Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Evaluation of the EPPS
Transcript of Evaluation of the EPPS
Adam Buttrick EPPS Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Scoring Procedures Reliability Norms Validity EPPS was compared with the Guilford Martin Personality Inventory, Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale, California Psychological Inventory, the Adjective Check List, the Thematic Apperception Test, the Strong Vocational Interest Blank, and the MMPI. In these studies there are often statistically significant correlations among the scales of these tests and the EPPS, but the relationships are usually low-to-moderate and sometimes are difficult for the researcher to explain. Since the MMPI is still actively used today on a worldwide basis as a major brand test this comparison might be the most interesting to study. Test-taking Administration is simple, because all the administrator must do is explain the use of the score sheet, but the actual test and instructions are given on the test sheet to each individual test-taker.
The test-taker reads all instructions and fills out the answers themselves.
Rapport is important (as always), but considering the personal nature of the test, there will not be interaction during the test. Test Format 15 Personality Variable Scales The test can either be scored by hand, or through a machine.
The score is determined based upon the category that the test-taker most often agreed with on the statements.
i.e. The examinee agreed with every item on the test related to Nurturance (15 items), but only agreed with Aggression 2 times. One can then assume that the examinee is not very aggressive.
Interpretation of Scores is usually done in the counseling setting with one-on-one discussion regarding the results The reliability of the EPPS was determined through the Test-Retest procedure, with a group of 89 students at the University of Washington. They took it twice with a one week interval. To determine the NORM, the scores from the 1509 college students who took it for reliability were observed and averaged for each category, separated between men and women. A forced choice, objective, non-projective Personality Inventory
Meant for people between 16-85
Takes Approx. 45 minutes to complete
Used primarily in Personal Counseling, but can be used in groups. Achievement
Aggression Each category is paired with the 14 others, making a total of 210 items, with another item added for each category just to check consistency. A. I like to share things with my friends
B. I like to analyze my own motives or feelings It was determined two ways: It was also determined through Split-half reliability, with a group of 1509 College students. The inter-correlated Coefficients were very low, which means the relationships between the items is not very good (which means they are measuring different things, a good sign.) Reliability in general has been questioned. The coefficients have been separated between the 15 categories. Overall reliability is close to .77 Biggest factor of validity is the
Social Desirability Factor, with a coefficient of .871 The official scoring involves adding up the number of times the examinee answered "A" or "B" in each row. The scorer puts each number in the proper row that correlates to the given category to determine that individuals score (between 0-28). The averages seemed to have most of the categories falling in the middle (close to 14) for the most part.
The men's highest category score was that of Dominance (big surprise)
Men's lowest score was Order
Women's highest category was of Affiliation (also, big surprise)
Women's lowest score was also Order When averaged together, the highest score between men and women was Intraception. Reviewer Comments Wittenborn: "a thoughtfully constructed instrument, embodies merits expressive of contemporary psychology. Although the author emphasizes the value of his schedule as an instrument for research, it comprises features which may prove to be of great merit in practical assessment." MMY: Developed by Allen L. Edwards (Professor of Psychology at the University of Washington) in 1957.