Understanding Psychometric Testing

There are many different psychometric tests available.  Some of the new ones are available online, and some of these, such as IRVEY™, can provide instant reports.  Many older tests are paper-based, and require people to ‘mark’ them.  However, while these different formats make one test look and feel different to another, they do not represent the most important differences between psychometric tests.

The term ‘psychometric’ represents what these tests do.  The ‘psycho’ part means they are testing aspects of human psychology.  Good psychometric tests are a scientifically valid way to assess aspects of a person’s psychological state or make-up.  They can give you information about things like how a person thinks, their strengths and/or limitations, or how they approach their world.  The ‘metrics’ part of the term means measurement.  Psychometric tests seek to measure certain things about what is going on in people’s minds, and about what they are able to do.

Broadly speaking, all psychometric tests fall into one of three different types.  These types do not reflect what the tests seek to assess, but how they seek to assess it.  The three different types of tests are called: criterion tests, normative tests, and ipsative tests.

Criterion tests:  these tests seek to assess how a person functions relative to a set of independent criteria.  To provide a simple, real life example, when someone advertises a job, they usually set out a list of descriptors they would like to find in potential candidates.  When interviewing candidates, they are assessing how candidates measure up to the list of skills and qualities they are seeking to find.  Obviously, the recruitment process described above is not a psychometric test, but it does illustrate how criterion-based tests work.  They measure a person’s responses in reference to a set of predetermined criteria.  Another real-world example is sitting for a driving test.  The road rules and driving standards are pre-determined, and the test seeks to discover whether you are competent at them all.  Aptitude tests are common criterion tests.

Normative tests:  these tests seek to measure how much of a certain potential or quality a person has in comparison with a normal distribution of people.  For example, a test might measure how a person performs on a task compared to how the ‘normal’ person performs.  School, college, or university exams are sometimes normative, where they compare a student’s performance against the performance of everyone else who sat the exam.  In this case, the student may be given a ranking to show where he sits relative to his peers.  This type of testing is useful when you want to compare one person’s ability against a ‘normal’ standard.  They are able to show ‘how much’ of a certain attribute a person has compared to the ‘normal’ person.  IRVEY™ is a normative test: it measures ‘how much’ change readiness a person has compared to a normal distribution of change readiness in the community.

Ipsative tests: these tests do not measure against an independent set of criteria (like criterion tests do), nor do they seek to measure compared to a normal population (as normative tests do).   Instead, they seek to compare two or more things within the same person.  For example, an ipsative test might measure how well a person performed on a test today compared with how well he performed on the same or similar test in the past.  Ipsative tests are sometimes used because they can provide more positive feedback than would be available from criterion or normative testing.  For example, a person may be improving in their performance when compared with themselves, but if compared with others or a set of pre-determined criteria, they may not be doing so well and could develop a sense of failure.  Sometimes they are used because the purpose is not to compare people against predetermined criteria or other people, but to see how one aspect of a person’s make-up fits with other aspects of their make-up.  Tests like Myers-Briggs are ipsative tests.

The ‘best’ test to use depends on what kind of information you are looking for and what your purpose is.  Each broad type has its strengths and its limitations.  However, if the test is scientifically valid and used sensitively and appropriately, it can provide useful information that may be difficult to obtain in any other way.

Book Launch: People Get Ready; Change Readiness in Organizations

Authors Steve Barlow PhD and Stephanie Barlow are pleased to announce the release of their new book on the topic of change readiness in organizations.

People Get Ready offers an insightful and unique perspective on change readiness as it applies to organizations and the individuals within them.  Drawing on a diverse background of scholarly work, the book presents a theory of change readiness and applies this theory in practical and accessible ways to the context of organizational change.

The book presents a compelling alternative to the dominant paradigm in organizational change literature that assumes the change manager or change leader is the primary agent of change within organizations.   People Get Ready presents a complementary perspective, namely that people who are ready for change bring potent and valuable resources that can drive and empower organizations to transform themselves from within.  The book offers practical advice on how to identify change readiness within staff, and explains why identifying change readiness can help organizations become more flexible and adaptable to change.

Available in paperback and as an ebook.

Visit www.redequip.com.au to purchase.