• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
The EFPA Test-Review Model: When Good Intentions Meet a Methodological Thought Disorder.欧洲心理学会测试-评审模型:当善意遭遇方法性思维障碍时
Behav Sci (Basel). 2017 Dec 31;8(1):5. doi: 10.3390/bs8010005. eCollection 2018 Jan.
2
[A proposal for reforming psychologists' training in France and in the European Union].[关于法国及欧盟心理学家培训改革的一项提议]
Encephale. 2009 Feb;35(1):18-24. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2007.11.008. Epub 2008 Apr 2.
3
Assessing the quality of tests: revision of the EFPA review model.评估测试质量:EFPA 审查模型的修订。
Psicothema. 2013;25(3):283-91. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2013.97.
4
Health Psychology 2000:The Development of Professional Health Psychology: European Federation of Professional Psychologists' Associations (EFPPA) Task Force on Health Psychology Final Report.健康心理学 2000:专业健康心理学的发展:欧洲职业心理学家协会联合会(EFPPA)健康心理学工作组最终报告。
J Health Psychol. 1998 Jan;3(1):149-60. doi: 10.1177/135910539800300112.
5
A primer on classical test theory and item response theory for assessments in medical education.医学教育评估中的经典测量理论和项目反应理论简介。
Med Educ. 2010 Jan;44(1):109-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03425.x.
6
Psychologists versus psychologists: evaluating the claims of psychologists who publicly criticize their profession.心理学家之间的较量:评估公开批评自己职业的心理学家的主张。
Genet Soc Gen Psychol Monogr. 2006 Nov;132(4):329-53. doi: 10.3200/mono.132.4.329-354.
7
The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behavior and patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol.基于互联网的电子学习对临床医生行为和患者结局的有效性:一项系统评价方案。
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):52-64. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1919.
8
Psychological Assessments in Legal Contexts: Are Courts Keeping "Junk Science" Out of the Courtroom?法律语境下的心理评估:法庭是否将“伪科学”挡在庭外?
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2019 Dec;20(3):135-164. doi: 10.1177/1529100619888860.
9
The measurement of collaboration within healthcare settings: a systematic review of measurement properties of instruments.医疗机构内协作的测量:对测量工具属性的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):138-97. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2159.
10
Cognitive psychology: mentalistic or behavioristic?认知心理学:心理主义的还是行为主义的?
Adv Child Dev Behav. 1989;21:73-90. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2407(08)60283-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Statistics is not measurement: The inbuilt semantics of psychometric scales and language-based models obscures crucial epistemic differences.统计学并非测量:心理测量量表和基于语言的模型的内在语义掩盖了关键的认知差异。
Front Psychol. 2025 Jun 26;16:1534270. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1534270. eCollection 2025.
2
Rating scales institutionalise a network of logical errors and conceptual problems in research practices: A rigorous analysis showing ways to tackle psychology's crises.评分量表将研究实践中的一系列逻辑错误和概念问题制度化:一项严谨的分析揭示了解决心理学危机的方法。
Front Psychol. 2022 Dec 28;13:1009893. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1009893. eCollection 2022.
3
Evaluation of the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-Fourth Edition as a Measurement Instrument.《韦氏个别成就测验第四版作为一种测量工具的评估》
J Intell. 2022 May 22;10(2):30. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence10020030.
4
Transitivity Violations Undermine Rating Scales in Motivation Research.传递性违背破坏了动机研究中的评分量表。
Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 30;12:632991. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.632991. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Using the Coefficient of Confidence to Make the Philosophical Switch From A Posteriori to A Priori Inferential Statistics.运用置信系数实现从后验到先验推断统计学的哲学转变。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2017 Oct;77(5):831-854. doi: 10.1177/0013164416667977. Epub 2016 Oct 6.
2
Computational Psychometrics for the Measurement of Collaborative Problem Solving Skills.用于测量协作问题解决技能的计算心理测量学
Front Psychol. 2017 Nov 29;8:2029. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02029. eCollection 2017.
3
From Discovery to Justification: Outline of an Ideal Research Program in Empirical Psychology.从发现到辩护:实证心理学理想研究计划概述
Front Psychol. 2017 Oct 27;8:1847. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01847. eCollection 2017.
4
A computational model of fraction arithmetic.分数运算的计算模型。
Psychol Rev. 2017 Oct;124(5):603-625. doi: 10.1037/rev0000072. Epub 2017 Apr 27.
5
Underreliance on mechanistic models: Comment on Ferguson (2015).对机械论模型的过度依赖:评 Ferguson(2015)。
Am Psychol. 2016 Sep;71(6):505-6. doi: 10.1037/a0040108.
6
"Everybody knows psychology is not a real science": Public perceptions of psychology and how we can improve our relationship with policymakers, the scientific community, and the general public.“每个人都知道心理学不是一门真正的科学”:公众对心理学的看法以及我们如何改善与政策制定者、科学界和普通公众的关系。
Am Psychol. 2015 Sep;70(6):527-42. doi: 10.1037/a0039405.
7
Advances in Computational Psychometrics.计算心理测量学的进展
Comput Math Methods Med. 2015;2015:418683. doi: 10.1155/2015/418683. Epub 2015 Aug 4.
8
Alfred binet and the concept of heterogeneous orders.阿尔弗雷德·比奈与异质秩序的概念。
Front Psychol. 2012 Aug 15;3:261. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00261. eCollection 2012.
9
The psychometricians' fallacy: too clever by half?心理测量学家的谬误:聪明反被聪明误?
Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2009 Feb;62(Pt 1):41-55. doi: 10.1348/000711007X243582. Epub 2007 Sep 29.
10
An abductive theory of scientific method.科学方法的溯因理论。
Psychol Methods. 2005 Dec;10(4):371-88. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.10.4.371.

欧洲心理学会测试-评审模型:当善意遭遇方法性思维障碍时

The EFPA Test-Review Model: When Good Intentions Meet a Methodological Thought Disorder.

作者信息

Barrett Paul

机构信息

Cognadev Ltd., 18B Balmoral Avenue, Hurlingham, Sandton 2196, South Africa;

出版信息

Behav Sci (Basel). 2017 Dec 31;8(1):5. doi: 10.3390/bs8010005. eCollection 2018 Jan.

DOI:10.3390/bs8010005
PMID:29403661
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5791023/
Abstract

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.

摘要

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。