A quasi-experimental assessment of the effect of computerizing noncognitive paper-and pencil measurements: a test of measurement equivalence.
Previous studies have provided evidence to question the equivalence of data gathered by different administration modes and to suggest that noncognitive instruments validated for paper-and-pencil administration may not be valid for computerized administration. In this study, a series of analyses of...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Applied Psychology Vol. 80; pp. 643 - 652 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
American Psychological Association
December 1995
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| Sumario: | Previous studies have provided evidence to question the equivalence of data gathered by different administration modes and to suggest that noncognitive instruments validated for paper-and-pencil administration may not be valid for computerized administration. In this study, a series of analyses of the variance–covariance matrices tested the measurement equivalence of data collected from paper-and-pencil and computerized formats. Four work-related noncognitive psychological measures were tested in this study. There was no evidence that administration mode had an effect on measurement equivalence. Reprinted by permission of the publisher. |
|---|