While the psychometric equivalence of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration formats has been documented for some tests, so far very few studies have focused on the comparability and validity of test scores obtained via in-person versus remote administrations, and none of them have researched a symptom validity test (SVT). To contribute to fill this gap in the literature, we investigated the scores of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) generated by various administration formats. More specifically, Study 1 evaluated the equivalence of scores from nonclinical individuals administered the IOP-29 remotely (n = 146) versus in-person via computer (n = 140) versus in-person via paper-and-pencil format (n = 140). Study 2 reviewed published IOP-29 studies conducted using remote/online versus in-person, paper-and-pencil test administrations to determine if remote testing could adversely influence the validity of IOP-29 test results. Taken together, our findings suggest that the effectiveness of the IOP-29 is preserved when alternating between face-to-face and online/remote formats.

Comparability and Validity of the Online and In-Person Administrations of the Inventory of Problems-29

Giromini L.
First
;
Pignolo C.;Zennaro A.;
2021

Abstract

While the psychometric equivalence of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration formats has been documented for some tests, so far very few studies have focused on the comparability and validity of test scores obtained via in-person versus remote administrations, and none of them have researched a symptom validity test (SVT). To contribute to fill this gap in the literature, we investigated the scores of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) generated by various administration formats. More specifically, Study 1 evaluated the equivalence of scores from nonclinical individuals administered the IOP-29 remotely (n = 146) versus in-person via computer (n = 140) versus in-person via paper-and-pencil format (n = 140). Study 2 reviewed published IOP-29 studies conducted using remote/online versus in-person, paper-and-pencil test administrations to determine if remote testing could adversely influence the validity of IOP-29 test results. Taken together, our findings suggest that the effectiveness of the IOP-29 is preserved when alternating between face-to-face and online/remote formats.
14
2
77
88
IOP-29; Malingering; Online; Symptom validity assessment; Teleassessment
Giromini L.; Pignolo C.; Young G.; Drogin E.Y.; Zennaro A.; Viglione D.J.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Giromini et al. (2021) Comparability and Validity of the Online and In‑Person Administrations of the IOP-29.pdf

Accesso aperto

Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 735.88 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
735.88 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2318/1810164
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact