PSI-4 Summary
Validity The discussion of validity in the manual focuses mainly on the literature that supports the foundations and assumptions of the PSI-4, as well as the specific subscales. Abidin (2012) provides a brief review of the literature that used the PSI-4. The covered topics include anxiety and parenting, at-risk children, attachment, ADHD, child abuse, family, forensic contexts, parent–child interaction/observed behavior, premature termination/medical treatment adherence, social support, substance abuse, and parental depression. Correlations between the subscales on the PSI-3 and PSI-4 ranged from 0.85 to 0.99. Correlations were found to be higher between the Parent domain and its own subscales (r = 0.82, SD = 0.061) than between the Parent
…show more content…
However, all questions are answered from the parent perspective thus it is unclear how truthful these reports are when examining child stress levels as well as these reports primarily access the parent’s subjective view of stress in the relationship. Specifically, a parent’s answers may not be the best indicator of a child’s stress in the relationship when they are at a young age. For example, if the parent is frustrated with his or her child at the time of administration, this could change the way the parent may have answered at another time, thus answering in a biased manner. Essentially, if the parent is answering based on emotions at the time of test administration, this may result in low correlation coefficients in the Child domain sub scale when engaging in a test-retest reliability check for research studies which was briefly discussed in this paper and may impair results. The fact that this is a subjective measure and can be influenced by the parents’ attitudes toward the child at the time of administration has limitations with regards to truthful data collected. If the child was old enough, researchers have challenged for the child to answer questions on the Child domain and the parent to answer on the Parent domain, however the challenge with this is that the test is written at a fifth grade level and is only for parents with children up to age twelve …show more content…
The manual as well as reviews of the literature do not identify why three different types of test items are utilized for one assessment and whether this is pertinent to the test as a whole. Item response theory (IRT) assumes unidimensionality of a test. According to Sykes, Hou, Hanson, and Wang (2002), mixed item formats on a test may raise questions about the test’s dimensionality which can lead to further concerns about the psychometric properties of the
However, all questions are answered from the parent perspective thus it is unclear how truthful these reports are when examining child stress levels as well as these reports primarily access the parent’s subjective view of stress in the relationship. Specifically, a parent’s answers may not be the best indicator of a child’s stress in the relationship when they are at a young age. For example, if the parent is frustrated with his or her child at the time of administration, this could change the way the parent may have answered at another time, thus answering in a biased manner. Essentially, if the parent is answering based on emotions at the time of test administration, this may result in low correlation coefficients in the Child domain sub scale when engaging in a test-retest reliability check for research studies which was briefly discussed in this paper and may impair results. The fact that this is a subjective measure and can be influenced by the parents’ attitudes toward the child at the time of administration has limitations with regards to truthful data collected. If the child was old enough, researchers have challenged for the child to answer questions on the Child domain and the parent to answer on the Parent domain, however the challenge with this is that the test is written at a fifth grade level and is only for parents with children up to age twelve …show more content…
The manual as well as reviews of the literature do not identify why three different types of test items are utilized for one assessment and whether this is pertinent to the test as a whole. Item response theory (IRT) assumes unidimensionality of a test. According to Sykes, Hou, Hanson, and Wang (2002), mixed item formats on a test may raise questions about the test’s dimensionality which can lead to further concerns about the psychometric properties of the