Descriptor
Source
| Measurement and Evaluation in… | 3 |
Author
| Hansen, Jo-Ida C. | 1 |
| Haverkamp, Beth E. | 1 |
| Kumar, V. K. | 1 |
| Lubinski, Barbara R. | 1 |
| Neuman, Jody L. | 1 |
| Vansickle, Timothy R. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 3 |
| Reports - Research | 3 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
| Strong Campbell Interest… | 1 |
| Strong Interest Inventory | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedVansickle, Timothy R.; And Others – Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 1989
Examined the equivalence of two versions of the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory (SCII) using four combinations of paper-and-pencil and computer administrations with college student subjects (N=75). Found slightly better test-retest reliability for the computer-based SCII. (Author/ABL)
Descriptors: College Students, Computer Assisted Testing, Higher Education, Interest Inventories
Peer reviewedKumar, V. K.; And Others – Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 1986
Disguising scale purpose by using an innocuous skill title and filler items had no effect on the reliability and validity of Rotter's Interpersonal Trust Scale. (Author)
Descriptors: College Students, Higher Education, Response Style (Tests), Student Attitudes
Peer reviewedHansen, Jo-Ida C.; Neuman, Jody L.; Haverkamp, Beth E.; Lubinski, Barbara R. – Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 1997
Examined user reaction to computer-administered and paper-and-pencil-administered forms of the Strong Interest Inventory. Results indicate that user reactions to the two administration modes were reasonably similar in most areas. However, the computer group indicated more often that their version was easier to use and follow. (RJM)
Descriptors: College Students, Computer Assisted Testing, Higher Education, Interest Inventories
