[HN Gopher] Open-Source Psychometrics Project
___________________________________________________________________
Open-Source Psychometrics Project
Author : Fr0styMatt88
Score : 37 points
Date : 2021-12-05 11:37 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (openpsychometrics.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (openpsychometrics.org)
| ziggus wrote:
| Nope.
|
| Psychometrics is one step away from horoscopes and E-meter
| readings.
|
| Back to the 19th century where you belong!
| willeh wrote:
| Except it isn't. There is clear evidence for efficacy of
| various psychometrical inventories in clinical settings. There
| is statistical evidence for the validity and reliability of the
| instruments themselves. Certainly there are limitations for
| what things you can use this type of methodology especially in
| cases where social desirability plays a large role.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| [citation needed]
|
| Psychological Testing, yes. Psychometric, no. For example
| screening for autism is effectively a Psychological test
| (https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/screening.html) However
| its still easy to abuse/confuse/project into wrong diagnosis.
| In autisim you don't really get a number to determine to tell
| you that you are 55% autistic.
|
| In some cases, "psychometric" tests used to determine
| specific issues work in clinical settings. When executed by a
| trained person, in a way that is not obvious to the patient.
| However even then, its not actually clear cut. Its very
| difficult to put a metric on something that inherently
| requires a subjective judgment.
|
| They can be used in the emergency room to asses patients for
| self harm risks. However they are only really a stepping
| stone to more indepth testing.
|
| Psychometric tests as used outside of clinical settings are
| deeply flawed, easily manipulated by both candidate and
| setter. They are a brilliant way to discriminate against any
| type of person you don't like.
| HPsquared wrote:
| It depends on your definition of "works". When averaged and
| aggregated, they show repeatable results and correlations
| looking at a population level (don't they?)
|
| I agree they are probably too "noisy" to be of much use in
| a clinical setting to draw definitive conclusions about an
| individual (other than probabilistic risk estimation type
| things)
| [deleted]
| voldacar wrote:
| psychometrics is basically the only area of psychology that
| actually replicates well
| kekebo wrote:
| Would you have a decent source on that?
| derbOac wrote:
| The best source I know of is this:
|
| https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797619831
| 6...
|
| Soto CJ. How Replicable Are Links Between Personality
| Traits and Consequential Life Outcomes? The Life Outcomes
| of Personality Replication Project. Psychological Science.
| 2019;30(5):711-727. doi:10.1177/0956797619831612
|
| Not exactly the same, and I wouldn't say exactly what the
| OP said but yes, it suggests these kinds of things at least
| replicate fairly well.
|
| FWIW, I'm very familiar with this open-source psychometrics
| project website (I think I used data from it once) and it's
| sort of a mish-mash of pop-fun-entertainment fluff and
| legitimate scientific stuff.
| slig wrote:
| I couldn't find on the website the "source" (i.e, tem questions,
| their scores and the what the scores means).
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-07 23:01 UTC)