JEDNAKOST PROFILA DOBIJENIH RAČUNARSKI PODRŽANIM I KLASIČNIM MODALITETOM MMPI-202

Bojan Janičić

doi:10.19090/pp.2015.3.311-333

Autori

Bojan Janičić Odsek za psihologiju, Filozofski fakultet, Univerzitet u Novom Sadu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19090/pp.2015.3.311-333

Ključne reči:

MMPI-202, računarski podržano testiranje, jednakost merenja, iskustvena ekvivalencija, sličnost profila

Apstrakt

Sa sve većom primenom računarski administriranih testova javlja se problem jednakosti merenja klasičnom i računarski podržanom formom. Ispitivanja ekvivalencije računarski podržanog i modaliteta papir-olovka obično uključuju i ispitivanje uticaja individualnih razlika i varijabli kao što su računarsko iskustvo i računarska anksioznost. Dosadašnja istraživanja dala su nekonzistentne rezultate. Cilj ovog istraživanja je bio da utvrdi da li postoje razlike u profilima ispitanika dobijenim pomoću računarski podržane i klasične verzije MMPI-202. Takođe, cilj ovog istraživanja je bio da ispita uticaj pola, starosti, nivoa obrazovanja, računarskog iskustva i računarske anksioznosti jednakost profila ispitanika na računarskom i klasičnom modalitetu ovog testa. Nije utvrđeno postojanje razlika u profilima ispitanika koje se mogu pripisati modalitetu testiranja.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Reference

American Psychological Association (1986). Guidelines for computer-based tests and interpretations. Washington, DC: APA.

Barbeite, F. G., & Weiss, E. M. (2004). Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an Internet sample: Testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 1–15.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(03)00049-9

Bartram, D., & Bayliss, R. (1984).Automated testing: Past, present and future. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 57, 221–237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1984.tb00164.x

Biro, M. (1995). Dijagnostička procena ličnosti – MMPI-202. Novi Sad: Futura publikacije i Filozofski fakultet.

British Psychological Society (1999). Guidelines for the development and use of computerbased assessments. Leicester: British Psychological Society.

Brosnan, M. J. (1998). The impact of psychological gender, gender-related perceptions, significant others, and the introducer of technology upon computer anxiety in students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 18, 63–78.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/lvhh-epgb-ae7j-wev8

Bugbee, A. C. Jr. (1996). The equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computer-based testing. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28, 282–290.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08886504.1996.10782166

Burke, M. J., & Normand, J. (1987). Computerized psychological testing: Overview and critique. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 1, 42–51.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.18.1.42

Butcher, J. N., &Williams, C. L. (2009). Personality assessment with the MMPI-2: Historical roots, international adaptations, and current challenges. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1, 105–135.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-0854.2008.01007.x

Butcher, J., Derksen, J., Sloore, H., & Sirigati, S. (2002). Objective personality assessment of people in diverse cultures: European adaptations of the MMPI-1. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 819–840.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(02)00186-9

Chua, S. L., Chen, D., & Wong, A. F. L. (1999). Computer anxiety and its correlates: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 609–623.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(99)00039-4

Colley, A., Gale, M., & Harris, T. (1994).Effects of gender role identity and experience on computer attitude components. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10, 129–137.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/8NA7-DAEY-GM8P-EUN5

Fajgelj, S. (2005). Psihometrija – Metod i teorija psihološkog merenja. Beograd: Centar za primenjenu psihologiju.

Finger, M. S., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Psychometric equivalence of the computer and booklet forms of the MMPI: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 11, 58–66.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.11.1.58

Groth-Marnat, G. (2003).Handbook of psychological assessment. New York: John Willey & Sons.

Heinssen, R. K. Jr., Glass, C. R., & Knight L. A. (1987). Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 3, 49–59.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0747-5632(87)90010-0

Honaker, L. (1988). The equivalency of computerized and conventional MMPI administration: A critical review. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 561–577.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(88)90081-5

Honaker, L. M., Harrell, T. H., & Buffaloe, J. D. (1988). Equivalency of Microtest computer MMPI administration for standard and special scales. Computers in Human Behavior, 4, 323–337.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0747-5632(88)90004-0

International Test Commission (2005). International guidelines on computer- based and Internet delivered testing. Retrieved from http://www.intestcom. org/upload/sitefiles/62.pdf

Janičić, B. (2004). Konstrukcija i evaluacija ekspertskog sistema za interpretaciju MMPI (Neobjavljena magistarska teza). Filozofski fakultet, Novi Sad.

Jennrich, R. I. (1970). An asymptotic χ2test for the equality of two correlation matrices. Journal of American Statistical Association, 65, 904–912.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1970.10481133

Johnson, D., & White, C. (1980). Effects of training on computerized test performance in the elderly. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 357–358.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.3.357

King, W. C., & Miles, E. W. (1995). A quasi-experimental assessment of the effect of computerizing noncognitive paper-and-pencil measurements: A test of measurement equivalence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 643–651.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.6.643