La opinión de los psicólogos españoles sobre el uso de los tests

  1. Muñiz Fernández, José 1
  2. Fernández Hermida, José Ramón 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Oviedo
    info

    Universidad de Oviedo

    Oviedo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/006gksa02

Journal:
Papeles del psicólogo

ISSN: 0214-7823,  1886-1415

Year of publication: 2010

Issue Title: Metodología al servicio del psicólogo

Volume: 31

Issue: 1

Pages: 108-121

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Papeles del psicólogo

Abstract

National and international psychological organizations interested in improving tests and testing practices follow two complementary strategies. On one hand they try to restrict the use of tests to those professionals who have been properly trained in the field of tests and testing, and on the other, the dissemination of information on tests and testing is encouraged. In order to implement both strategies in a rigorous way it is essential to know the opinions of professional psychologists. To this end the European Federation of Psychologists� Associations (EFPA) has developed a questionnaire composed of 33 items. In this paper we present the answers of the Spanish psychologists to the EFPA questionnaire. 3.126 psychologists answered the questionnaire, 2.235 women (71,5%), and 891 men (28,5%), all of them members of the Spanish Psychological Association (COP). The mean age was 41,92 years, and standard deviation 0,43. The mean of years working as professionals was 12,5, standard deviation 8,9. In relation of the field of specialization, 69,6% work in Clinical Psychology, 13,6% in Educational Psychology, 6,4% in Work and Organizational Psychology, and 10,4% in other fields, such as sports, forensic, social services, or traffic. 3,8% are unemployed. The results are articulated around eight main dimensions, which are commented in detail comparing the results obtained in the main fields of specialization, Clinical, Educational and Work psychology. Psychologists show a very positive attitude towards tests and testing, however different aspects that most be improved in the future are pointed out as well. Finally the results are analyzed in detail, and some future perspectives commented.

Bibliographic References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Bartram, D. (1996). Test qualifications and test use in the UK: The competence approach. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 12, 62-71.
  • Bartram, D. (1998). The need for international guidelines on standards for test use: A review of European and international initiatives. European Psychologist, 2, 155-163.
  • Bartram, D. y Coyne, I. (1998). Variations in national patterns of testing and test use: The ITC/EFPPA international survey. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14, 249-260.
  • Bartram, D. y Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.) (2006). Computerbased testing and the Internet. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Bartram, D. y Roe, R. A. (2005). Definition and assessment of competences in the context of the European diploma in psychology. European Psychologist, 10, 93-102.
  • Bennett, R. E. (1999). Using new technology to improve assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and practice. 18(3), 5-12.
  • Bennett, R. E. (2006). Inexorable and inevitable: The continuing story of technology and assessment. En D. Bartram and R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Computer-based testing and the Internet. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. (pp. 201-217).
  • Binet, A. y Simon, T. H. (1905). Méthodes nouvelles pour le diagnostic du niveau intellectuel des anormaux. L’année Psychologique, 11, 191-244.
  • Breithaupt, K. J., Mills, C. N., y Melican, G. J. (2006). Facing the opportunities of the future. En D. Bartram and R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Computer-based testing and the Internet (pp. 219-251). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Brennan, R. L. (Ed.) (2006). Educational measurement. Westport, CT: ACE/Praeger.
  • Byrne, B. M., Leong, F. T., Hambleton, R. K., Oakland, T., van de Vijver, F. J., y Cheung, F. M. (2009). A critical analysis of cross-cultural research and testing practices: Implications for improved education and training in psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(2), 94-105.
  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
  • Downing, S. M. y Haladyna, T. M. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of test development. Hillsdale, NJ.: LEA.
  • Drasgow, F., Luecht, R. M. y Bennett, R. E. (2006). Technology and testing. En R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement. Westport, CT: ACE/Praeger. (págs. 471-515).
  • European Federation of Professional Psychologists’ Associations (2005). Meta-Code of ethics. Brussels: Author (www.efpa.eu).
  • Evers, A. (2001a). Improving test quality in the Netherlands: Results of 18 years of tests ratings. International Journal of Testing, 1, 137-153.
  • Evers. A. (2001b). The revised Dutch rating system for test quality. International Journal of Testing, 1, 155- 182.
  • Fernández-Ballesteros, R., De Bruyn, E., Godoy, A., Hornke, L., Ter Laak, J., y Vizcarro, C. et al. (2001). Guidelines for the assessment process (GAP): A proposal for discussion. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 187-200.
  • Ferrando, P. J. y Anguiano, C. (2010). El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en Psicología. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 18-33.
  • Goodman, D.P. y Hambleton, R.K. (2004). Student test score reports and interpretive guides: Review of current practices and suggestions for future research. Applied Measurement in Education, 17, 145-220.
  • Hambleton, R. K. (2004). Theory, methods, and practices in testing for the 21st century. Psicothema, 16, 696- 701.
  • Hambleton, R. K. (2006). Testing practices in the 21st century. Key Note Address, University of Oviedo, Spain, March 8th.
  • Hambleton, R. K., Merenda, P. F., y Spielberger, C. D. (Eds.) (2005). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Londres: LEA.
  • Irvine, S. y Kyllonen, P. (Eds.) (2002). Item generation for test development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Joint Committee on Testing Practices. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington DC: Joint Committee on Testing Practices.
  • Koocher, G. y Kith-Spiegel, P. (2007). Ethics in psychology. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
  • Leach, M. y Oakland, T. (2007). Ethics standards impacting test development and use: A review of 31 ethics codes impacting practices in 35 countries. International Journal of Testing, 7, 71-88.
  • Leeson, H. V. (2006). The mode effect: A literature review of human and technological issues in computerized testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 1-24.
  • Lindsay, G., Koene, C., Ovreeide. H., y Lang, F. (2008). Ethics for European psychologists. Gottingen and Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe.
  • Lunt, I. (2005). The implications of the “Bologna process” for the development of a European qualification in psychology. European Psychologist, 10, 86-92.
  • Mills, C.N., Potenza, M.T., Fremer, J.J., y Ward, W.C. (Eds.) (2002). Computer-based testing: Building the foundation for future assessments. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
  • Moreland, K. L., Eyde, L. D., Robertson, G. J., Primoff, E. S., y Most, R. B. (1995). Assessment of test user qualifications. American Psychologist, 5, 1, 14-23.
  • Muñiz, J. (1997). Aspectos éticos y deontológicos de la evaluación psicológica. En A. Cordero (Ed.), Evaluación psicológica en el año 2000 (pp. 307-345). Madrid: TEA Ediciones.
  • Muñiz, J. y Bartram, D. (2007). Improving international tests and testing. European Psychologist, 12(3), 206-219.
  • Muñiz, J., Bartram, D., Evers, A., Boben, D., Matesic, K., Glabeke, K., Fernández-Hermida, J.R., y Zaal, J. (2001). Testing practices in European countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 201-211.
  • Muñiz, J., y Fernández-Hermida, J.R. (2000). La utilización de los tests en España. Papeles del Psicólogo, 76, 41-49.
  • Muñiz, J., Prieto, G., Almeida, L., y Bartram, D. (1999). Test use in Spain, Portugal and Latin American countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15(2), 151-157.
  • Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., y Prieto, G. (1999). Tests informatizados: fundamentos y aplicaciones. Madrid: Pirámide.
  • Papeles del Psicólogo (2009). Número monográfico sobre Ética Profesional y Deontología. Vol. 30, 182- 254.
  • Parshall, C.G., Spray, J.A., Kalohn, J.C., y Davey, T. (2002). Practical considerations in computer-based testing. New York: Springer.
  • Peiró, J.M. (2003) La enseñanza de la Psicología en Europa. Un proyecto de Titulación Europea. Papeles del Psicólogo, 86, 25-33
  • Phelps, R. (Ed.) (2005). Defending standardized testing. Londres: LEA.
  • Phelps, R. (Ed.) (2008). Correcting fallacies about educational and psychological testing. Washington: APA.
  • Prieto, G. y Muñiz, J. (2000). Un modelo para evaluar la calidad de los tests utilizados en España. Papeles del Psicólogo, 77, 65-71.
  • Shermis, M. D. y Burstein, J. C. (Eds.) (2003). Automated essay scoring. London: LEA.
  • Simner, M. L. (1996). Recommendations by the Cana- dian Psychological Association for improving the North American safeguards that help protect the public against test misuse. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 12, 72-82.
  • Sireci, S.G. y Zenisky, A.L. (2006). Innovative item formats in computer-based testing: In pursuit of construct representation. En S. M. Downing, y T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development. Hillsdale, NJ.: LEA.
  • Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Zenisky, A.L. y Sireci, S.G. (2002). Technological innovations in large-scale assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15, 337-362.
Data source: Dialnet