Study Guides (380,000)
CA (150,000)
UTSC (9,000)
Psychology (2,000)

PSYC31H3 Study Guide - Final Guide: Sexual Differentiation, Minority Group, Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography

Course Code
Konstantine Zakzanis
Study Guide

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 29 pages of the document.
PSYC31 NPT Final Exam Notes
Ch 6 Lec Notes
Examination Data comes from:
1. Background Data
Essential for providing the context in which current observations can be
oI.e. Clinical interview, collateral sources, & medical history
Includes, but is not limited to, the following:
oDevelopmental and medical history
Facts surrounding their upbringing
oFamily background
Socioeconomic background, what parents do for a living,
oEducation and occupational accomplishments (or failures)
Occupational titles, how often they change jobs, indecisions,
occupational (cognitive) demands, toxins, hazards, income,
Ask everything related to their education level and
EVERYTHING surrounding their academic life
oCurrent living situation
Money is a great motivator
Also if someone is there to help them with anything
they might need help with
oLevel of social functioning
oMedication regiment
oDrug or alcohol dependency
Even after they quit, they might have persistent cognitive
2. Behavioural Observations
How patients conduct themselves in the course of the examination is a
source of useful information
Testing differs from other forms of psychological data gathering in that it
elicits behaviour samples in a standardized, replicable, and more or
less artificial and restrictive situation
oKnown to usually be valid and reliable
Strengthssameness of the test situation for each subject so that
examiner can compare behaviour samples between individuals, over
time, or with expected performance levels
Weaknessespsychological tests are limited to the behaviours
occasioned by the test situation (ecological validity)
3. Quantitative Data
find more resources at
find more resources at

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Every psychological observation can be expressed numerically as
quantitative data
oRaw score is meaningless
As actuarial approach developed by Ralph Reitan exemplifies the
quantitative method
oRelies on scores, derived indices, and score relationships for
diagnostic predictions
oInjury characteristics are completely ignored, which is not
Objective way of looking at it
o0 is average on the graph
Scores are summary statements about observed behaviour
Scored tests with > 1 item produces a summary score
oUsually the simple sum of the scores for all the individual items
Hence, a final test score may misrepresent the behaviour under
examination on at least two counts:
oBased on only one narrowly defined aspect of behaviour samples
oAnd it is two or more steps removed from the original behaviour
o“Global” or “Full Scale” scores calculated by summing or
averaging a set of test scores are three-four steps removed from
the behaviour they represent
Thus, it might miss the relative strengths and weaknesses
Ignores the deficits
The inclusion of test scores in the psychological data base satisfies the
need for objective, readily replicable data cast in a form that permits
reliable interpretation and meaningful comparisons
Standard scoring systems provide the means for reducing a vast array
of different behaviours to a single numerical value
This standardization enables the examiner to compare the raw score of
any one test performance of a patient with all other scores of that patient,
or with any other group/performance criteria
oIf we don’t collectively communicate the scores, it doesn’t make
Test Scores:
Can be expressed in a variety of forms
oRarely does a test maker use a raw score for in itself a raw
score communicates nothing about its value
Test-makers generally report scores as values of a scale based on
the raw scores made by a standard population (the group of
individuals tested for the purpose of obtaining normative data on the
Each score then becomes a statement of its value vs. to all other scores
on that scale
find more resources at
find more resources at

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Percentile equivalents
Reporting Scores:
A difficulty in reporting scores lies in the statistically naïve person’s
natural assumption that if one measurement is larger than other,
there’s a difference in quantity of whatever is being measured
oSo we add a descriptor
Descriptor (x) Percentile (%) Range
Very Poor < 2%
Borderline 2% > x > 10%
Low Average 10% > x > 25%
Average 26% > x > 75%
Above Average 76% > x > 90%
Superior 91% > x > 98%
Very Superior > 99%
Problems in the Evaluation of Quantitative Data:
Test score approach to psychological assessment that minimizes the
importance of qualitative data
find more resources at
find more resources at
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version