Uploaded by David Batten

PSYC371- Exam Notes

PSYC371 Exam Notes
Psychological tests = used to make decisions or promote self-understanding, by providing
more accurate information about a person than what you could get without the test.
Ability to select, administer, score, interpret and report on the results are the main skills
needed for being a psychologist.
o 1890- First time ‘mental test’ was used by James McKeen Cattell
o 1905 – Binet produced intelligence test for children in French schools for special
education classes.
o 1916 – Terman produced Stanford- Binet Intelligence test (still used today)
o 1917 – Woodworth produces first personality assessment
o 1921 – Rorschach develops Inkblot projective test (based on psychoanalysis – Freud)
o 1939 – Wechsler develops adult intelligence test (WAIS)
o 1942 – MMPI developed
o 1957 – Raymond Cattell develops performance motivation test
o 1968 – Mischel critiques personality assessments
o 1988 – Ziskin and Faust challenge use of psychological tests in court
Key Players:
o Alfred Binet
 Intelligence testing of children for special needs classes in France
 Stanford-Binet still in use.
 Concept of “Mental Age”
o Stanley Porteus
 Testing with Australian Aboriginal children
 No need for English fluency
 Maze like intelligence test
o David Wechsler
 Adult intelligence test
 Developed in inpatient facility to assist with differential diagnosis
 Deviation IQ instead of Mental age
o Hathaway and McKinley
 Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)
 566 items
o Rorschach
 Projective test
 Inkblot test
 Most widely used projective test
o Murray
 Projective Test
 Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)
 Second most widely used projective test
Characteristics of Psychological Tests
o Sample of behaviour that is used to make inferences about the individual within a
social context
 Criterion referencing = what effective behaviour looks like in the situation
(thus the person has to meet a certain criteria – e.g. 50/100 = PASS in an
 Norm referencing = performance of an individual related to the group norms
from which they came (e.g. normal for a small child to be afraid of the dark.
Not normal for an adult to be.)
o Objective procedures
 Standardised measures of scoring, administration, time limits etc
 No intentional or unintentional bias
 Requires inter-rater reliability and validity
o Quantitative measures
 Scoring as opposed to “ideas”
o Provides objective reference point for evaluating behaviour
 Criterion referencing v norm referencing
 Allows for a comparison between the individual and everyone else.
o Must meet a number of criteria to be consider a useful information gathering device
 Psychometric properties
 Scoring
 Accuracy and reproducible test
Limitations of psychological tests:
o Only a tool – doesn’t have all the answers
o Used to attempt to capture a hypothetical construct – e.g. intelligence testing only
really assesses one’s academic intelligence, not their real life, worldly intelligence.
o Need to be constantly evaluated and refined to stay current, else they become
o Can be disadvantageous to minority groups (e.g. English literacy problems, cultural
context for learning etc).
Testing = a measure that only examines a specific construct
Assesment = holistic approach (multiple factors), of which testing is a part (also observation,
interviews etc)
Testing and assessment by ClinPsychs, EducationPsychs, ForensicPsychs,
OrganisationalPsychs, Neuropsychs
All tests are similar, but their differences are in the areas of :
o Reponses required – self-report, interview, performance tests etc
o Administration – number of people who can administer the test is restricted for
some tests (ClinPsych v Neuropsych)
o Frame of reference for comparing performance – Norm referencing v criterion
Best Practice:
o Determine whether test is needed (not always suitable or applicable)
o Select appropriate test
o Administer test
o Score Test
o Interpret Test
o Report on findings
o Keep records
Code of Ethics from APS
o 3 broad principles
 The rights and dignity of people and peoples
 Propriety
 Integrity
NHMRC national statement of research ethics:
o Values and Principles
o Risk and benefit
o Discomfort and inconvenience
o Low risk and negligible risk
o Consent
Cultural differences:
o Culture goes beyond language
o Tests need to be (as much as possible) culture neutral – Culture Fair Test
o Tests need to be unbiased
Interpreting test scores:
o Raw scores usually need interpretation or transforming
o Criterion referenced scores v Norm referenced scores will have different
Transforming scores from norm referenced:
o Usually done by transforming scores into
o Z-score
o T-score (personality tests)
o STEN score – 10 point scale M=5.5 SD=2
o Percentile (not the same as a percentage)
o Stanine Scale (Standard Nine) percentile groups
Other methods of scoring:
o Difficulty level to score ability tests (Logit Scale)
o Age/Grade equivalents
o Expectancy Tables
o Rule of thumb:
 Check source of norms is generalizable to your situation (contextualise)
 Are norms relevant to situation?
 Known susceptibility of norms being culturally specific?
 How is the test scores being used?
 Can results be checked a different way?
 Explain why you used the norms you did.
o Random Sampling means norms are indicative of the general population
o Flynn effect – global IQ is rising – thus tests need to be re-normed.
Reliability = is the test dependable time and again i.e. will the test keep getting the same
result if tested across time.
o Systematic error = systematic changes that can be predicted and therefore
compensated for (i.e. phone battery dying over a period of time, and carrying a
o Unsystematic error = unpredictable changes that cannot be compensated for (i.e.
dropping phone and smashing screen is unpredictable and you can’t compensate for
Domain-Sampling Model:
o Based on generalizability theory and classical test theory
o A way of thinking about the composition of a psychological test that sees the test as
a representative sample of the larger domain of possible items that could be
included in the test
o Idea is that if a person gets a certain score on a test, then we assume that this score
would’ve been obtained if the samples of the items were put to the person
o We expect some variation due to sampling, however the mean of the scores would
tell us the person’s true score (as called in Classical Test Theory).
o Test-retest reliability
o Inter-rater reliability
o Generalizability
Reliability Scores:
o Observed Score = True Score + Error Score Variance
o Reliability coefficient = the proportion of observed score variance that is due to true
score variance.
o Reliability scores range from r=1(perfect reliability) r=.5 (50% reliability) r=0 (no
Measures of reliability:
o Equivalent forms
o Internal consistency
o Test-retest
o Inter-scorer (like HSC drama marking panel)
Reliability Coefficients:
o Three main methods of calculating:
 Equivalent forms (correlation between equivalent forms of the test – two
versions of the test – see how well they correlate.)
 Split Half (Split the test in half and then correlate the halves – SpearmanBrown Formula)
 Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha – test each item as if it were a
subtest and then correlate each “subtest” against all the others.)
 Good internal consistency = .7 or above.
 Best item = lowest alpha
 Worst item = highest alpha
Sources of Error:
o Test Construction (item content or sampling, format)
o Test Administration (test environment, examiner-related variables eg presence,
demeanour, rapport etc)
o Test Taker (Human fallibility, time, practice effects)
o Test Scoring & Interpretation (human error in scoring, less applicable in computer
Standard Error of Measurement – think of like a confidence interval or margin of error
Validity = does the test measure what it’ supposed to measure.
Without validity, the items are meaningless.
Construct validity = does the test measure the construct effectively (for example, does an
intelligence test measure intelligence?) Strong theory = strong validity. Test development
helps develop theory and theory helps test development.
o Cronbach and Meehl developed the Multi-trait Multi-method (MTMM) matrix as a
tool to assess construct validity by setting a criteria for what correlations should be
large and which should be small in terms of the psychological theory of the
constructs. (The table with the triangles!)
o The main idea is that the measures of the same construct should relate more
strongly than measures of different constructs using the same or different measures.
Content validity = validity of the content of the items in the test (FACE VALIDITY – can you
guess what the test is asking about based on the items.)
o Good for achievement testing
o Not overly psychometrically sound – sometimes you don’t want he test taker to
know what you’re getting at.
o Culture has a big impact on judgments concerning the content validity of tests and
test items. (e.g content of an Australian history test is going to be more more valid
as a measure of Australian intelligence around history, than it would be in America.)
Predictive Validity = how well does the test predict how a person will perform in something
else (for example, how well does an aptitude test predict how well a child will do at school;
or how well does the DASS21 predict how severely depressed/anxious/stressed a person is?)
o Criterion is external to the test itself
o Criterion scores obtained after some time interval from test scores = Predictive of
something in the future (Kindy aptitude test vs HSC)
o Sensitivity = How good is the test at identifying what we want to know? How many
are predicted to have the trait (eg how many people are depressed?)
o Specificity = How well does the test discriminate? How many are predicted to not
have the trait? (eg how many people are not depressed?)
Concurrent Validity = both the test and the criterion are being assessed at the same time
(e.g. testing a new depression/anxiety/stress scale against the DASS – you’re assessing a)
content validity (is the new scale assessing D/A/S AND b) you’re assessing whether a person
is depressed/anxious/stressed.) Example DASS21 and K10.
Incremental Validity = the degree to which an additional predictor explains something about
the criterion measure that’s over and above that explained by the predictors already in use
(for example – HSC results being explained by not only intelligence of students, but also by
their school, socio-economic status etc. This is on top of their HSC result.) – Related to
multiple regression.
Factor Analysis = calculated all possible correlation coefficients between all possible pairs of
o Exploratory factor analysis = no hypothesis, exploring possible factors
o Confirmatory factor analysis = hypothesis that you are trying to confirm.
Can be used to determine both convergent and divergent validity (how alike or
different two constructs are)
Decision theory = the simplest decision that can be made with a test is when it is used to
decide which of two categories a person belongs to (eg male v female, mentally disordered v
not mentally disordered, gambler v not gambler).
o Can lead to errors though (for example):
 Valid positive: Looks like depressed – is depressed
 Valid negative: Doesn’t look depressed – is not depressed
 False positive: Looks depressed – is not depressed
 False negative: Doesn’t look depressed – is depressed.
Types of items include:
o Problems that need to be solved (attribute = ability)
o Questions about typical behaviour (attribute = personality characteristics)
o Expression of sentiments (attribute = attitudes)
o Statement of preference (attribute = interest)
Rational-Empirical Approach = a way of constructing the test that relies on both reasoning
about what is known about the construct you are testing for AND evaluating the data about
how the test items behave when administered to a sample.
o Rational-Empirical = Reasoning about the construct + data
 Need to have a reason for including the items (for example DASS items are
all to do with symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress – no random
ones.) Therefore good face validity.
Empirical Approach = a way of constructing the test that relies on collecting an devaluating
data about how each of the items from a pool of items discriminates (via correlations)
between groups of respondents who are thought to either show or not show the attribute in
question (criterion).
o Empirical = Data + Correlation with criterion of interest.
 MMPI was developed using empirical approach
 Item was selected for inclusion if it could discriminate between
groups that showed the trait, and those that couldn’t.
o For example people with Schizophrenia apparently
endorsed the “I like riding horses” item???? Go figure!
o Pretty ridiculous reasoning for inclusion, thus most people
will use the rational-empirical approach, which uses a
theoretical understanding of the construct (eg
Schizophrenia) to guide and justify the inclusion or rejection
of items, and thus allow for the items to discriminate
between those with the attribute, and those without.
Specify attribute = clearly specify the attribute or characteristic
you’re looking at. (Construct/latent trait – denoted by theta 𝜃.
Literature search = If there’s already a test on it, that fits your
idea and attribute – don’t reinvent the wheel. Check Mental
Measurement Yearbook.
Measurement model = Nominal, ordinal or interval/ratio. Item
characteristic curve – where you have a) a discriminant
parameter (where the line switches direction) b) Difficulty
parameter – further along the line the harder the task is) and c)
Guessing parameter – how high above the x-axis the line starts
indicates how likely it is that with zero ability you could’ve
guessed and got that score.
- Classical test theory: mathematically expressed set of ideas that
measure psychological variables in a test (Observed score = true
score +error)
- Item Response Theory: specifies the functional relationship
between response in a test and the strength of the trait it’s
assessing. (Likert scale - the stronger the trait the higher the
Writing and Editing= clear and concise!!! Choose answer
Item analysis = Examining how each item behaves in relation to
the model. Best to use sample population first. Look at intercorrelations amongst items, corrected item total correlations
and Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted (Analysis of best and worst
performing items - Best item = lowest alpha, worst item =
highest alpha). Make sure you reduce social desirability bias.
Assessing reliability and validity = Reliability tested over time
(test-retest reliability) and Cronbach’s alpha. Validity – multiple
different methods (eg Multi-trait multi-method matrix or factor
Norms = Necessary if you want it to be published.
Representative sample needed. Info needed about age, gender
Publication = Publisher becomes responsible. Manual is written.
Put in Mental Measurements Yearbook.
Implicit theories = lay people’s theories of intelligence
Explicit theories = constructed by psychologists, based on empirical evidence
Not just an issue of IQ
Term ‘intelligence’ only came into play after the development of the Stanford-Binet test in
1905 (before that was called Mental Ability or Cognitive Ability).
Phrenology = study of the shape and size of the human skull and brain, as an indicator of
intelligence (ie big head = more brain)
ALFRED BINET (1857-1911):
o Tested children in France for special needs classes.
o Concept of ‘mental age’
o Test involved naming, comprehension, language and memory tasks.
o Assessed ‘global intelligence’ - represented by ability, judgment, memory and
abstract thinking.
o ‘Norm group’ looked at a comparison between mental age v chronological age.
o Asked “What does intelligence actually look like?”
o Contemporary of Binet
o Assessed ‘global intelligence’
o Looked at correlation and factor analysis
o Psychometric ‘g’
o Two factor model of intelligence – ‘g’ – global intelligence and ‘s’ – specific abilities
(mechanical, verbal, spatial and numerical).
o Terman reformed the Binet Intelligence test.
o Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (SB-5 is now being used).
o Terman brought in the idea of the intelligence quotient (Binet just used mental age,
compared to norms.)
o IQ=(Mental age/chronological age)X100
o Mean IQ=100 (no reason for it really), and SD=15 (average 1Q ranges from 85-115)
o Terman’s termites – longest running longitudinal study of 1000 children that were
considered ‘gifted’ (IQ over 140.) More intelligence = greater income, longevity and
better relationships.
David Wechsler (1896-1981)
o Initial interest was in adult psychiatric patients and using intelligence as part of
differential diagnosis.
o Believed that intelligence was about learning behaviours to be able to deal
effectively with your environment.
o Used deviation IQ – how many standard deviations above or below the mean
determines your level of intelligence.
o 4 parts to the test:
 Verbal comprehension
 Working memory
 Perceptual reasoning
 Processing speed
o Multifactor theory of intelligence (7 main mental abilities):
 Verbal comprehension
 Reasoning
 Perceptual speed
 Numerical ability
 Word fluency
 Associative memory
 Spatial visualisation
J.P. GUILFORD (1897-1987)
o First person to ask “What IS intelligence?”
o Rejected the idea of ‘g’
o Focussed on the ‘Structure of intellect’ model. SOI had 3 domains:
 Operations (types of mental processes)
 Convergent =focussing on one problem and finding it’s one answer
 Divergent = thinking more creatively and broadly about the problem
and how to solve it.
 Contents (types of stimuli to be processed)
 Products (types of information to be processed and stored)
PHILIP VERNON (1905-1987)
o Incorporated Spearman’s ‘g’ and Thurstone’s Primary mental abilities into a
hierarchical model of intelligence (similar to Bloom’s taxonomy).
o Believed there was a general ‘base’ of intelligence ‘g’, but then had multiple minor
factors that contributed to overall intelligence.
o Two factor theory – fluid and crystallised intelligence
 Fluid intelligence (Gf) = nonverbal, culture free basic mental capacity that
underpins abstract problem solving (essentially one’s general mental ability)
 Crystallised intelligence (Gc) = culture-specific/context specific knowledge
and intelligence acquired through life experiences
o 16PF test (16 personality factors)
o Culture-fair tests (where one’s culture does not inherently impact how well they
perform on a test – eg an Australian history test given to American students is not
culture fair.)
o Culture free tests are not really achievable (even direction of writing is culturally
specific to either left or right start readers.)
o All knowledge is inherently culturally specific.
o Extension of the Gf-Gc model to include other second order factors
 Gf – fluid intelligence
 Gc – crystallised intelligence
 Gv – visual processing
 Ga – auditory processing
 Gy – general memory and learning
 Gr – retrieval ability
 Gs – cognitive speed
 Gt – decision reaction time
Three Stratums:
 Stratum III – General Mental Ability
 Stratum II – Broad intellectual Abilities (Above)
 Stratum I – Large number of narrow abilities (bottom of the pyramid)
o General tests for Stratum II include:
 Differential Abilities Scale
 Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children
 Woodcock-Johnson Battery
o No test currently assesses all of Stratum II and I.
JEAN PIAGET (1896-1980)
o Looked at the development of intelligence instead of psychometrics
o Proposed that intelligence in children is due to the interaction between their
biological endowment and their environment.
o Four main stages of development:
 Sensorimotor (0-2 years)
 Preoperational (2-6 years)
 Concrete Operational (7-12 years)
 Formal Operational (12+ years)
o Intelligence = how material is processed by the brain
o PASS = Planning (Executive functioning), Attention-arousal (Attention span),
Simultaneous (Stimuli and understanding) and Successive (sequential information
and problem solving) (cognitive processing theory)
o Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) – Nagleiri.
o Multiple intelligences
o Intelligence based on functional areas of the brain, which find expression in a
cultural context.
o 8 Intelligences include:
 Linguistic
 Interpersonal
 Intrapersonal
 Bodily kinaesthetic
 Logical-Mathematical
 Naturalistic
 Musical
 Visuo-spatial
o Triarchic intelligence
 Componential (analytical)
 Experiential (creative)
 Contextual (pratical)
o Theoretical v practical intelligence - challenging the idea that book smarts > street
o Factor Analysis:
 Binet
 Stanford-Binet (Terman)
 Spearman
 Wechsler
 Thurstone
 Guilford
 Vernon
 Cattell
 CHC model
o Developmental:
 Piaget
o Information Processing:
 PASS (Nagleiri)
 CAS (Nagleiri)
 Gardner
 Sternberg
Aptitude is different to achievement
o Aptitude = potential/ability to succeed (fluid)
o Achievement = success/understand and knowledge of past learning (crystallised)
Group testing – GAMSAT – LSAT etc.
Psychoanalytic Approach
o Unconscious processes – no control over self.
o Basic needs drive behaviour
o Early experiences unconsciously affect us
o Freud’s Id (Desires) Ego (Reality) Superego (Morality)
 Rorschach inkblot test (1920)
 No objective scoring
 Hasn’t been revised since creation
 Scoring solely dependent on scorers subjective interpretation.
 Sentence completion
 Face validity easily manipulated
 Washington University Sentence Completion Test (1970)
 Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank (1950)
 Figure Drawing
 Draw-A-Person Test – serious lack of validity!!
 Auditory Projective Technique (BF Skinner) - total crap!
o Personality comes from you interactions with others – not in isolation
o Child learns to repeat behaviours that are praised, and don’t repeat those that
o Harry Stack Sullivan – therapist as participant observer – focus on ‘significant others’
- strange personality traits are just extensions of normal
o Interpersonal Circumplex
 Guttman
 Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI)
o Henry Murray – researching ‘normal’ people.
 Needs = underlying desires
 Presses = environment affects needs and drives behaviour.
 Diagnostic council.
 Adjective checklist
o Thematic Apperception Test (Murray and Morgan – 1930’s)
Multivariate (Trait) Approach
o Looks at what makes people individual.
o Oldest style (Greek humours)
o Allport first to formalise theory
o Cattell developed 16 personality factors
o Eysenck developed EPQ which assessed neuroticism, psychoticism and extraversion
o Costa and McCrae developed the Big 5 using factor analysis to determine number of
traits needed.
o Tests:
 16PF – Cattell (1956)
 EPI/ EPQ – Eysenck (1975)
 BIG FIVE – Costa and McCrae (1992)
Empirical Approach
o Looks at what makes people the same and how to predict their behaviour.
o Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)
 10 subscales:
 Hypochondria
 Depression
 Conversion Hysteria
 Psychopathic Deviation
 Masculinity/Femininity
 Paranoia
 Psychasthenia (anxiety)
 Schizophrenia
 Hypomania
 Social Introversion
 Criterion keying – doesn’t matter what it says, but what it’s getting at.
 Validity - Had a lie scale and Infrequency scale
Social Cognitive Approach
o Mischel (1968) – argued that psychoanalysis and trait approaches don’t take into
consideration the effect that one’s experiences can have on your personality.
 Context skills and adaptation
 Can develop new skills depending on the situation (how to eat dinner at
home vs with the Queen).
o Kelly (1955) – what makes people the same or different as a reflection of your own
 Repertory Grid
o Bandura (1982) – Self efficacy, self regulation and delayed gratification as indicators
of personality.
Positive Psychology
o Carl Rogers – Actual Self v Ideal self.
o Abraham Maslow – hierarchy of needs and self actualisation
o Martin Seligman – Strengths based approach – what is right with people not what is
wrong with them. Wellbeing, contentment, satisfaction, hope and optimisim.
o Self reports are main assessments.
Referral question
Case History Data
Clinical Interview
Mental Status Examination
Psychological Tests (Intelligence - Wechsler, Personality- MMPI/Rorschach,
Psychopathology- PAI, Depression and Anxiety – BDI/BAI/DASS21/42)
Psychological Report
Performance Appraisal
o Quantitative production counts (number of shoes sold)
o Qualitative production measures (number of shoes returned)
o Personnel information (absenteeism)
o Training proficiency (scores on training exams)
o Judgmental Data (supervisor ratings, customer ratings)
Supervisor Ratings
o Subjective and bias free
o Need to be aware of job requirements
Rating Scales
o Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)
 Never greets the customer to Always greets to customer. (Anchored end
o Behavioural Observation Scale
 Same as BARS but each item has a Likert frequency scale (Greet the
customer (Always, almost always, sometimes, rarely, never)
Theories of performance
o Task performance – core aspects of the job (can you do your job)
o Contextual performance – do you contribute to the company atmosphere (Total IT
geek might be great with computers, but have no social skills).
Personnel Selection
o Criterion of future employment – prediction from application
o False negatives and false positive common.
Employee charcteristics
o KSAO – Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, Other Characteristics
o Job analysis
o Equal Opportunity Employment
o Validity Generalisation League Table
 What are the best predictors for performance?
 Schmidt and Hunter found this combination:
 GMA + Work Sample
 GMA + Integrity Test
 GMA+ Structured Interview
o Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) 1983
 Tried to break down GMA into specialised fields for soldiers
 Turns out GMA only is the best indicator for success in any field.
o General Mental Ability tests:
 Wonderlic Personnel Test (1920)
Big 5 and Job Success
o Conscientiousness rates highest and predicts honesty
o Extraversion better for leadership roles and sales
o Openness to experience will be able to be trained better
o Agreeableness and Neuroticism more to do with work place culture.
Integrity tests – can’t use polygraph anymore.
Work attitudes – job satisfaction v organizational commitment v organizational justice
Fairly new field (1993 established in Australia as part of the APS)
Involves testifying in court as an expert witness and providing forensic assessments
Before presenting a forensic assessment in court it needs to be decided that:
o Evidence is necessary
o Evidence is admissible in court
 Evidence is required by the judge or jury to assist in decision making
 Person giving evidence must be suitably qualified
 Must present scientific evidence that is widely accepted in the scientific
Expert Witness must:
o Use psychologically and psychometrically sound tests and assessment techniques
o Draw conclusions based on a validated theory
o Weigh and qualify testimony based on empirical research and theory
o Know how to defend scientific basis of the procedure used for the assessment
 Commerically available tests
 Reliability coefficient of at least .80
 Use tests that are relevant to the legal issue involved
 Administered on standardised instructions
 Test is applicable to age, gender, intelligence etc
 If possible use test that provides a formula for scoring
 If possible, assess response style of person and score accordingly.
Setting for forensic assessment:
o Criminal
 Defence, prosecution, sentencing etc
o Civil
 Personal injury and compensation
o Family
 Custody
Main differences between Therapeutic and Forensic Assessments:
o Therapeutic:
 Client is assumed to be reliable
 Client employs therapist - Working with the therapist
 Seeking help
 Diagnosis and treatment of a problem
o Forensic:
 Client not assumed to be reliable
 Therapist employed by state or other (not client)
 Not seeking help – just assessing them objectively
 Diagnosis, but not treatment
 Legal presentation of results
Three main Assessment Techniques:
o Type 1 – test specifically designed for forensic assessment and designed to a egal
 MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool- Criminal Adjudication
o Type 2 – test not designed for forensic assessment/legal requirements but
constructs being measured have legal standards (eg psychopathy, malingering)
Type 3 – test are not developed for the use of forensic assessments, but have been
adopted to answer a legal question (eg intelligence tests)
Competency to stand trial:
o Competency Screening Test (1971)
 Sentence completion regarding legal proceedings
o MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool – Criminal Adjudication (1992)
 Functional abilities associated with the legal construct on competency to
stand trial
 Competence scales – Understanding, Reasoning, Appreciation
 Uses a scenario and questions to assess three competence scales.
o Risk Assessment/Prediction of Aggression or Dangerousness
 Clinical judgement
 Actuarial formula (more accurate)
 Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (1988)
 Static-99 (1999)
 Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (2005)
 Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol Version II (2003)
 Psychopathy Checklist- Revised Second Edition (2003) (Gold
standard for psychopath/antisocial personality forensic assessment)
Custody Evaluation
o Cognitive and personality tests used (WAIS-IV, WISC-IV, MMPI-2)
o Ackerman-Schoendorf Scales of Parental Evaluation of Custody (ASPECT) – only test
that assesses parental suitability for custody of children.
o Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) 1992.
 Focuses on deliberate distortions in self-presentation
 Highly reliable
o Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) 1996
 Aims to detect response bias, intentional faking and exaggeration of