On the sins of short-form development.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: On the sins of short-form development.
Authors: Smith, Gregory T., McCarthy, Denis M., Smith, G T1 (AUTHOR), McCarthy, D M (AUTHOR), Anderson, K G (AUTHOR)
Source: Psychological Assessment. Mar2000, Vol. 12 Issue 1, p102-111. 10p. 2 Charts.
Subject Terms: *Clinical psychology, Psychodiagnostics
Abstract: The empirical short-form literature has been characterized by overly optimistic views of the transfer of validity from parent form to short form and by the weak application of psychometric principles in validating short forms. Reviewers have thus opposed constructing short forms altogether, implying researchers are succumbing to an inappropriate temptation by trying to abbreviate measures. The authors disagree. The authors do not oppose the development of short forms, but they do assert that the validity standards for short forms should be quite high. The authors identify 2 general and 9 specific methodological sins characterizing short-form construction and offer methodological suggestions for the sound development of short forms. They recommend a set of 6 a priori steps researchers should consider and 9 methodological procedures researchers can use to develop valid abbreviated forms of clinical-assessment procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Psychological Assessment is the property of American Psychological Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 3090997
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: On the sins of short-form development.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Smith%2C+Gregory+T%2E%22">Smith, Gregory T.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McCarthy%2C+Denis+M%2E%22">McCarthy, Denis M.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Smith%2C+G+T%22">Smith, G T</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McCarthy%2C+D+M%22">McCarthy, D M</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Anderson%2C+K+G%22">Anderson, K G</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Psychological+Assessment%22">Psychological Assessment</searchLink>. Mar2000, Vol. 12 Issue 1, p102-111. 10p. 2 Charts.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Clinical+psychology%22">Clinical psychology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychodiagnostics%22">Psychodiagnostics</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The empirical short-form literature has been characterized by overly optimistic views of the transfer of validity from parent form to short form and by the weak application of psychometric principles in validating short forms. Reviewers have thus opposed constructing short forms altogether, implying researchers are succumbing to an inappropriate temptation by trying to abbreviate measures. The authors disagree. The authors do not oppose the development of short forms, but they do assert that the validity standards for short forms should be quite high. The authors identify 2 general and 9 specific methodological sins characterizing short-form construction and offer methodological suggestions for the sound development of short forms. They recommend a set of 6 a priori steps researchers should consider and 9 methodological procedures researchers can use to develop valid abbreviated forms of clinical-assessment procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Psychological Assessment is the property of American Psychological Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=3090997
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.102
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 102
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Clinical psychology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychodiagnostics
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: On the sins of short-form development.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Smith, Gregory T.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McCarthy, Denis M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Smith, G T
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McCarthy, D M
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Anderson, K G
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Text: Mar2000
              Type: published
              Y: 2000
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 10403590
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 12
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Psychological Assessment
              Type: main
ResultId 1