Psychology 340 Exam 2

• gather data about someone
• help describe someone
• make predictions about someone
• can be evaluated psychometrically
• interview data can stand alone

• medicine/nursing
• law
• art architecture

The tendency to act like those around us

• behavior
• -positive correlation between activity levels of suspect and officer
• mood
• -interviewee anger relate to interviewer anger

Interviewer guides the interview with questions

Interviewee guides interview with answers

Standardized across administration?

Elicits information about qualifications/ employment duties

Assesses for clinical diagnosis and underlying symptoms

Goal: is the interviewee a good fit for the job? professionally and personally?

• totally open-ended
• open-ended, but specific
• direct
• confrontation

• specific set of questions administered the same way
• in order
• with rules for probing
• cut-points used for diagnostic purposes
• reliable, but perhaps not valid
• assumes respondent is self-aware and honest with the interviewer

determine if mental disorder is present

get a biographical sketch of interviewee and understand interviewee so you can interpret other test scores

• takes a development perspective; from birth to present
• work history, education, medical, family, hobbies, social, etc.
• open- and closed-ended questions used
• use computers to do this and structured interviews?

Evaluate a person suspected to have neurological or emotional problems

• assesses appearance, emotions, intelligence, attention, sensory factors, orientation
• used to diagnose psychosis, brain damage, etc.

warmth, geuineness, acceptance, understaning, etc.

keep the interction flowing withe proper responses

• open-ended questions
• use miniml effort to keep interview going
• stay thematic
• verbtim playback
• paraphrasing
• summarizing
• reflection/empathy

• too much talking
• topic-hopping
• judgemental/evaluative statements
• probing statements
• hostility
• false reassurance

• level 1: no connection to what interviewee said
• level 2: superficial awareness of what was said
• level 3: interchangeable statement and response
• levels 4 & 5: provide accurate empathy and goes beyond what was said explicitly

• read the empirical research and theory on interviewing
• get supervision
• self-evaluation

• halo effect
• general standoutishness
• cross-cultural differences

Form opinion of the interviewee early on and is based for who interview

one interviewee characteritics biases evaluation of other characteristics

e.g. eye contact discouraged in some non-american cultures

low and inconsistent

• Agreement between 2 or more interviewers
• range-.20 to .97
• median .55

structured compared to unstructured interviews

• psychometric
• information-processing: how we learn and solve problems
• cognitive: how we adapt to real-world demands

• selected to design intelligence test
• identify intellectual defiency

• to find and maintain a definite direction/purpose
• to make necessary adaptations to achieve that purpose
• to engage in self-critisms and self-adjustments to your strategy

• age differentiation: older children know more than younger children
• mental age: children expected to know specific things at each age
• general mental ability: total product of various and distinct elements of intelligence; an overall score, no subscores

• Intelligence consists of general mental ability (g) and lots of other factors
• difference of other factors cancel each other

in intelligence tests, the first factor is g

• Describes multiple forms of intelligence
• crystallized (c): knowledge and understanding we already have e.g. facts, statistics
• fluid (f): abilities that allow us to reason, learn, think, etc.; e.g. processing of cognitive, visual, audio info

• defined intelligence and asked to measure it via problem solving
• 30 items of increasing difficulty
• lacked an appropriate measuring unit
• lacked normative data

• retained age differentiation
• created age scales; items grouped according to age level, not increasing difficulty
• only 1 score produced
• introduced mental age; used 2/3 benchmark

• Developed by Terman at Standford
• retained
• age differentiation
• age scale
• mental age
• g
• changed; increased standardization sample, except they were all white california kids
• added the intelligence quotient (IQ); crude calculation, has limitations

• extended age range down to 2 years old
• scoring standards/instructions improved; standardization sample larger, more diverse
• performance intems added; e.g. copy designs, but only 25% of the test
• equivalent forms designed
• allows test comparison and examination of psychometric properties
• found: reliability lower for youth and those with high IQ
• found: standard deviation vary across age/IQ groups
• implications: we cant compare scores from different groups

• discriminability analysis to keep items whose score correlated highly with overall test score
• improved: instructions for scoring/administration, added the deviation IQ-a standard score; M=100, SD=16
• corrected for differential variability in age/IQ groups; now we could compare scores, in terms of SD's

• Hierarchichal model: g is at the top, crystallized abilities, fluid-analytical abilities, short-term memory
• Thurstone promotes this multidimensional model argued intelligence is comprised if independent factors; primary mental abilites

• removed age scales and replaced with point scales; all items with the same content placed together into 15 seperate tests
• implications: test-takers obtain 15 different scores of various abilities; use these scores to calculate on overall g, calculate a content area score, use just to individual test scores

• nonverbal and verbal scales equally weighted
• intergration of point and age scales; point scale maintained on routing test, age scles used for 8 subtests

the minimal number of correct responses is obtained, indication items are not to difficult

the maximum number of incorrect responses is obtained, indicating items are to difficult

• SD=15, not 16
• new subtests added;current ones updated
• taps extremes of intelligence
• age range 2-85+
• standardization sample: Nearly 8000, stratified by gender, ethnicity, region, etc.
• reliability coefficient 7.9 multiple measures
• evidence for content-, construct-, and criterion- validities found

• pointed to the role of nonintellective factors of intelligence tests
• objected to Binet's single score
• tested intelligence in adults; said intellect could deteriorate with age
• used point scales instead of age scales; points assigned to each item, content area scores obtained
• use performancce scales; subjects had to things, tests independent of language, culture and education, comparable units used to express prformance/erbal scores

• vocab
• similarities
• information
• comprehenion (WISC)

• block design
• matrix reasoning
• visual puzzles

• arithmetic
• digit span
• letter-number sequencing

• symbol search
• coding

• define words
• stable over time, not prone to deteriorate

• tests concrete and abstract thinking
• "in what ways are x and y alike"

• trivia (sort of)
• "how many members are there in the US congress?"

• answer abtract questions
• "why do we lock our doors at night?"

• relatively simple math problems, administered orally
• "a person w/ $28 spends $.50. how much does he have now?"
• test concentration, motivation, and memory

repeat digits administered orally to you at a rate of one per second

retain and reorder a mixd series of letters aand numbers

• 9 red, white and red/white design
• test ability to reason, analyze special relations

identify a pattern/relationship in the stimuli

"which of these 3 pieces go togther to make one ongruent puzzle?"

• you're shown 2 target geometric figures
• "is one of those 2 in a set of 5 more?

• numbers 1-9 paired with a symbol
• you translate numbers into symbols, one by one

• score each test by hand
• enter scores into WAIS software program
• progrm converts each subtest's raw score to a scaled score
• ech subtest has a M scaled score=10 and SD=3
• these subtest scores comprise 4 different index, content area, or composit scores
• these scores comprise the full scale IQ (FSIQ) and the general ability index (GAI)
• age-adjusted and reference group norms

• standardized on 2450 adults; stratified by gender, race education, geographpic region
• high split-half test-retest reliabilites
• SEM used to yield confidence intervals around FSIQ
• SEM for WAIS-IV=approx. 2.5 ex. 1 sem around fsiq=68% confidence, 2=95%
• Convergent evidence for validity, scores correlate well with score from tests of similar content.

measures uintelligence of indivuduals ages 6yr-16yrs, 11 months