Continuous Norming Approaches: A Systematic Review and Real Data Example.

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Assessment Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1177/10731911241260545
Julian Urban, Vsevolod Scherrer, Anja Strobel, Franzis Preckel
{"title":"Continuous Norming Approaches: A Systematic Review and Real Data Example.","authors":"Julian Urban, Vsevolod Scherrer, Anja Strobel, Franzis Preckel","doi":"10.1177/10731911241260545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Norming of psychological tests is decisive for test score interpretation. However, conventional norming based on subgroups results either in biases or require very large samples to gather precise norms. Continuous norming methods, namely inferential, semi-parametric, and (simplified) parametric norming, propose to solve those issues. This article provides a systematic review of continuous norming. The review includes 121 publications with overall 189 studies. The main findings indicate that most studies used simplified parametric norming, not all studies considered essential distributional assumptions, and the evidence comparing different norming methods is inconclusive. In a real data example, using the standardization sample of the Need for Cognition-KIDS scale, we compared the precision of conventional, semi-parametric, and parametric norms. A hierarchy in terms of precision emerged with conventional norms being least precise, followed by semi-parametric norms, and parametric norms being most precise. We discuss these findings by comparing our findings and methods to previous studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":8577,"journal":{"name":"Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"10731911241260545"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911241260545","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Norming of psychological tests is decisive for test score interpretation. However, conventional norming based on subgroups results either in biases or require very large samples to gather precise norms. Continuous norming methods, namely inferential, semi-parametric, and (simplified) parametric norming, propose to solve those issues. This article provides a systematic review of continuous norming. The review includes 121 publications with overall 189 studies. The main findings indicate that most studies used simplified parametric norming, not all studies considered essential distributional assumptions, and the evidence comparing different norming methods is inconclusive. In a real data example, using the standardization sample of the Need for Cognition-KIDS scale, we compared the precision of conventional, semi-parametric, and parametric norms. A hierarchy in terms of precision emerged with conventional norms being least precise, followed by semi-parametric norms, and parametric norms being most precise. We discuss these findings by comparing our findings and methods to previous studies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
持续规范方法:系统回顾与真实数据示例。
心理测验的常模对测验分数的解释起着决定性的作用。然而,传统的基于分组的常模法要么会导致偏差,要么需要非常大的样本才能收集到精确的常模。连续常模法,即推断常模法、半参数常模法和(简化的)参数常模法,提出了解决这些问题的方法。本文对连续常模进行了系统综述。综述包括 121 篇出版物,共计 189 项研究。主要研究结果表明,大多数研究使用了简化参数规范化方法,并非所有研究都考虑了基本的分布假设,而且比较不同规范化方法的证据并不确定。以认知需要-儿童量表的标准化样本为例,我们比较了传统标准、半参数标准和参数标准的精确度。在精确度方面,我们发现了一个层次结构,即传统标准的精确度最低,其次是半参数标准,而参数标准的精确度最高。通过将我们的研究结果和方法与之前的研究进行比较,我们对这些发现进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment
Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
86
期刊介绍: Assessment publishes articles in the domain of applied clinical assessment. The emphasis of this journal is on publication of information of relevance to the use of assessment measures, including test development, validation, and interpretation practices. The scope of the journal includes research that can inform assessment practices in mental health, forensic, medical, and other applied settings. Papers that focus on the assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological functioning, personality, and psychopathology are invited. Most papers published in Assessment report the results of original empirical research, however integrative review articles and scholarly case studies will also be considered.
期刊最新文献
Testing a Multidimensional Factor Structure of the Self-Control Scale. Validation of the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness Scale in a Sample of Transgender and Gender-Diverse Adults. Measurement Invariance of the First Years Inventory (FYIv3.1) Across Age and Sex for Early Detection of Autism in a Community Sample of Infants. Completion Rates of Smart Technology Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) in Populations With a Higher Likelihood of Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory: Psychometric Properties and Symptom Comparisons in Women With and Without Brain Injuries Due to Intimate Partner Violence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1