The University of Nebraska Press The two volumes of Tests in Print IV contain information on 3,009 test entries. Each entry includes bibliographies of references for each test giving information about the construction, validity and use of the test, the address and name of the publisher, a score index, the populations for which the test is intended, and a list of the reviewers of the test in the Mental Measurements Yearbook. The introduction contains crisp, understandable instructions of how to use the volumes. The tests are listed alphabetically by title so finding a test referred to is readily accomplished. Tests in Print IV also has six indexes that markedly improve the usefulness of the work. For instance, there is an Index of Acronyms so that a person relatively uninformed about testing but who hears or reads a test referred to by the Acronym (i.e. CAT, WAIS-R, MCMI, etc.) can find it and then locate the appropriate entry. Measurement of anything is overlooked but never overestimated as a crucial step in knowledge. Measurement of psychological and educational variables is all the more complex because what is being measured is often not directly observable. Nevertheless, psychological and educational measurement has grown rapidly and continuously with new attempts at measurement hitting the literature almost everyday. Anyone who either practices or consumes psychological science inevitably encounters claims that something has been measured, found to be in some quantity, and therefore this or that conclusion is either drawn or advanced as affirmed or disconfirmed. When such measurement attempts are encountered in the justice system, they are often connected with decisions that vitally and powerfully affect lives and liberty interests of many persons. Everybody involved in the process of making decisions that affect so much and so many should be at least minimally knowledgeable about measurement of psychological and education variables. Yet this is very seldom the case. Even many of the professionals claiming to have measured or reporting the measurement of something of interest to the court are ignorant and uninformed. We have seen time and time again references to and/or reported usage of measurement procedures that have no validity or reliability, are not published or standardized in any way, but nevertheless are presented in court as measurements that can be relied upon to inform a finder of fact. An example of this is the Kelly Michaels conviction recently overturned by the Appellate and Supreme Courts of New Jersey. A validator of sexual abuse allegation, Eileen Treacy, testified in court about her measurement of the behavior of the children alleged to have been victimized. She called it a test and reported a testing measurement procedure that she used as the basis for her opinion that the children had been abused. It was an idiosyncratic, subjective, unvalidated and unreliable procedure with no scientific credibility. However, the jury convicted and it took five years for the courts finally to rule, as they did, that there was no test and that no valid measurement ever took place. Kelly Michaels spent five years in prison. This compilation of valid information about every test currently available for purchase is an indispensable resource for the justice system. It should be in every law library and available to every attorney, judge, or mental health professional who works in the justice system. At the very least, the fact that a test is or is not published and commercially available will give a quick and ready fix on what to do next to evaluate it. If a procedure referred to as a test in any testimony or document is not in Tests in Print IV, you know immediately it is not published and it is imperative to check on what scientific data there are to support its use. The procedure may well not be proper and therefore not admissible as evidence. The entries provide enough information to make a quick triaging decision as to whether the use made of the test supports the conclusions or opinions derived from it. If it appears further clarification is needed, the entries give the necessary information to pursue the more complete body of literature about a specific test. Then a trip to the local library to read the Mental Measurements Yearbook (MMY) is warranted. I strongly recommend that lawyers, social work agencies, bar associations, and courthouse libraries purchase Tests in Print IV and have it available. All mental health professionals who use tests and write reports should purchase it as a standard reference. Reviewed by Ralph Underwager, Institute for Psychological Therapies, Northfield, Minnesota.
|
