Barrett Paul
Cognadev Ltd., 18B Balmoral Avenue, Hurlingham, Sandton 2196, South Africa;
Behav Sci (Basel). 2017 Dec 31;8(1):5. doi: 10.3390/bs8010005. eCollection 2018 Jan.
The European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA) has issued sets of test standards and guidelines for psychometric test reviews without any attempt to address the critical content of many substantive publications by measurement experts such as Joel Michell. For example, he has argued that the psychometric test-theory which underpins classical and modern IRT psychometrics is "pathological", with the entire profession of psychometricians suffering from a methodological thought disorder. With the advent of new kinds of assessment now being created by the "Next Generation" of psychologists which no longer conform to the item-based, statistical test theory generated last century, a new framework is set out for constructing evidence-bases suitable for these "Next Generation" of assessments, which avoids the illusory beliefs of equal-interval or quantitatively structured psychological attributes. Finally, with no systematic or refutations of the logic, axioms, and evidence set out by Michell and others; it is concluded psychologists and their professional associations remain in denial. As with the eventual demise of a similar attempt to maintain the status quo of professional beliefs within forensic clinical psychology and psychiatry during the last century, those following certain EFPA guidelines might now find themselves required to justify their professional beliefs in legal rather than academic environments.
欧洲心理学家协会联合会(EFPA)发布了一系列心理测量测试评审的标准和指南,但却没有尝试探讨像乔尔·米歇尔等测量专家许多重要出版物中的关键内容。例如,他认为支撑经典和现代IRT心理测量学的心理测量测试理论是“病态的”,整个心理测量学家职业群体都患有方法学思维障碍。随着新一代心理学家创造出的新型评估方式的出现,这些评估不再符合上世纪产生的基于项目的统计测试理论,本文提出了一个新框架,用于构建适用于这些“新一代”评估的证据基础,该框架避免了关于等距或定量结构化心理属性的虚幻信念。最后,由于没有对米歇尔等人提出的逻辑、公理和证据进行系统的审视或反驳,得出的结论是心理学家及其专业协会仍在否认这些观点。就像上世纪法医临床心理学和精神病学领域中类似的维持专业信念现状的尝试最终失败一样,那些遵循某些EFPA指南的人现在可能会发现自己需要在法律而非学术环境中为自己的专业信念辩护。