Validation of a Computerized Adaptive Version of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP)
This is a validation study of a computerized adaptive (CAT) version of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) conducted with 413 undergraduates who completed the SNAP twice, 1 week apart. Participants were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 retest groups: (a) paper-and-pencil (P&P) SN...
| Publicado en: | Psychological Assessment Vol. 17; no. 1; pp. 28 - 44 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
American Psychological Association
March 2005
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=507973040&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 507973040 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 10403590 POL jtl: Psychological Assessment issn: 10403590 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: March 2005 vid: 17 iid: 1 pid: 34 pub: American Psychological Association artinfo: ui: 507973040 10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.28 ppf: 28 ppct: 16 formats: tig: atl: Validation of a Computerized Adaptive Version of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) aug: au: Simms, Leonard J. Clark, Lee Anna su: Test validity Personality tests Psychodiagnostics Computer software sug: subj: Test validity Personality tests Psychodiagnostics Computer software ab: This is a validation study of a computerized adaptive (CAT) version of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) conducted with 413 undergraduates who completed the SNAP twice, 1 week apart. Participants were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 retest groups: (a) paper-and-pencil (P&P) SNAP, (b) CAT, (c) P&P/CAT, and (d) CAT/P&P. With number of items held constant, computerized administration had little effect on descriptive statistics, rank ordering of scores, reliability, and concurrent validity, but was preferred over P&P administration by most participants. CAT administration yielded somewhat lower precision and validity than P&P administration, but required 36% to 37% fewer items and 58% to 60% less time to complete. These results confirm not only key findings from previous CAT simulation studies of personality measures but extend them for the 1st time to a live assessment setting. Reprinted by permission of the publisher. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|