Literature DB >> 10495816

The equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil psychological instruments: implications for measures of negative affect.

S E Schulenberg1, B A Yutrzenka.   

Abstract

The use of computerized psychological assessment is a growing practice among contemporary mental health professionals. Many popular and frequently used paper-and-pencil instruments have been adapted into computerized versions. Although equivalence for many instruments has been evaluated and supported, this issue is far from resolved. This literature review deals with recent research findings that suggest that computer aversion negatively impacts computerized assessment, particularly as it relates to measures of negative affect. There is a dearth of equivalence studies that take into account computer aversion's potential impact on the measurement of negative affect. Recommendations are offered for future research in this area.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10495816     DOI: 10.3758/bf03207726

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput        ISSN: 0743-3808


  5 in total

1.  Validation of the electronic version of the BREAST-Q in the army of women study.

Authors:  Sarah Fuzesi; Stefan J Cano; Anne F Klassen; Dunya Atisha; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 4.380

2.  Measurement equivalence using a mixed-mode approach to administer health-related quality of life instruments.

Authors:  Jeanette M Broering; Alan Paciorek; Peter R Carroll; Leslie S Wilson; Mark S Litwin; Christine Miaskowski
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Methodological issues in Internet-mediated research: a randomized comparison of internet versus mailed questionnaires.

Authors:  Lisa Whitehead
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2011-12-04       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 4.  Interformat reliability of digital psychiatric self-report questionnaires: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sven Alfonsson; Pernilla Maathz; Timo Hursti
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 5.428

5.  Comparison of two Bayesian methods to detect mode effects between paper-based and computerized adaptive assessments: a preliminary Monte Carlo study.

Authors:  Barth B Riley; Adam C Carle
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 4.615

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.