From paper to pixels: A comparison of paper and computer formats in psychological assessment

Computers in Human Behavior

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 1-7

  Naus, Mary J ^a   Philipp, Laura M ^a   Samsi, Mekhala ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Computers in psychological research; Depression; Paper and computer formats in psychological assessment; Personality; Quality of life

Indexed keywords

COLLEGE STUDENTS; DATA COLLECTION METHODS; DEPRESSION; EFFICIENT; GREAT-ER; INTERNET BASED; PAPER FORMATS; PAPER TESTS; PERSONALITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS; PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCHES; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY OF LIVES; QUESTIONNAIRE DATUM; REDUCED COSTS;

SURVEYS;

EID: 54449089103     PISSN: 07475632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.05.012     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2. American Psychological Association (1992). American Psychological association ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Accessed 04.08.06.
3. American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
4. Anderson N. Applicant and recruiter reactions to new technology in selection: A critical review and agenda for future research. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 11 (2003) 121-136
5. Beck A., Brown G., and Steer R. BDI-II manual (1996), The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio
6. Buchanan T. Potential of the internet for personality research. In: Birnbuam M.H. (Ed). Psychological experiments on the internet (2000), Academic Press, San Diego, CA 121-140
7. Buchanan T., Johnson J.A., and Goldberg L.R. Implementing a five-factor personality inventory for use on the Internet. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 21 (2005) 115-127
8. Buchanan T., and Smith J.L. Research on the internet: Validation of a world-wide web mediating personality scale. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 31 (1999) 565-571
9. Buchanan T., and Smith J.L. Using Internet for psychological research: Personality testing on the World Wide Web. British Journal of Personality 90 (1999) 125-144
10. Burke J., Burke K., and Baker J. Test retest reliability in psychiatric patients of the SF-36 Health Survey. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research 5 (1995) 189-194
11. Carlbring P., Brunt S., and Bohman S. Internet vs. paper and pencil administration of questionnaires commonly used in panic/agoraphobia research. Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1421-1434
12. Caruso J.C. Reliability generalization of the NEO personality scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 60 (2000) 236-255
13. Chuah S.C., Drasgow F., and Roberts B.W. Personality assessment: Does the medium matter? No. Journal of Research in Personality 40 (2006) 359-376
14. Clay G.E., Lankford J.S., and Wilson S.E. The effects of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration on measures of negative affect. Computers in Human Behavior 8 (1992) 203-209
15. Cole M.S., Bedeian A.G., and Field H.S. The measurement equivalence of web-based and paper and pencil measures of transformational leadership: A multinational test. Organizational Research Methods 9 (2006) 339-368
16. Cory C.H. Relative utility of computerized versus paper-and-pencil tests for predicting job performance. Applied Psychological Measurement 1 (1977) 551-564
17. Costa Jr. P.T., and McCrae R.R. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual (1992), Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL
18. Costa Jr. P.T., McCrae R.R., and Dye D.A. Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences 12 (1991) 887-898
19. Coyne C. The impact of mode of data collection on data quality with subjects having low literacy skills (African American women). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 60 (1999) 1552
20. Cronbach L.J. Essentials of psychological testing. 5th ed. (1990), Harper Collins, New York
21. Cronk B.C., and West J.L. Personality research on the internet: A comparison of web-based and traditional instruments in take-home and in-class settings. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 34 (2002) 177-180
22. Donovan M.A., Drasgow F., and Probst T.M. Does computerizing paper-and-pencil job attitude scales make a difference? New IRT analyses offer insight. Journal of Applied Psychology 85 (2000) 305-313
23. Dozois D., Dobson K., and Ahnberg J. A psychometric evaluation of the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Psychological Assessment 10 (1998) 83-89
24. Griffin B., Hesketh B., and Grayson D. Applicants faking good: Evidence of item bias in the NEO PI-R. Personality and Individual Difference 36 (2004) 1545-1558
25. Hill S.R. Social desirability in the use of the five-factor model in employee selection. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 64 (2004) 3576
26. Johnson J.A. Ascertaining the validity of individual protocols from Web-based personality inventories. Journal of Research in Personality 39 (2005) 103-129
27. Knapp F., and Heidingsfelder M. Drop-out analysis: Effects of the survey design. In: Reips U.D., and Bosnjak M. (Eds). Dimensions of internet science (2001), Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich, Germany 221-230
28. Lukin M., Dowd E., and Plake B. Comparing computerized versus traditional psychological assessment. Computers in Human Behavior 1 (1985) 49-58
29. Madden, M., & Rainie, L. (2003). America's online pursuits: The changing picture of who's online and what they do. Accessed 03.08.06.
30. Martin C.L., and Nagao D.H. Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses. Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (1989) 72-80
31. McFarland, L. A., Ryan, A. M., & Paul, K. B. (1998). Equivalence of an organizational attitude survey across administration modes. Unpublished paper presented at the 13th annual conference of the society for industrial and organizational psychology, Dallas, TX.
32. McHorney C.A., Ware J.E., Lu J.F.R., and Sherbourne C.D. The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36®): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care 32 (1994) 40-66
33. Mead, A. D. (2001). How well does web-based testing work? Results of a survey of users of NetAssess. Paper presented at the 16th annual conference of the society for industrial and organizational psychology, San Diego, CA.
34. Musch J., and Reips U.D. A brief history of web experimenting. In: Birnbuam M.H. (Ed). Psychological experiments on the internet (2000), Academic Press, San Diego, CA 61-88
35. Overton R.C., Taylor L.R., and Zickar M.J. The pen-based computer as an alternative platform for test administration. Personnel Psychology 49 (1996) 455-464
36. Peterson L., Johannsson V., and Carlsson S.G. Computerized testing in a hospital setting: Psychometric and psychological effects. Computers in Human Behavior 12 (1996) 339-350
37. Rammstedt B., Holzinger B., and Rammsayer T. Comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized administration of the NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). Diagnostica 50 (2004) 88-97
38. Reips U.D. The web experiment method: Advantages, disadvantages, and solutions. In: Birnbuam M.H. (Ed). Psychological experiments on the internet (2000), Academic Press, San Diego, CA 89-117
39. Reynolds, D. H., Sinar, E. F., & McClough, A. C. (2000). Evaluation of an Internet-based selection procedure. Paper presented at the 15th annual conference for the society for industrial and organizational psychology, New Orleans, LA.
40. Robie C., and Brown D.J. Measurement equivalence of a personality inventory administered on the Internet versus a kiosk. Applied H.R.M. Research 11 (2006) 97-107
41. Rosenfeld P., Giacalone R.A., Knouse S.B., Doherty L.M., Vicino S.M., Kantor J., et al. Impression management, candor, and microcomputer-based organizational surveys: An individual differences approach. Computers in Human Behavior 7 (1991) 23-32
42. Ryan J.M., Corry J.R., and Attewell R. A comparison of an electronic version of the SF-36 General Health Questionnaire to the standard paper version. Quality of Life Research 11 (2002) 19-26
43. Salgado J.F., and Moscoso S. Internet-based personality testing: Equivalence of measures and assesses' perceptions and reactions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 11 (2003) 194-205
44. Sanitioso R., and Reynolds J.H. Comparability of standard and computerized administration of two personality questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences 13 (1992) 899-907
45. Schmidt W.C. World-wide web survey research: Benefits, and potential problems, and solutions. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 29 (1997) 274-279
46. Schulenberg S.E., and Yutrzenka B.A. Equivalence of computerized and conventional versions of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social 20 (2001) 216-230
47. Sheehan K.B., and McMillan S.J. Response variation in e-mail surveys: An exploration. Journal of Advertising Research 39 (1999) 45-54
48. Smith M.A., and Leigh B. Virtual subjects: Using the internet as an alternative source of subjects and research environment. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 29 (1997) 496-505
49. Suris A., Borman P., and Lind L. Aggression, impulsivity, and health functioning in a veteran population: Equivalency and test-retest reliability of computerized and paper-and-pencil administrations. Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 97-110
50. Stanton J.M., and Rogelberg S.G. Using internet/intranet web pages to collect organizational research data. Organizational Research Methods 4 (2001) 199-217
51. Steiner D.D., and Gilliland S.W. Procedural justice in personnel selection. International and cross-cultural perspectives. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 9 (2001) 124-137
52. Vispoel W.P., Boo J., and Bleiler T. Computerized and paper and pencil versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: A comparison of psychometric features and respondent preferences. Educational and Psychological Measures 61 (2001) 461-474
53. ® Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A user's manual (1994), The Health Institute, Boston, MA
54. Wiseman F. Methodological bias in public opinion surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (1972) 105-108