学校心理学家如何在评估中解决努力、动机和诚实的问题?

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment Pub Date : 2023-05-20 DOI:10.1177/07342829231175938
Benjamin J. Lovett, Theresa M. Schaberg, Ara Nazmiyal, Laura M. Spenceley
{"title":"学校心理学家如何在评估中解决努力、动机和诚实的问题?","authors":"Benjamin J. Lovett, Theresa M. Schaberg, Ara Nazmiyal, Laura M. Spenceley","doi":"10.1177/07342829231175938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Data collected during psychoeducational evaluations can be compromised by response bias: clients not putting forth sufficient effort on tests, not being motivated to do well, or not being fully honest and careful when completing rating scales and contributing similar self-report data. Some of these problems apply to data from third-party informants as well. In the present study, we surveyed school psychologists about their approach to detecting, preventing, and reacting to apparent response bias. A sample of 297 school psychologists responded to at least one of four open-ended questions. We found that most participants only used informal techniques for detecting response bias (rather than specialized tests and embedded indices), relied on rewards or reinforcements to prevent response bias, and reacted to apparent response bias by noting it in their evaluation reports. However, a wide variety of other strategies were endorsed by smaller proportions of practitioners. We compare these results to results from similar surveys in neuropsychology, and discuss implications for applied practice as well as future research.","PeriodicalId":51446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","volume":"41 1","pages":"603 - 618"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Do School Psychologists Address Issues of Effort, Motivation, and Honesty During Evaluations?\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin J. Lovett, Theresa M. Schaberg, Ara Nazmiyal, Laura M. Spenceley\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07342829231175938\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Data collected during psychoeducational evaluations can be compromised by response bias: clients not putting forth sufficient effort on tests, not being motivated to do well, or not being fully honest and careful when completing rating scales and contributing similar self-report data. Some of these problems apply to data from third-party informants as well. In the present study, we surveyed school psychologists about their approach to detecting, preventing, and reacting to apparent response bias. A sample of 297 school psychologists responded to at least one of four open-ended questions. We found that most participants only used informal techniques for detecting response bias (rather than specialized tests and embedded indices), relied on rewards or reinforcements to prevent response bias, and reacted to apparent response bias by noting it in their evaluation reports. However, a wide variety of other strategies were endorsed by smaller proportions of practitioners. We compare these results to results from similar surveys in neuropsychology, and discuss implications for applied practice as well as future research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"603 - 618\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231175938\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231175938","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

心理教育评估过程中收集的数据可能会受到反应偏差的影响:客户在测试中没有付出足够的努力,没有做好的动机,或者在完成评分表和提供类似的自我报告数据时没有完全诚实和谨慎。其中一些问题也适用于来自第三方线人的数据。在本研究中,我们调查了学校心理学家检测、预防和应对明显反应偏差的方法。297名学校心理学家的样本回答了四个开放式问题中的至少一个。我们发现,大多数参与者只使用非正式技术来检测反应偏差(而不是专门的测试和嵌入指数),依靠奖励或强化来防止反应偏差,并通过在评估报告中注明明显的反应偏差来做出反应。然而,其他各种各样的战略得到了比例较小的从业者的认可。我们将这些结果与神经心理学中类似调查的结果进行了比较,并讨论了对应用实践和未来研究的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How Do School Psychologists Address Issues of Effort, Motivation, and Honesty During Evaluations?
Data collected during psychoeducational evaluations can be compromised by response bias: clients not putting forth sufficient effort on tests, not being motivated to do well, or not being fully honest and careful when completing rating scales and contributing similar self-report data. Some of these problems apply to data from third-party informants as well. In the present study, we surveyed school psychologists about their approach to detecting, preventing, and reacting to apparent response bias. A sample of 297 school psychologists responded to at least one of four open-ended questions. We found that most participants only used informal techniques for detecting response bias (rather than specialized tests and embedded indices), relied on rewards or reinforcements to prevent response bias, and reacted to apparent response bias by noting it in their evaluation reports. However, a wide variety of other strategies were endorsed by smaller proportions of practitioners. We compare these results to results from similar surveys in neuropsychology, and discuss implications for applied practice as well as future research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment (JPA) publishes contemporary and important information focusing on psychological and educational assessment research and evidence-based practices as well as assessment instrumentation. JPA is well known internationally for the quality of published assessment-related research, theory and practice papers, and book and test reviews. The methodologically sound and impiricially-based studies and critical test and book reviews will be of particular interest to all assessment specialists including practicing psychologists, psychoeducational consultants, educational diagnosticians and special educators.
期刊最新文献
Resolving Dimensionality Issues of the Utretch Work Engagement Scale for Students Using an Integrative Data-Analytic Framework Psychometric Properties of the School Support Scale (SSS) for a Sample of Chilean Adolescents Interpretation Evidence for the Multidimensional Test Anxiety Scale: A Brief Report Perceived School Belonging Among Youth with Chronic Physical Illness Florence Bullying-Victimization Scales: Validation Study and Victimization Associations With Well-Being and Social Self-Efficacy
×
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