After Reading The Material, I Need Assistance And Tutoring 

After Reading The Material I Need Assistance And Tutoringpsychologic


After reading the material, I need assistance and tutoring: Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation external Learning Tool Kline, T. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications. I have review chapters 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, and 10 Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006). Arbitrary metrics in psychology. Link. 


Review the construct, its conceptual definition/s, and related concepts. Examine the literature and existing tools that measure the construct. Provide justification for developing an original scale. Discuss how to construct the items, considering principles of item pool creation, the need for subject matter experts, and whether the construct is unidimensional or multidimensional. Develop at least 20 sample items representing the construct, including negatively-worded items with indications. If the construct has multiple dimensions, categorize sample items accordingly, with rationale. Argue for specific methods to analyze item performance. Choose at least two methods to establish the scale's validity, specifying the variables for criterion-related validity. Length should be 10-15 pages.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction: Understanding the Construct

Psychological constructs are fundamental elements that underpin human behavior and mental processes. They serve as theoretical variables that psychologists aim to measure and understand. The construct selected for this project is "Resilience in Adolescents", defined as the capacity to adaptively cope with stressors and adversities, maintaining psychological well-being (Luthar et al., 2000). Resilience, in this context, is multifaceted, encompassing emotional, behavioral, and cognitive components that enable adolescents to bounce back from negative experiences and develop positive functioning despite hardships. Related concepts include stress-coping mechanisms, emotional regulation, and adaptability, which interact with resilience but are not identical, emphasizing the importance of precise operationalization.

Literature Review and Existing Measurement Tools

Resilience has been extensively studied, resulting in various measurement tools such as the Resilience Scale (Wagnild & Young, 1993), the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (Connor & Davidson, 2003), and the Adolescent Resilience Scale (Hjemdal et al., 2006). These tools vary in scope, focus, and psychometric properties. The Resilience Scale emphasizes personal competence and acceptance of self and life, while Connor-Davidson captures internal resilience traits. However, many existing measures are either lengthy or not tailored specifically for adolescent populations, highlighting a gap for a concise, developmentally appropriate scale. Furthermore, some tools lack differentiation across dimensions such as emotional regulation and social support, which are critical for a comprehensive assessment of resilience.

Justification for Developing an Original Scale

Given the limitations of existing instruments, an original scale focusing explicitly on adolescent resilience is justified. It aims to integrate multidimensional aspects—emotional, social, and cognitive—drawing from theoretical frameworks and empirical research. The scale will be designed to be concise, developmentally suitable, and capable of capturing nuanced differences across dimensions, making it useful for both research and practical interventions.

Item Construction and Principles

Item pool development begins with thoroughly reviewing literature and consulting subject matter experts (SMEs) in adolescent psychology and psychometrics. The principles guiding item creation include clarity, relevance, and the ability to capture the full spectrum of the construct. Items will be written to represent each dimension, with some negatively-worded items to improve validity detection, clearly marked in a table.

The dimensions considered are:

- Emotional Regulation

- Social Support

- Problem-Solving Skills

Using a Likert scale from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree), items aim to cover each aspect comprehensively.

Sample Items and Dimensional Categorization

| Item Number | Item Text | Dimension | Negatively Worded? |

|--------------|------------|------------|---------------------|

| 1 | I can stay calm when facing stressful situations. | Emotional Regulation | No |

| 2 | When I face setbacks, I feel overwhelmed. | Emotional Regulation | Yes |

| 3 | I have people I can turn to for support during difficult times. | Social Support | No |

| 4 | I often feel alone when dealing with problems. | Social Support | Yes |

| 5 | I am good at coming up with solutions when I encounter a problem. | Problem-Solving Skills | No |

| 6 | I give up easily when things get tough. | Problem-Solving Skills | Yes |

Additional items will ensure full coverage across each dimension with attention to unidimensionality or multidimensional structure, depending on factor analysis outcomes.

Item Analysis and Scale Validation

For analyzing items, I propose employing both Classical Test Theory (CTT) methods, such as item-total correlations, and Item Response Theory (IRT) models like the Rasch model, due to their complementary advantages in highlighting item functioning. Item-total correlations help identify items that do not contribute well to the overall construct, while IRT offers insight into item difficulty and discrimination parameters, ensuring items function appropriately across varied levels of resilience.

Validity Assessments

Construct validity will be evaluated through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), testing whether the data fit the hypothesized multidimensional model. Concurrent validity will be established by correlating the resilience scale with established measures such as the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Connor & Davidson, 2003). A strong positive correlation would support the scale's criterion-related validity, demonstrating that it aligns well with existing validated instruments measuring similar constructs.

Additionally, predictive validity can be assessed by examining the scale’s ability to predict psychological outcomes such as academic performance or mental health indicators, e.g., depression or anxiety scales. Regression analyses will clarify how resilience scores account for variance in these outcomes, providing evidence for criterion validity.

Conclusion

The development of a nuanced, multidimensional resilience scale tailored to adolescents addresses a significant gap in psychological measurement. A rigorous process involving literature review, expert consultation, methodical item construction, and thorough validation procedures will result in a reliable and valid instrument. This scale can facilitate better understanding and targeted interventions to enhance resilience among adolescents, contributing valuable tools for both research and practice.

References

  • Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18(2), 76-82.
  • Hjemdal, O., Friborg, O., Martinussen, M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Foresight mental health: The resilience scale for adolescents (READ). Journal of Adolescence, 29(1), 89-98.
  • Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543-562.
  • Wagnild, G. M., & Young, H. M. (1993). Development and testing of the Resilience Scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1(2), 165-178.
  • Kline, T. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Sage Publications.
  • Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006). Arbitrary metrics in psychology. Link.
  • Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2013). Psychological resilience: A review and critique of definitions, concepts, and theory. European Psychologist, 18(1), 12-23.
  • Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227-238.
  • Fergus, S. J., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2005). From maltreatment to resilience: A framework for understanding the pathways to adolescent resilience. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29(4), 357-373.
  • Southwick, S. M., & Charney, D. S. (2012). Resilience definitions, theory, and challenges: Interdisciplinary perspectives. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 3(1), 17259.

Related Assignments