Construct Development, Scale Creation, and Process Analysis
Cathleen Buckley, Christina Drakeford, Taquanta Johnson, Chad Hughes
PSYCH/655 – Psychometrics
November 5, 2018
Dr. Amy Logsdon
?
Construct Development, Scale Creation, and Process Analysis
Part I – Construct Development and Scale Creation
A. Construct to measure
1. Test Anxiety
a. Elementary (1st grade-6th grade)
b. Middle school (7th-8th grade)
c. High school (9th-12th grade)
d. College (Undergraduate)

B. Operational definition of the construct using three (3) peer-related journal articles
1. ..
2. ..
3. ..

C. Five items to sample the domain
1. Difficulty concentrating
a. Negative self-image
2. Restlessness
a. Inability to standstill, pacing, fidgeting, wringing hands/hair
3. Irritability
a. Short-tempered
4. Worry
a. Test performance
1. Cognitive
a. Preparing and taking
5. Emotional
a. Physiological reaction/responses
D. Selected method of scaling appropriate for the domain
1. Self-Reporting instrument
a. Paired comparisons
E. Justify selected scaling method
1. Valid data both qualitative and quantitative
a. Data can be collected at a low cost from different groups of people
2. Questions can be quantifiable
b. Easier to compare data between larger groups

F. Formatted items – an instrument to query respondents
G. Justification for the interview or self-report instrument
1. This is considered a self-report instrument
a. The norm and reliability measure creates a self-reported test.
?
Part II – Analysis and Justification
Construct Development, Scale Creation, and Process Analysis
Many students experience test anxiety which often arises during taking tests and at the chance of negative consequences. Sufferers display this specific anxiety before taking a test and during the actual test-taking. The symptoms consist of specific, cognitive sections, and physiological effects (Pekrun, 2001). Test anxiety is a frequent occurrence and drastically impacts students’ academic progress as well as, their physical and mental well-being. In relation to today’s pressures and increased amount of tests mandatory for an education, there is necessity for construct development, scale creation, and a process analysis to measure test anxiety effects on students who risk academic and future issues.
This essay analyzes how this instrument is normalized and its reliability measures, determine the number of participants in the study, and defines their characteristics. In addition, it explains to whom the instrument is generalized, how validity is established and describes the item selection methodology. Lastly, it discusses whether cut-off scores are established and explains how the item selection is evaluated.
Description of Instrument Norm and Reliability Measures Used
“The instrument norm is designed for a group of test takers as a reference for evaluation, interpretation, and context placement of their individual test scores” (Cohen, Swerdlik & Sturman, 2018, I-26). In this instance, the norm-referenced test would establish a baseline to examine cognitive functions by using score comparisons and performance statistics to test its impact on test anxiety. For example, data may include poor test preparation to students’ traits of freezing on a test to heightened self-confidence. Using previously established reliability measurements provide a method to compare similar constructs to other tests. A tool for reliability measurement is ‘situation-specific’ to focus on the two main factors of test anxiety; emotional and cognitive measurements. This would emphasize study habits and skills, test perceptions, emotional factors and possibly, cognitive scale measurements for consistency over time (Cohen, Swerdlik ; Sturman, 2018).
Number of Participants
We are working with a small population; therefore, the sample size is larger. This study has 400 students from local elementary, middle school, high school, and one university. For an equal representation, 25 male and 25 female (50) students will be randomly selected from each group and their age; appropriate according to grade level. Collecting the test results would occur during study periods, through study groups and surveys, one week prior to final examinations to gauge the severity of test anxiety.
Respondent Characteristics
In the article Anxious for Success….(n.d.), it was found that test anxiety correlates to the anxiety linked to performance stressors and consists of cognitive, behavioral, and physiological characteristics. Each sample has its own unique stressors indicated in Table 1. Test anxiety characteristics surpass regular levels of studying students when subjected to stressful circumstances. As a result, as anxiety increases, test performance decreases. The New York State Board found students who exhibit test anxiety often view testing situations as an aversive personal threat. When this occurs, they display high levels of anxiety under testing or evaluating conditions (Anxious for Success…, n.d.).
Respondent Characteristics
Elementary School Restlessness, irritability, aches and pains, temper tantrums, nightmare, nausea
Middle Internalized – worry or withdrawal
Physical symptoms, stomach aches
High School Excessive worry and insomnia, and preoccupied.
Keep worries to themselves
College Fear of failure, threatening situation, thoughts of inadequacy or incapability

Explanation To Whom the Instrument is Generalized
How Validity is Established
Methodology of Item Selection
The methodology of this test is to better understand how often students develop test anxiety while attending academic classes. To measure their frequency, the data from how often students have test anxiety prior to taking tests and the tests results consequences will be used. Additional insight into the frequency of test anxiety will also be obtained by using a random selection of varying age groups. Test reliability and validity of the results are vital to properly score data. Appropriate timing of the test and following testing regulations and procedures will assist with increasing the tests’ success.
Decision to Establish Cut-Off Scores
There will be an established cut-off score when depending on the success of passing the exam or not. Because of the norm test having a baseline it is imperative that all students reach the above baseline for a successful measurement. At the same time comparison of scores will help evaluate the factors associated with poor study habits or test anxiety issues. There has to be a standard (cut-off score) set to have a subjective argument rather the students were successful during the test or not. And if not successful why and how come. The cut-off score will aid in determining just how much of an impact the anxiety driven factors had on the students while testing.
Item Selection Evaluation
The DSM is very detailed about how worrying, irritability, and how the mind can draw blanks. Not only are these symptoms present, but many others. Sweats, inability to focus, and/or restlessness are other common symptoms of anxiety in general. Therefore, once these symptoms are understood a serious of yes or no questions must be asked. A detailed questionnaire can be given before the exam is even administered to help in detecting who may be suffering from a form of anxiety. In this situation, it would be evident that the factor is the exam the students are about to take. These questions would first be administered to those who have clinically been diagnosed with test anxiety. Once they complete the questionnaire then it can be given to the students. The answers are compared, reviewed and considered prior to the exam. This would assist as a preliminary review of how many students experience symptoms of test anxiety.
Conclusion chris
References
Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E. & Sturman, E. D. (2018). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Anxious for Success: High Anxiety in New York’s Schools (n.d.). New York State School Boards Association. Retrieved from
https://www.nyssba.org/clientuploads/nyssba_pdf/Test_Anxiety_Report.pdf
Pekrun, R. (2001). Test Anxiety and Academic Achievement. International Encyclopedia of the Social ; Behavioral Sciences,15610-15614. doi:10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/02451-7