ArticleAustralian journal of psychology2024
Psychological testing in the profession of psychology: an Australian study.
Article in Australian journal of psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: In Australia, psychological measurement and testing is a core competency for all registered psychologists. This study aimed to provide a current perspective on the views of Australian psychologists in the use of psychological testing given the lack of recent Australian research. Method: Psychologists ( Results: Attitudinal differences, based on demographics and practice endorsement area, were examined. Partial support was obtained for the factorial model of previous EFPA studies. There was no difference in attitudes based upon the gender of the psychologists, but older psychologists reported less favourable attitudes and lower competence for psychological testing. Psychologists holding endorsements in organisational psychology, neuropsychology, and educational and developmental psychology indicated more positive testing attitudes and appreciation than other areas of practice. The application of technology in assessment was identified as an area that warrants further investigation and training. Conclusions: The outcome has theoretical and practical implications for professional bodies and educational institutions that develop policies and training programs relevant to psychological measurement and testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.