Contributions of the EFPA Standing Committee on Tests and Testing to standards and good practice

European Psychologist

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 149-159

  Bartram, Dave ^a  

^a SHL Group Ltd   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Psychological testing; Test certification; Test quality; Test Review; Test user qualification

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955753433     PISSN: 10169040     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000093     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. AERA. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). In Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2. Bartram, D. (1995). The development of standards for the use of psychological tests in occupational settings: The competence approach. The Psychologist, May, 219-223.
3. Bartram, D. (1996). Test qualifications and test use in the UK: The competence approach. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 12, 62-71.
4. Bartram, D. (1998). The need for international guidelines on standards for test use: A review of European and International initiatives. European Psychologist, 3, 155-163. (Pubitemid 128106881)
5. Bartram, D. (2001). The development of international guidelines on test use: The International Test Commission Project. International Journal of Testing, 1, 33-53.
6. Bartram, D. (2008). The advantages and disadvantages of on-line testing. In S. Cartwright & C. Cooper (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personnel psychology. Oxford University Press.
7. Bartram, D., & Coyne, I. (1998a). The ITC/EFPPA survey of testing and test use within Europe. In Proceedings of the British Psychological Society's Occupational Psychology Conference (pp. 197-201). Leicester, UK: British Psychological Society.
8. Bartram, D., & Coyne, I. (1998b). Variations in national patterns of testing and test use. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14, 249-260.
9. Bartram, D., Lindley, P. A., & Foster, J. M. (1990). A review of psychometric tests for assessment in vocational training. Sheffield: The Training Agency.
10. Evers, A., Sijtsma, K., Lucassen, W., & Meijer, R. R. (2011). The Dutch review process for evaluating the quality of psychological tests: History, procedure, and results. International Journal of Testing, 10, 295-317.
11. Fernandez-Ballesteros, R. (1997). Task force for the development of guidelines for the assessment process (GAP). The International Test Commission Newsletter, 7, 16-20.
12. Fernandez-Ballesteros, R., De Bruyn, E. E. J., Godoy, A., Hornke, L. F., Ter Laak, J., Vizcarro, C., Zaccagnini, J. L. (2001). Guidelines for the assessment process (GAP). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 187-200.
13. Hambleton, R. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 229-244.
14. Hambleton, R. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In R. K. Hambleton, P. Merenda, & C. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for crosscultural assessment. Erlbaum.
15. ITC. (2001). International guidelines on test use. International Journal of Testing, 1, 95-114.
16. ITC. (2006). International Guidelines on computer-based and Internet-delivered testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 143-172.
17. ITC. (2010). A test-taker's guide to technology-based testing. Retrieved from http://www.intestcom.org.
18. Muñiz, J., & Bartram, D. (2007). Improving international tests and testing. European Psychologist, 12, 206-219.
19. Muñiz, J., Bartram, D., Evers, A., Boben, D., Matesic, K., Glabeke, K., Zaal, J. N. (2001). Testing practices in European countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 201-211.
20. Van de Vijver, F., & Hambleton, R. (1996). Translating tests: Some practical guidelines. European Psychologist, 1, 89-99.