Coaley-3941-Prelims:Coaley-3941-Prelims.

qxp 25/11/2009 3:34 PM Page iii

An Introduction to
Psychological Assessment
and Psychometrics
Keith Coaley
Coaley-3941-Ch-01:Coaley-Sample.qxp 25/11/2009 10:36 AM Page 1

1
Introduction: Foundations of
Psychological Assessment

Learning Objectives
By the end of this chapter you should be able to:
• Understand the basic principles underlying psychological assessment, how they
contrast with common perceptions, and distinguish between its different forms.
• Identify the key figures in the historical development of assessment methods.
• Give an account of the core characteristics and issues relating to different
approaches.
• Understand their use in the different areas of applied psychology.

What is This Chapter About?

Applied psychologists ply their trade in the real world. So we have to begin by introducing
many of the core definitions, characteristics and foundations underlying modern
approaches to assessment and psychometrics. It helps also to have an understanding of the
historical tradition preceding modern practice, so we will review its development from its
historical roots, identifying those explorers who have had a significant and enduring influ-
ence. We will also take a look at some key terms and issues, followed by discussion of com-
mon types of test and how these can be classified or grouped. The chapter will conclude
with brief descriptions of how and why assessments are used in the different fields of
applied psychology today.
Coaley-3941-Ch-01:Coaley-Sample.qxp 25/11/2009 10:36 AM Page 2

• • • An Introduction to Psychological Assessment and Psychometrics • • •

What Do We Mean by Psychological

Assessment and Psychometrics?

The common thread that unites all of the domains of applied psychology is measure-
ment. Psychometrics are designed to do measurement; in fact, the term is an abbrevi-
ation for ‘psychological measurement’. They form a branch of a wider field referred to
as psychological assessment, which seeks to understand the psychology of the individ-
ual, whatever the circumstances, whether in clinical, forensic, educational, counselling,
health, coaching or occupational settings. The complexity of the mind makes this a dif-
ficult task to achieve.
A proliferation of terms used over the years has tended to cause some confusion and
so the word ‘test’ has been applied as a generic word for absolutely everything linked
to assessment. It could mean a questionnaire or an inventory, and is interchangeable
with equivalent terms such as tool, assessment, measure or instrument. But in practice
there are distinctions. Let’s say, for argument’s sake, you feel a bit depressed and go to
see a clinical or counselling psychologist. Your psychologist may firstly go through a
detailed interview and make notes, and then ask you to complete a depression inven-
tory. Or you have just been subjected to hospital treatment and feel a bit anxious about
your state of health so you visit a health psychologist who goes through a similar
process using an anxiety inventory. Or you apply for a new job and have to face an
assessment centre which includes interviews, tests, questionnaires and work sample
exercises. In all these cases you undertake an assessment which has different compo-
nents. The whole process consists of a psychological assessment and is designed to
describe, predict, explain, diagnose and make decisions about you. The actions required
by social services to care for you, in some instances, may also be included. Therefore
measurement, using quantitative inventories, tests or questionnaires, actually forms one
or more parts of a broader thing called psychological assessment (see Figure 1.1).
A ‘test’ is a sub-component of measurement, being focussed on those tasks/questions
(called items) which have right or wrong answers, and are mostly referred to as cognitive,
ability or aptitude tests. That means that you cannot really describe a personality question-
naire as a ‘personality test’, even though it may make use of measurement. Many experi-
enced psychologists who have written books like this one mix the two terms. People
get worried when they encounter the term ‘personality tests’, so I think it is neither an
accurate description nor good public relations to use it. Similarly, a ‘questionnaire’ is also
a sub-component of measurement, although having items which do not have right or
wrong answers. They may, for example, ask people to agree or disagree about a statement
or to indicate whether a particular statement is true or false about them. A response to say
a statement is false about me as an individual would, surely, not be a wrong answer. The
term ‘inventory’ is sometimes also used for these instruments. Lastly, the term ‘psychome-
tric’, as I said earlier, refers to those things which are based upon a measurement process,
including tests and questionnaires which are not tests. An understanding of the statistics
underlying tests and questionnaires is essential for good practice use of them. To confuse
things further, I prefer to describe some components solely as ‘assessments’, for example

•2•
Coaley-3941-Ch-01:Coaley-Sample.qxp 25/11/2009 10:36 AM Page 3

• • • Introduction: Foundations of Psychological Assessment • • •

Psychological Assessment

Measurement Non-measurement

Correct/ Not using

Interviews, Other
incorrect correct/
observations questionnaires/
item incorrect
etc. checklists etc.
responses responses

Questionnaires,
Tests
inventories

Figure 1.1 A taxonomy of psychological assessment

interviews, simple checklists and observations, to distinguish them from activities which
do involve measurement. So psychological assessments are far more than tests. True assess-
ment really is a more complex enterprise involving the integration of information from dif-
ferent sources to get a more comprehensive understanding of a person, using multiple
sources including personal, social and medical history where relevant.
Measurement ultimately evolved from the study of individual differences in human
psychology which has aimed to be more objective in its descriptions of people. The
concern is to establish what exists rather than whether what exists is good or bad. Key
questions are: What are the ways by which people differ and how can we objectively
measure the differences? Over the last 100 years or so the discipline has become
increasingly scientific in its approach, and the growth of empirical thinking has had
enormous consequences in how we make assessments. Psychology is concerned to
discover not just what characteristics are possessed by a person, but also the way these
are organized to make the individual different from others. The aim is to be more pre-
cise, enabling the trained professional to make justifiable and verifiable predictions. In
other words, we seek to use clearly agreed criteria to define psychological constructs
and, where possible, to measure these through the use of scales and statistical tech-
niques. Often scales can be standardized so as to compare a person with others, for
example the general population or other people diagnosed as suffering depression or
anxiety, or other managers in an occupational setting. Psychometric instruments are
carefully constructed to ensure their measurements are both accurate and replicable.

•3•
Coaley-3941-Ch-01:Coaley-Sample.qxp 25/11/2009 10:36 AM Page 4

• • • An Introduction to Psychological Assessment and Psychometrics • • •

The science of psychology operates on the basis of clear criteria and standardized
measurement scales. We need to be explicit about what we mean and how we measure,
whether in research or practice. Used well, measurement can give us accurate and rele-
vant information which leads to more effective decision-making, providing insights not
available through observations and interviews. These latter methods, anyway, are often
influenced by personal factors relating to the person doing the assessment. So it is clear
that to adopt a scientific approach we need to base our methods upon measurement
(see Box 1.1 which discusses what we mean by measurement and its benefits).

Box 1.1 What is Measurement?

Measurement is the assignment of numbers to properties or attributes of people,

objects or events using a set of rules, according to Stevens (1946, 1968). From this
definition several characteristics of measurement may be derived (Aguinis, Henle and
Ostroff, 2001):
1 It focuses on attributes of people, objects or events not on actual people, objects
or events.
2 It uses a set of rules to quantify these. They must be standardized, clear, under-
standable and easy to apply.
3 It consists of scaling and classification. Scaling deals with assignment of numbers
so as to quantify them, i.e. to determine how much of an attribute is present.
Classification refers to defining whether people, objects or events fall into the
same or different categories.
Aguinis et al. add that Stevens’ definition relates to a process of measurement. This
means that:
1 Its purpose should be determined, for example, in prediction, classification or
decision-making.
2 The attribute should be identified and defined. A definition needs to be agreed
before it is measured or different rules may be applied, resulting in varying num-
bers being assigned. The purpose of measurement should guide this definition.
3 A set of rules, based on the definition, should be determined to quantify the
attribute.
4 Lastly, the rules are applied to translate the attribute into numerical terms.

Benefits of Measurement
1 The key benefit is objectivity, which minimises subjective judgement and allows
theories to be tested (Aguinis, 1993).
2 Measurement results in quantification. This enables more detail to be gathered
than through personal judgements.
3 More subtle effects can be observed and statistical analysis used to make precise
statements about patterns of attributes and relationships (Pedhazur and
Pedhazur Schmelkin, 1991).
4 Better communication is possible because standardized measures lead to a
common language and understanding.

•4•
Coaley-3941-Ch-01:Coaley-Sample.qxp 25/11/2009 10:36 AM Page 5

• • • Introduction: Foundations of Psychological Assessment • • •

Surveys of public attitudes towards psychological assessment and measurement are

comparatively rare. There has been a growing recognition of the value of psychological
assessment among people at large and other health professionals, increasing demand in
the US. Elsewhere data is based upon acceptance of test materials and methods in the
workplace. In the UK one survey found that most employers, whilst still using tradi-
tional methods, such as application forms, references and interviews, are increasingly
also using ability tests, personality questionnaires and assessment centres (Hodgkinson,
Daley and Payne, 1996). There have been studies of the perceptions of graduates and
managers about the use of psychometrics, especially for recruitment and selection, and
these are generally positive, with some worries about, for example, the need for pro-
fessionally qualified administrators (as shown in Box 1.2).

Box 1.2 Evaluating Perceptions of Testing

How people think about psychological assessment is important in applied psychol-

ogy. In clinical settings studies of people’s perceptions are focussed mainly on ther-
apeutic methods and outcomes. In the workplace they have often been based upon
perceptions of fairness and relevance to jobs. Increased use of unsupervised computer-
based testing has been subject to evaluation because of concerns about lack of
standardization and a potential for cheating. A study by Hughes and Tate (2007)
demonstrates that many applicants feel that such testing is unfair.

Method
Participants completed an online questionnaire requesting their views and experi-
ences regarding computer-based ability testing. The target population was made up
of undergraduates and graduates who were considered more likely to have been
exposed to this kind of testing.

Results and Discussion

A total of 46 per cent thought computer-based testing to be a fair selection method,
41 per cent felt it was not fair, 6 per cent felt it depended on circumstances and
7 per cent did not express a view. Comments of those who said that it depended on
the circumstances of use tended to focus on:
• Its use alongside other selection measures
• The relevance of the test to the job
• The test’s quality and provision of practice items and feedback
• Whether cheating could be controlled.
The authors say that the high proportion who did not feel the tests were fair
demonstrates a need for employers to ensure tests are appropriate and the reasons
for using them are explained. Their purpose and the process by which candidates are
assessed should be made transparent in pre-test information. In other words, com-
munication is a key issue in managing perceptions.
(Cont’d)

•5•
Coaley-3941-Ch-01:Coaley-Sample.qxp 25/11/2009 10:36 AM Page 6

• • • An Introduction to Psychological Assessment and Psychometrics • • •

This is particularly important for selection methods. When there is high unemploy-
ment employers might feel they can ignore candidates’ reactions, but in a labour
shortage unpopular techniques could deter some from applying. One study even sug-
gests that candidates who are uncomfortable with an organization’s methods may
react by not buying its products (Stinglhamber, Vandebberghe and Brancart, 1999).
Some techniques are more popular. Interviews, work samples and assessment centres
are preferred to peer assessment, personality questionnaires and abstract reasoning
tests because they appear less job-related.

The picture is less clear among other European countries, with some national differ-
ences (Cook and Cripps, 2005). Assessment and measurement in occupational settings
are most popular in Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands, whilst there is some resist-
ance, notably in Germany and Turkey. There is not much information about other areas
of the world – Australia and New Zealand appear to have a similar approach to the
UK, and in some African countries, such as Nigeria and Ghana, there has been a move
towards testing. Some evidence is available, based upon personal experience, the coun-
try’s historical background and the introduction of test producers to China, that the
Chinese are also using them.
Psychologists and others, such as HR professionals, using assessment instruments
will need more than just technical skills to make their way in the world. These skills
include knowing how to administer test materials relevant to their area of practice
both accurately and ethically. But they also need a sound understanding of the theo-
retical and conceptual foundations of their science, combined with cultural awareness.
And they will need the communication skills to be able to explain what they are
doing and why.

Summary
The psychology of individual differences seeks to describe the ways in which people
differ, and to understand how and why these arise, and because of this assessment
instruments are used widely in applied psychology today. They are founded upon an
objective, scientific and empirical approach to making justifiable and verifiable predic-
tions about people, rather than being based on subjective opinion. Psychological assess-
ment refers to the integration of information from multiple sources in order to
describe, predict, explain, diagnose and make decisions. Psychometrics are those instru-
ments which measure people’s characteristics, having been subjected to standardiza-
tion using scales which enable scores to be compared. In any form of assessment the
tasks or questions are called items. Where an instrument has right/wrong items it is
often referred to as a test; whilst others are better referred to as questionnaires or
inventories. It is important for those who make use of these instruments to do so in an
ethical way and to adhere to codes of practice.

•6•