1988
DOI: 10.1177/073428298800600301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Survey of Tests Used for Adult Assessment

Abstract: A survey of test usage for adult assessment was responded to by 402 professionals. Based on the responses of 313 individuals who assess adults, the following instruments were the most popular in each domain: WAIS-R or WAIS (intelligence), WRAT-R or WRAT (achievement), MMPI (personality), Vineland (adaptive behavior), and Strong-Campbell (vocational interest). There was a tendency for the most popular instruments to be seen as providing the information of greatest importance, although Draw-A-Person was a clear … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

2
10
0

Year Published

1992
1992
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Stinnett, Havey, and Oehler-Stirlnett (1994) and Anderson, Cancelli, and Kratochwill (1984) had response rates of 31 % and 36%, respectively. Additionally, the response rate is also similar to those obtained in survey research investigating assessment practices of American Psychological Association (APA) members and directors of programs (Harrison, Kaufman, Hickman, & Kaufman, 1988;22%). A second limitation of this study is that the results are based on self-report.…”
Section: Limitations Of the Studysupporting
confidence: 52%
“…Stinnett, Havey, and Oehler-Stirlnett (1994) and Anderson, Cancelli, and Kratochwill (1984) had response rates of 31 % and 36%, respectively. Additionally, the response rate is also similar to those obtained in survey research investigating assessment practices of American Psychological Association (APA) members and directors of programs (Harrison, Kaufman, Hickman, & Kaufman, 1988;22%). A second limitation of this study is that the results are based on self-report.…”
Section: Limitations Of the Studysupporting
confidence: 52%
“…Standardized testing is the expected and accepted approach for evaluating intellectual functioning in cases involving claims of mental retardation. Although the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) maintains that “…limitations in adaptive behavior should be established through the use of standardized measures…” (Schalock et al, , p. 43), adaptive functioning measures do not appear to be as widely used as intelligence measures in general clinical practice (Harrison, Kaufman, Hickman, & Kaufman, ; Hutton & Dubes, ; Stinnett, Havey, & Oehler‐Stinnett, ) or in Mental Retardation evaluations for capital cases (Kan, Boccaccini, McGorty, Noland, & Lawson, ; Young, Boccaccini, Conroy, & Lawson, ). For example, Young et al () interviewed 13 Texas psychologists who had performed evaluations of mental retardation in capital cases and found that only seven (54%) reported that they would use a standardized adaptive functioning measure for pre‐trial evaluations and only four (31%) would use a standardized measure when evaluating an inmate on death row.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…most commonly used for adolescent and adult assessment (Harrison, Kaufman, Hickman, & Kaufman, 1988), and "probably the best interest inventory available" (Westbrook, 1985(Westbrook, , p. 1483. Although the 1985 version of the SII has been replaced by the 1994 version (Form T317), the fact that the present study utilized the previous version does not minimize the importance of the investigation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%