The development of a set of guidelines for the revision of psychological tests and the use of revised psychological tests

Abstract

The psychological testindustry has produced a wide variety of psychological tests that are used by professionals to facilitate measurement and decision-making. Tests are updated and revised periodically in order to remain current, valid and reliable in what is a competitive psychometric industry. Despite the prevalence of test revisions, especially in recent years, a number of authors have commented on the lack of comprehensive guidelines for test revision. Guidelines shouldcover aspects such as what the different types of revision are, when to embark on a revision, whatprocessto followand how test users should use revised tests. Test revision differs from test construction in a number of ways. There are external factors that affect the regularity with which a test should be revised. Test revision also involves more role players than test construction, including the opinions of those test users who may be resistant to any change in the previous test edition. Finally, revised tests sometimes have to contend with requirements from the test publisher who purchased the test or distribution rights from the developer. Test revision is expensive and time consuming, which leaves little scope for experimentation or trial-and-error. The availability of expertise, as well as the human and financial resources required to complete test revisionscan make such projects unaffordable, especiallyforprofessionals indeveloping countries, such as South Africa.It may be more feasible for such professionalsto collaborate with international revision projects. By doing so they cangain experience in test revision, contribute indigenous information that could shapethe revision ofan international test, increase opportunities to engage with international users, and potentially source international funding for research in their own country. The current studydevelopeda comprehensive and practical set of 30 guidelines to assist those involved in test revision. These guidelines were peer-reviewed and refined. Finally, the guidelines were field-tested using a case study of a recently revised ivdevelopmentaltest, the Griffiths III. Professionals from South Africa, including the present researcher,formed part of the international team for the extensive revision of the Griffiths III, which makes this test an ideal case study from both the perspectives of the developed test revision guidelines as well as collaboration of professionals from a developing country in an international test revision. The knowledge gainedfrom the development of guidelines and international collaboration in test revision is reflected on