Guscia Roma, Harries Julia, Kirby Neil, Nettelbeck Ted
Department of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Australia.
J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2006 Sep;31(3):156-60. doi: 10.1080/13668250600876459.
The development and use of support need instruments for funding disability services is a relatively recent initiative. Although the use of these measures appears at face value to provide an objective measure of support needs, little is known about their psychometric properties, particularly with respect to rater bias and purpose of assessment. A measure of support that has been developed in Australia to provide estimates of service needs and associated funding is the Service Need Assessment Profile (SNAP).
This study investigated whether SNAP scores obtained for different assessment purposes - research and funding - are affected by rater bias, by comparing SNAP to 3 other measures of support from 29 people with intellectual disabilities.
We found that SNAP scores completed for funding purposes showed an individual's support needs to be much greater than comparison scores on both SNAP and the 3 other measures obtained for research purposes.
Our results suggest that support measures such as SNAP may significantly overestimate support needs when raters know the assessment is being used for funding purposes.
用于资助残疾服务的支持需求工具的开发和使用是一项相对较新的举措。尽管从表面上看,这些措施的使用似乎能提供支持需求的客观衡量标准,但对于它们的心理测量特性,尤其是评分者偏差和评估目的,人们知之甚少。澳大利亚开发的一种用于估计服务需求和相关资金的支持衡量工具是服务需求评估概况(SNAP)。
本研究通过将SNAP与29名智力残疾者的其他3种支持衡量工具进行比较,调查了因不同评估目的(研究和资金)获得的SNAP分数是否受评分者偏差影响。
我们发现,为资金目的填写的SNAP分数显示,个体的支持需求比为研究目的获得的SNAP及其他3种衡量工具的比较分数要高得多。
我们的结果表明,当评分者知道评估用于资金目的时,像SNAP这样的支持衡量工具可能会显著高估支持需求。