personality assessments
This week we are discussing personality assessments and validity scales within the field of psychology. In Unit 4, we learned that in psychometrics, validity means an estimate of how well a test can measure what it implied to measure within a specific context (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018). Meanwhile, a validity scale, within the scope of personality assessments, is defined as a subscale of a test that is designed to assist in judging how honest the test taker responded to the responses/items, carelessness, deliberate efforts to deceive, and/or unintentional misunderstanding (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018).
An example of a validity scale is the TRIN scale. This scale was developed to recognize acquiescent and non-acquiescent response patterns. This scale consists of twenty-three pairs of items that are worded in the opposite form of each other throughout to show consistency in responding (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018). Another example of a validity scale is VRIN. This scale was developed to recognize indiscriminate response patterns. The VRIN, like the TRIN, is made up of item pairs, testing for consistency throughout by developing item pairs that are worded opposite or in a similar form (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018).
When looking for support to AERA, Standard 10.12 states, ” In psychological assessment, the interpretation of test scores or patterns of test battery results should consider other factors that may influence a particular testing outcome. Where appropriate, a description of such factors, and an analysis of the alternative hypotheses or explanations regarding what may have contributed to the pattern of results should be included in the report). While this standard does not blatantly say the word “validity scales,” they are referenced as it describes using specific tests and measurements to ensure the test taker is not intentionally or otherwise influencing and skewing the results/data. I believe that the use of validity scales can be beneficial as it provides insight into whether the data you have collected is biased, skewed, etc. However, in my opinion, one should proceed with caution with validity scales, as it is not an exact science, and it should be taken with “a grain of salt,” so to speak. At the same time, it could be a contributing factor, and it is probably not the determining factor.
While validity scales can be helpful, they have both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage of a validity scale is that it can provide insight into how carefully, honestly, and diligently a test taker responded to test items. However, a disadvantage of validity scales is that an assessor relies too heavily on the validity scale results. With that, the data and results of the personality assessment can also be skewed (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018). Based on all of the information provided, I believe that validity scales should be used to provide a proposition on the data and test-taker. When taking personality assessments, it is human nature for an individual to want to be perceived by others in the best way and not always the most honest way. Using validity scales can provide insight as to how accurate we should assume the results of the personality assessments can be. However, just like with any other test, we should not solely rely on the validity scales to provide the most accurate depiction of the situation at either end of the spectrum.
References
- (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. Psychological Testing, and Assessment. [Capella]. Retrieved from https://capella.vitalsource.com/#/books/1260303195/