometimes called an unstructured interview. The idea is that this is a time to meet with and get to know the job applicant. Often the interviewer is thinking things such as:

“Let’s see if he has a firm handshake.”

“Let’s see if he looks me in the eye.”

“I’ll ask him what he does in his spare time.”

The problem is that none of the answers to these questions will predict performance at work. So what if I have a limp handshake? Donald Trump (very successful property tycoon) does not even like to shake hands – he’s worried about germs! Imagine him at a job interview.  The shake would be very limp if at all.  In some cultures it’s rude to look people in the eye – so we cannot go assuming that those who avoid eye contact will not be good performers or that they are dishonest or hiding something. As for spare time, what about somebody who puts together model cars or aeroplanes on the weekend, does it mean that will be a good designer or engineer. No, this may simply be a low level weekend interest and not something that would keep them entertained as a career. Not to mention the fact that in some parts of the world it’s actually illegal to ask about people’s hobbies in a job selection process!

The point to grasp then is that often the people conducting interviews have little or no training and are running unstructured interviews that have little relevance to job performance and therefore lack both reliability and validity.  However, the suggestion is not that we remove interviews totally!

Structured Interviews

Research has shown that interviews have good reliability and validity when run in a particular way by those who have undergone thorough training. These are called structured interviews. The idea here is to align the interview questions to the competencies required of the candidate to be successful in the job. Then the interviewer asks the same or very similar questions to each candidate based on job requirements. Behavioural interviews are one type of structured interview. The questions are designed to elicit a high level of evidence that the candidate has displayed the behaviour associated with competent performance over repeated occasions in the past. Another type of structured interview is Situational interviewing – here the candidate is asked what they would do in certain situations. Situational interviews are generally less valid than Behavioural interviews. The biggest problem with getting HR and Consultants to run structured interviews is the need for training. PsyAsia used to run a 2-day course in behavioural interviewing, but our clients in Asia told us that would require too much time out of the workplace. We thus reduced this to a one-day course (see our behaviour-based interviewing course here if interested) but whilst this satisfies the big decision makers it really only serves as an introduction to interviewing. There needs to be more communication and understanding between HR and those who hold the purse-strings in Asia if we are to increase competence in this area!

Psychometric Tests and Structured Interviews

So thus far, we pointed out that interviews can be reliable and valid but that can only happen if the interviewers have been appropriately trained and where using structured interviews; preferably a behavioural interview.  Those using psychometric tools also need to be appropriately trained in order to ensure they remain reliable and valid tools. Assuming training and competence requirements are met for both tests and interviews, why use tests? 

Psychometric tests are able to cover a lot more ground in far less time. Aptitude tests give us an indication of numerical, verbal and spatial skills in 18 minutes if using modern tests like the Saville Consulting Aptitude range.  There’s no way we could discover this information in even a one-hour interview!  Personality assessments can sample and assess personality traits relevant to performance on the job. The average completion time for good personality assessments is 30-40 minutes. There also a few good faster tools available which take around 20 minutes. The amount of information gleaned in this short period of time is a credit to the developers of psychometric tests. However, with particular regard to personality testing, it is necessary to confirm the profile with behavioural evidence from the candidate. So, whilst the profile may suggest somebody who really enjoys multi-tasking, this becomes a basis for an interview question (assuming this is required by the job).

In essence then, psychometric tests are useful because they provide so much more information than an interview can provide in a much shorter period of time. They have been designed by experts using modern statistical techniques aligned with modern personality research and theory. However, psychometric tests are only part of the story and a well designed interview using competent interviewers will add incremental validity to the assessment process. The interview will serve to confirm (or refute) the psychometric profile and provide rich behavioural evidence (that cannot be recorded by psychometric tests) that the person can perform at the level required by the person specification.

Other Methods of Assessment

So far we’ve only looked at different types of interview as an alternative or as complimentary to the assessment process. How about other methods of assessment?

Application forms
We all need to complete one of these to show our intention to apply for a job. Realistically though they are there for this reason alone. They serve as a record of information which the organisation deems important to hold on the individual. Current application forms hold no value as selection tools with the exception perhaps of educational and experiential background. This can be changed by designing application forms that elicit only job relevant responses and preparing a scoring system for the from even before sending it out.

CV/Resume
Candidates like to send their CV/Resume because many people have these on file and it’s easy to quickly update it and print it off on a per-job basis. However, again these are not particularly useful in selection. Research shows that decision-makers are often seduced by smart graphics as well as vocab which sells the applicant by over-inflating their achievements. It’s also possible to lie in a CV, although research has shown that most people don’t lie about their educational qualifications or experience as they know the prospective employer can check up on this. What they do tend to lie about or at least mislead about is their level of competence. We suggest that CVs are not used at any stage of the selection process.

Assessment Centres (ACs)
This is where the candidate is invited to a physical location to partake in a number of exercises with other candidates. Most ACs last a day and during that time the candidates will undergo both group and individual exercises such as presentation exercises, negotiation exercises or in-tray exercises. Assessment Centres have been shown to be highly valid and reliable methods of selection when using well trained assessors.
PsyAsia runs training in Assessment Centres and we also offer consultancy in Assessment Centre Design

References
References lack validity in the assessment process and yet organisations continue to request them! Typically a candidate will not give a potential employer the name of somebody who will give them a poor or perhaps even an honest reference. The tendency is to only offer names of those who they trust will give a great reference. On the other hand, if the current employer really wants the candidate to move on they may fake the reference, making the candidate appear almost angelic! Does this mean we should not use references in the selection process? No. It is possible to improve upon the use of references by designing work-related reference forms that elicit behavioural evidence from the previous employer that is in line with the competency requirements of the new job. However, this may lower the response rate as the referee really needs to think about actual behaviours and write them down rather than sending the standard “he’s a great guy” reference.

Graphology
Most organisations aren’t into this, but an alarmingly high percentage of French organisations are! The idea here is that various personality traits can be seen via somebody’s handwriting. Those traits can then be linked to performance at work. So for somebody that writes with very bold strokes, the graphologist may say they are ambitious. This would be good for a salesperson. However, research has shown a lack of reliability in this method. Not only do people write differently depending on their mood, their culture, their upbringing and so on, but graphologists given the same handwriting to analyse often do not agree with each other about the personality traits of the writer!  Graphology thus should not be used as a selection tool.

Phrenology
Phrenologists assume that different aspects of personality are stored in different parts of the brain and that where somebody has more of a particular characteristic, the corresponding part of the brain will be larger and hence cause protrusions on the head!  The idea would be that you measure different bumps and indentations on your candidates and then project their personality from that. Of course, this method holds no validity and brain imaging tools such as fMRI and PET scans have refuted it.

Astrology
In Asia, people use astrology to help them decide auspicious dates for business openings, functions, weddings and so on. Does it work for job applicants?  No! The idea that people born at the same time, in the same place, where the alignment of stars and planets are similar will work in the same way does not hold any weight. Don’t hire employees based on their star signs!

Psychometric Tests and other Selection Methods

As you can see, there are many ways we can assess people. However each method varies in terms of reliability and validity. Assessment Centres hold very high reliability and validity if done properly, but they are expensive, require lots of resources and skills to run and only assess 6-12 people at a time. We’ve already said that structured interviews are good but again, they take time and resources. Psychometric tools do cost money.  However the cost is offset by the number of candidates that can be assessed and the information that can be gathered in the assessment compared to other selection methods. Don’t forget, an interviewer’s time is costly. A panel interview with 3 interviewers is likely to cost around 2-3 times the fee of a psychometric test and yet will not gather as much information. Not to mention the fact that if you are using the right psychometric tool, it’s reliability and validity will already have been assessed and will be good. Whereas we tend to assume that interviews will be reliable and valid if run by trained people – this is rarely tested!

Psychometric Tests for development, coaching, careers advice and team-building

This lesson has focussed on the use of psychometric tests in candidate selection. However, much of what has been raised applies to the use of tests in other scenarios.  For example, in careers advice, psychometric tools allow the counsellor to offer advice which is based on a systematic assessment of the individual’s aptitude and personality alongside the information already on file such as achievements thus far, previous experience, educational qualifications and so forth. In coaching, development and team-building, psychometric tools often serve as a reliable and valid basis for the discussion. Not using these tools means the initiator starts off with far less information and is likely to be less systematic. Psychometrics enables the initiator to work from a validated model and a holistic assessment of the people being developed and not to base interventions and advice on subjective insights.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE. VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Online Psychometric Testing Mini-Course: Session 2

Thursday, June 24th, 2010

In this session we will explore the following:

1. The different categories of psychometric tests

Different categories of psychometric tests

There are two major categories of psychometric tests:

Tests of MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

and

Tests of TYPICAL BEHAVIOUR

 

Maximum Performance Tests

Tests of Maximum performance include tests that have right and wrong answers. This means aptitude tests, ability tests and attainment tests. It’s possible to break down the category of maximum performance tests further by distinguishing between Speed Tests and Power Tests.  A speed test is more common in occupational testing. It is a test that has a time limit.  The idea is that most candidates will not complete all questions by the end of the allotted time. Candidates will trade off speed with accuracy. It is quite conceivable however that candidates would do somewhat better if they were allowed more time.  On the contrary, power tests are not timed. The idea here is that you either know the subject matter or you don’t and that even if you were given more time your score would be unlikely to improve.  As an example, I know nothing about quantum physics.  If you sit me in a room and ask me to sit a test on this topic I won’t do well – I’ll do badly and I’ll do badly irrespective of how long you give me to complete the test!

So, what is the difference between the main types of maximum performance tests?

Aptitude Tests

These assessments are future looking. They ask if the candidate has the aptitude to do something in the future, perhaps after a period of education or experience. If I want to know if my graduate respondent will make a good leader I may ask him to sit a number of aptitude tests. I am quite certain that the recent graduate will not be able to be a leader right now. But that is not what I am asking.  I need to know if after a few years of on-the-job experience and leadership development training this person has the aptitude to be a successful leader. An example of an aptitude test would be Saville Consulting’s Swift Analysis Aptitude Test or their Customer Aptitudes Test.

Ability Tests
In the aptitude example above I noted that I know my recent graduate will not make a good leader now. Ability tests are about the “here and now”. They tell us what the candidate is able to do now. Ability tests appear at the top of the hierarchy in maximum performance assessment. An example of an ability test would be the General Ability Test (GAT) or the Graduate and Managerial Assessment (GMAT).

Attainment Tests
These are the tests that you are probably more familiar with. The tests we sit during our schooling and university years are attainment tests.  The question is: following this period of learning, how much does the person now know? So, GCSE tests, A’Levels, University Degrees, Pilot Licence Tests, Piano Tests and so on are all examples of attainment tests.

However, just as you are beginning to think this isn’t too difficult to understand, let me add a thought for you!  It is possible for a single test to actually be any of the above 3 categories depending on how you intend to use it! For example, if you have just completed a training course for apprentice mechanics and then give them a mechanical aptitude test in order to assess their learning, you are actually using it in a similar way to an attainment test. If you didn’t train these apprentices and you wish to see if they have the aptitude to be good mechanics and you have them sit this test, you are using it as an aptitude test.  If you are about to select a mechanic who needs to perform right now without further training you could use this same test as an ability test!

Typical Behaviour Tests

These are not really tests in the purest sense because with typical behaviour (also called typical performance) there is no right or wrong. In view of this we try to speak about questionnaires and assessments for this category instead of tests! This category includes personality assessments and interest questionnaires.

Personality Assessments
These obviously assess personality. Some personality assessments assess a few types of personality and these are called PERSONALITY TYPE assessments (for example, the Myers Briggs Type Indicator – MBTI or the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire – EPQ). Other personality assessments assess traits. A type is a collection of traits.  A trait is a relatively enduring characteristic of the person (such as extraversion or resilience) which can be used to predict behaviours. Trait tools are able to assess at a finer level and this is one reason why type tools should not be used in assessment for selection decisions despite being useful guides in development and team-building. Trait tools can be further split into 2 more categories – NARROWBAND and BROADBAND. Broadband Personality Questionnaires assess traits broadly – this means there are overall fewer traits to assess – perhaps 5 or 6 in total. An example of a broadband personality tool is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). Narrowband tools assess more traits/contain more scales. They typically assess each scale with fewer questions than broadband instruments. Some narrowband assessments may have around 16 scales (e.g., the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire – 16PF) whilst others may have around double that, for example the Identity Personality Questionnaire and the Apollo Profile assess 36 and 34 scales respectively. A benefit of narrowband tools is their ability to assess at a very specific level within the person. This enables a more valid prediction of workplace performance. However, broadband personality tools have their own advantage which is that because they contain more questions per scale/trait – reliability for each scale/trait is generally higher than with narrowband tools.  We’ll discuss reliability and validity in detail later in the course.

Note: Some personality assessments were not developed specifically for workplace assessment but are nonetheless used in workplace selection and development (e.g., 16PF, MMPI) whilst other questionnaires were developed specifically to be used in workplace selection and development (e.g., Apollo, OPQ32, Hogan Personality Inventory)

Interest Questionnaires
As the name implies, these tools assess the respondent’s interest in various aspects of the working world in a structured and meaningful way and are therefore typically used in career counselling. They are also used in selection assessment to ascertain whether the candidate will comfortably fit the particular organisation they are applying to work in.  For example, if I am interested in doing structured work in a well structured organisation I may not be very happy working for an organisation which values spontaneity and creativity. Some personality assessments also report on the respondent’s interest by way of “derived scales”.  Derived scales come about by way of predicting statistically what the respondent would score in particular areas (such as interest) based on how they responded to the general personality assessment. An example of an Interest Questionnaire is the Strong Interest Inventory.  An example of a personality questionnaire that uses derived interest scales is the Identity Self-perception Questionnaire.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE.  VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Online Psychometric Test Mini-Course: Lesson 1

Monday, June 14th, 2010

Welcome to our first session in Psychometric Testing!

In this first session we will explore the following:

1. What is a psychometric test?
2. A brief background of psychometric testing.

What is a psychometric test?  How are they developed?

Let’s start out by telling you what a psychometric test is not!

You may have come across various different online tests.  Not all of them are psychometric.  Whether they are or not will depend on how they were designed, for what purpose and what they intend to measure. For example, you may have come across the Thematic Apperception Test or the Rorshach Inkblot Test. These tests are used mainly in clinical settings. The client is asked to look at scenes or pictures and to articulate what they see. Such tests are supposed to be able to assess the unconscious mind. However, interpretation is not as objective as we would like to see in occupational testing and assessment.  Furthermore, what the client “sees” may be based on external factors such as culture, upbringing or season of the year. 

Psychometric Tests are different! They are defined as quantitative (numerical) assessments of one or more psychological (in the head) attributes. So, psychometric tests are used to assess in a quantitative way things like numerical reasoning skills, verbal aptitude, extroversion, conscientiousness and so on.  That alone does not make a test psychometric of course. In order to be psychometric the test must have been designed to be:

1. Administered in a standardised manner
2. Scored in a standardised manner
3. Interpreted in a standardised manner
4. Constructed according to psychometric principles

You’ll see later how important standardisation is throughout the use of psychometric tools.  In fact standardisation is a critical element of all scientific HR processes.

As for being constructed according the psychometric principles, what we mean here is that the test must have gone through each aspect of a very scientific development process.  It is not good enough to simply write down a few questions, produce a flashy report and start selling a new test!  This is the process it must go through:

a. Development of a rationale behind the test that is supported by research. For example – if I decide to develop a new test of extroversion, the scientific research literature and models must inform the design of my questions and the aspects of extroversion that I attempt to assess.

b. Next I need to write some experimental questions. At this stage I’ll write more questions than I intend to have in the final version of my test because I am prepared to throw some out based on feedback.

c. Now I’ll find a sample of people (who represent the group I am designing the test for) and I’ll ask this sample to complete my experimental test. In other words, I pilot my test.

d. Next I head back to my office and assess the responses and how they relate to each other statistically.  At this stage I am running item analysis to test that similar questions (items) are indeed related to each other in the way I would expect. More on this later. The point to grasp now is that this is an iterative process. Things won’t be perfect the first time around. Based on the statistics I’ll need to remove some questions, refine others and then go back to point C. I’ll do this again and again until I am happy with the statistics I get at point D!

e. Now that my test questions are performing well I need to enter a standardisation phase. Here, a larger group of people will complete my test and that will show me where people tend to score on the test. This group will become my benchmark or norm group later and add meaning to the scores of future test-takers.

f. The next question is “Does my new test actually assess what it is supposed to assess and/or does it predict something meaningful?”. As an example, you would expect my numerical reasoning test to predict success of accountant trainees. This stage is called Validation, we are assessing the validity of the test or whether it is fit for purpose.

g. Now, we all know from science classes at school that all good experiments end with a write-up!  That’s exactly what we do at the final stage of psychometric test development. We need to write up all of the above stages in a long document which is called the test’s technical manual. It is this manual that prospective clients with reputable training in psychometrics will consult before purchasing a psychometric test.  So, if your test publisher tells you they don’t have such a document, it might be wise to stay away from them. On the other hand – do expect to pay for the manual. Some publishers will offer them free of charge but others will require a fee.

Based on the above, hopefully you can see that developing tests well takes time and effort. It is for this reason that good tests are usually not cheap! Not only that.  The test is not static. People change, norms change and so validities may even change. The publisher cannot put the test on the shelf and forget as if it were a book they wrote years ago. This is why usually clients will pay a fee per test report or per candidate whenever they use the test.  If you are attracted by free or very cheap internet-based tests you could be making a costly mistake. Particularly if you plan using the test in candidate selection for your business. 

What is the history of psychometric testing?

Let’s give you a very brief background at this stage. Something that I find interesting being based in Asia and often working with Western-developed tests is the role Asia has in the development of psychometric tests for assessment at work!  If it had not been for the Chinese Cultural Revolution, China may actually be far more advanced in this field than the West because China certainly was testing for individual differences before such testing was recorded in Europe or the USA. The Chinese government believed it important to test for entrants to the Civil Service more than 4000 years ago!  However, at the time of the Cultural Revolution, this sort of assessment was outlawed as being too bourgeoisie.

This paved the way for the West to develop individual difference assessment and one of the first names to crop up in textbooks is French Psychologist Binet who around 1905 coined the term IQ. His application of testing was of course more related to education.  The World Wars saw an increase in and marked use of psychological assessment for selection decisions. Here people were forcibly recruited into the army through conscription.  The arduous task for decision-makers was where best to place these newcomers. The Army Alpha and Army Beta tests assisted in answering this question.  Although successful for war-time placements, the same tests used in peacetime by commercial organisations gained a poor reputation as they worked less well (they were not designed for this application).

Nowadays tests are used extensively in organisations to assist in selection and development decisions as well as team-building, career guidance and performance appraisal. Reputable test publishers go out of their way to assess their tests and ensure they are free from bias and that they work to do the job they were designed to do. Tests are useful decision-making tools although they should never be used on their own.  You’ll find out why later.   One of the biggest problems we face in Asia is an influx of poorly designed tests along with non-psychologist distributors who know little about psychology and psychometrics. In this course you’ll learn more about this, how to spot good from bad and above all you’ll gain the confidence to make competent decisions about using the best psychometric test for your purpose.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE.  VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Personality Test Accreditation – Live Online – Psychologist Facilitator

Friday, May 7th, 2010
Online Training in Psychometric Tests

Online Training in Psychometric Tests

Asia-based Psychometric Test distributor PsyAsia International has announced that they will begin offering a live online training and accreditation program for the Apollo Profile from 1-4 June. The training will be run by an experienced business psychologist who is accredited with the Apollonean Institute to accredit users of this personality test.

One of the major benefits of Apollo over other personality assessments is that it compares the candidate’s scores on each of its 34 business personality scales to those who have been rated as excellent. Different comparison groups are available which means the client can compare their candidate(s) with excellent sales employees, call centre staff, supervisors, leaders and so on.  Most personality assessments compare candidates with the average person rather than excellence and hence this makes Apollo a rarity as well as a highly-valid tool.

PsyAsia International has been offering world-class training in Asia since 2002. The company only uses fully qualified and registered organisational psychologists to ensure quality and competence. This means that PsyAsia’s psychologists typically have as much training as a medical doctor, not to mention the hours of professional development they are required to undergo each year!  PsyAsia added online training to their repertoire in 2008 and followed this with their first live online training course at the end of 2009 – the Psychometric Test Administration Course.

The test administration course follows the British Psychological Society’s syllabus for their Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing and allows the attendee to request that PsyAsia also assess them for the BPS Certificate in Occupational Test Administration.  Training runs over 3 consecutive daily sessions of about 70-80 minutes, starting at 5pm Singapore/Hong Kong time which is 9am UCT/GMT. Each session is recorded and attendees can log-into PsyAsia’s online learning centre to view them as well as to chat with other attendees and post questions in the interactive forum.

The online training for the Apollo Profile will follow a similar format to the company’s Live Online Psychometric Test Administration Course. Apollo training will run over 4 consecutive daily sessions. There will be some pre-course work along with homework and a final piece of post-course work. Attendees without a background in psychometric testing will also need to complete the test administration course but there is no additional fee for this.

PsyAsia team member Cynthia Wong was asked to comment on who she thought would benefit from the training.

“Anybody who is interested in using a top-rate personality assessment such as the Apollo Profile will definitely benefit.  This assessment has numerous uses which include recruitment/selection, development, team-building and career coaching.  Moreover, those who may find it difficult or inconvenient to attend our face-to-face training in Asia now have an option to receive the same training and accreditation online.”  said Ms. Wong.

Registration is now open for the June Apollo Profile sessions.  Due to the online nature, attendees don’t need to be based in Asia. All training is conducted in English so registration is open to anybody who is able to make the time slots and credit cards are accepted. To register, simply follow the links on the course page at: http://www.psyasia.com/apollo_profile_accreditation_course.php

If you would like to find out more about the Apollo Profile, please see here: http://www.psyasia.com/personality_tests_apollo.php

You may also be interested in attending the free Apollo Profile webinar from Jim Bowden, the publisher, on 17 May.  Full details at http://webinars.psyasia.com

Apollo Profile Personality Test Webinar

Apollo Profile Personality Test Webinar

Types of Bias in Psychometric Test Translation

Friday, January 15th, 2010

Types of Bias in Psychometric Test Translation

With the demand and need for psychological tests increasing in various different cultures and countries, there has been much greater awareness regarding some of the issues that are associated with the development or adaptation of tests to be used in contexts and situations that may be different from which the test was developed for. This article focuses on one of the key aspects of translating tests, the types of bias that can occur.

When utilizing the test in a new cultural group, it is not quite as simple as directly translating the test, administering it and then comparing the results for its validity. There are a number of issues that need to be considered such as whether the area assessed with the test applies to the new culture or whether is may be biased towards that group and whether what is assessed by the test also has similar behavioral indicators? These are just some of the potential areas where bias can be found in the translation of tests and affect the validity of the test being utilized in the new context.

Van der Vijer & Hambleton (1996) differentiates between three distinct types of bias that may affect the validity of tests that have been adapted for different cultural contexts and these are construct bias, method bias and item bias.

Construct bias occurs when the construct (e.g. personality) that is measured by the test displays significant differences between the original culture for which it was developed and the new culture where it is going to be utilized. These differences can occur in the way that the construct was formulated and developed as well as in the relevant behaviors that are associated with the construct. It is critical to examine whether the underlying theory of the test is subject to construct bias and this can be examined through the studies examining the construct and its associated behaviors in the context that it will be utilized in. If there are significant differences found in these studies, it may indicative that there is construct bias. Major revisions may be required to overcome this bias. If not, the validity of the test will be affected.

Method bias refers to factors or issues related to the administration of the test that may affect the validity of the test. Examples of areas that method bias can occur include social desirability, acquiescence response styles, the conditions in which the test was conducted and the motivation of the respondents. Across cultures, there potentially can be differences that can occur in these areas and these can affect the way that the respondents answer the items in the test. This potentially may lead to differences between found that can be erroneously attributed to cultural differences when in fact, these differences are the result of differences in the administration procedures. As a result, it is threat to the validity of tests that have been adapted for use in new cultures. Test developers also not only need to focus on the adaptation of the test itself but also need to be aware of issues regarding the implementation of the test in a new context.

Item bias is another source of bias that can occur in the translation of tests and these refer to biases that occur with the items in the test. This is usually the result of either poor translation choices for items or due to culturally inappropriate translations. For example, the phrase “kick the bucket” is essentially a phrase that referring to passing away in the Western context and is commonly known by most people in that culture; unfortunately, this phrase would have no meaning for people from cultures without any prior experience with that phrase. In this manner, a literal translation of that phrase would be a poor translation as it does not convey the correct meaning of the item. The items in the test need to be culturally equivalent, where the meaning of the items needs to be correctly translated so as to maintain the validity of the test in the new cultural context.

These are some of the biases that may occur during the translation of tests. Test developers will need to be aware of the sources of bias and take the appropriate measures to avoid these biases.

References:

Van der Vijer, F. and Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Translating tests: some practical guidelines. European Psychologist, 1, 89-99.

Psychometric Training in Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and China
If you are serious about using psychometric tests properly then we recommend joining PsyAsia International’s Psychometric Assessment at Work Course which leads to a certificate of competence in Occupational Testing Level A and Level B from the British Psychological Society. The Course is run publically in Singapore and Hong Kong or in-house anywhere.
More details about BPS Level A and B in Singapore and Hong Kong

Online Psychometric Training – Worldwide
Alternatively, you might be interested in introductory Online Psychometric Test Training presented live by a registered psychologist. PsyAsia is offering a special fee of just US$12 for anybody who registers for the February online psychometric training course!
More details about online psychometric test training

 
  • Recent Posts

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Archives

  •   Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape. Offenders will be detected and reported to their webhost, ISP and local government