Hanson R, Smith J A, Hume W
Child Care Health Dev. 1984 Jan-Feb;10(1):17-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.1984.tb00163.x.
Six videotapes covering 1406 administrations of items from the Griffiths Scales of Mental Development were made, and each one was shown to a different panel of 9 or 10 observers. Each person independently scored the items and made comments on administration and scoring. Reasons for disagreements among scorers were considered in terms of these comments and the characteristics of individuals and groups participating. Disagreement was particularly high for items from the Baby Scales. This was at least partly due to use of mothers' reports. Mothers' reports were found to present a particular problem when elicited on occasions for which they are not recommended by the manual. Across all ages disagreement was related to difficulties with both administrative and scoring criteria. The present study was designed to be sensitive to a range of sources of unreliability and the findings may have relevance for other infant assessment procedures.
制作了6盒录像带,涵盖了对格里菲斯心理发展量表项目的1406次施测,每盒录像带都播放给由9名或10名观察者组成的不同小组观看。每个人独立对项目进行评分,并对施测和评分发表评论。根据这些评论以及参与的个体和群体的特征,考虑评分者之间存在分歧的原因。婴儿量表项目的分歧尤其大。这至少部分归因于母亲报告的使用。当在手册不推荐的情况下获取母亲报告时,发现母亲报告存在特殊问题。在所有年龄段,分歧都与施测和评分标准方面的困难有关。本研究旨在对一系列不可靠来源保持敏感,研究结果可能与其他婴儿评估程序相关。