ED 164 579 TM 008 001 Manual for the USES General Aptitude Test BaLtery. Section III

436 Pages·2007·16.69 MB·English

DOCUMENT ::',ESUBE
TM 008 001
ED 164 579
Manual for the USES General Aptitude Test BaLtery.
TITLE
Section III: Development.
Manpower Administration (DOL), Washington, D.C.
INSTITUTION
PUB DATE
70
423p.; For related documents, see TM 007 890 and 008
NOTE
Small type may be marginally legible
281
;
Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Printing Office,
AVAILABLE FROM
Washington, D.C. 20402 (Stock Number 029-014-00018-3,
$3.95)
MF-$0.83 HC-$22.09 Plus Postage.
ED FS PRICE
Adults; Aptitude Tests; Bibliographic Citations;
DESCRIPTORS
Higher Education; Norms; *Occupational Tests;
Occupations; Scoring Formulas; Senior High Schools;
Test Bias; *Test Interpretation; Test Reliability;
*Test Reviews; *Test Validity; *Vocational
Aptitude
*General Iptitude Test Battery; *Test Manuals
IDENTIFIERS
kBSTRACT
This revised manual for the General Aptitude Test
item
(1) historical development;
Battery (GATE) discusses:
(2)
(5) general
(4) physical format;
factor analysis;
analysis;
(3)
(6) intercorrelations of raw
working population norms (ages 18 -54) ;
(7) development of
GATB test scores and of GATB aptitude scores;
data for various GATE
norms for specific occupations (tables present
validity studies on 446 occupations defined by the Dictionary of
development of norms for specific
Occupational Titles) ;
(8)
(9) validity of norms for specific occupations;
(10)
occupations;
(11) validity
development of Occupational Aptitude Pattern Structure;
relationship of
of occupational Aptitude Pattern norms;
(12)
(13) effectiveness of tests in
aptitudes to college success;
(14). correlations with 40 other
selection and counseling;
(15) reliability and effects of practice; (16)
standardized tests;
(17) effect of sex, minority group
effect of training on scores;
effect of aging on
status, and cultural exposure on scores;
(18)
(20) 9th and 10th
effect of disabilities on scores;
scores;
(1;)
(22) use of
disadvpltaged;
use of the GATB with the
grade norms;
(21)
a 706-item bibliography.
(C2)
test results; and (23)
***********************************************************************
made
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be
from the original document.
***********************************************************************
1910
Manual for the
USES
Section III:
DEVELOPMENT
O
0.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
0
MANPOWER ADMINISTRATION
U s DEPARTMENT OF WEALTH,
EDUCATION I. VIRLPARE
20210
Washington, D.C.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
EDUCATION
E.
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO-
DuCED ExACTLy AS RECEIVED FROM
THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN-
ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS
STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE,
flail
2
SENT OrFIC,AL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
.K.-
EDUCX,TION POSITION OR POLICY
Foreword
General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) was developed by the United
States Employment Servict and has been used since 1947 by State employ-
ment service offices. Since that time the GATB has been included in a con-
tinuing program of research to validate the tests against success in many
different occupations. Because of its extensive research base, the GATB has
come to be recognized as the best validated multiple aptitude test battery
in existence for use in vocational guidance.
Many schools and other organizations have been authorized to use the
GATB for counseling and re:;oarch. information regarding release of the
GATB tests for these purpos=2.s may be obtained from State Employment
Services.
The Manual for the General Aptitude Test Battery is published in four
separate sections as follows:
Section I, A dministr3tion card Scoring, contains the procedures for
administration and scoring of the GATB, and conversion of the
raw test scores to aptitude scores. Separate editions of Section I
are published for B-1001 (the mark-in-booklet version) and B-
:002 (separate answer sheet version) .
Supplement to Section I for 8-1002 contains the modifications in pro-
cedures in the administration and scoring of the GATB using the
-Scan separate answer sheets. It is to be used in
IBM 1230 or
Section I for
conjunction
Section II, Nw.nis, ecru/dot/wd Aptitude Pattern Structure, shows
the GATB occupationo.1 aptitude pattern structure which is used
for counseling purposes. GATB norms for adults and 9th and
10th graders are shown for occupational families.
Section III, Derelopmnt, contains technical information on the devel-
opment of the GATB; procedures for GATB occupational valida-
tion research; techniques used in developing the GATB occupa-
tional aptitude pattern structure; statistics on the relationships
between the GATB and other tests; information on the effects
of age, sex, minority group status, cultural exposure, disabilities,
and training on aptitude scores; information on the development
of GATB -norms for 9th and 10th graders; and guidelines for
using GATB results.
Section IV, NOrinti, Specific Ocenpations, r -fnins GATB aptitude test
norms used for selection for specific occupations. Also includes
alphabetical and industrial indices of the many occupations for
which norms have been developed.
Copies of Sections II, III and IV of the Manual are available to the public
from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402. Section I of the Manual is on restricted sale.
I may be obtained from State
Further information regarding Section
Employment Services.
III
3
Table of Contents
Foreword
Construction of Tests,
1.
Item Analysis
5
Factor Ana lysi.-
.J.
7
Composition of the GATI1
1.
15
General Working Population Norms
19
I ntercorrelat ions
6.
.).9
Derivation of Aptitude Scores
7.
Development of Norms for Specific Occupations
K.
.17
Validity of Norms for Specific Occupations
9.
63
,.x-elopment of Occupational Aptitude Pattern Structure
'O.
179
.
V;:!ity of Occupational Aptitude Pattern Norms
11.
183
Relationship of Aptitudes to College Success
205
12.
Effetiven-sL; of Tests in Selection and Counseling
13.
Correlations With Other Tests
229
1.1.
Reliability and Effects of Practice
951
Effect of Training on Aptitude Scores
.-)75
16.
I;.
Effect of Sex. iNlitiority Group Status, and Cultural Exposure
On
Aptitude Scores
277
Effect of Aging On Aptitude Scores
289
18.
Effect of Disabilities un Aptitude Scores
19.
311
Norms for 9th and 1('`!1 Grades
90.
317
Use of the C AT1-1 With the Disadvantaged
IT;;e of Test Results
359
Bibliography
371
1. Construction of Tests
STEPS IN CONSTRUCTION
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
OF TESTS
Before the development of the GATB, sepa-
of
The procedures used in the development
the
rate tests had been constructed to measure
separate-answer-sheet form of the GATB
various abilities that seemed related to success
(B-1002) were as follows:
in different occupations. Each time the study
-17-The construction of items for the
IBM
of a different occupation was undertaken, new
805 separate-answer-sheet form of the
GATB
tests would be devised if the job analysis indi-
the
(B-1002) involved two major .phases: (1)
cated that some ability seemed to be important
in
revision of test items that had been included
and the store of USES tests did not already
to
the original edition of the GATB, 13-1001,
include such a test. Each test was constructed
adapt them for use with a separate answer
with items that were as homogeneous as possi-
test
sheet; and (2) the construction of new
ble with regard to the abilities they seemed to
items. This did not apply to the test measuring
Over a period
measure, but varied in difficulty.
itself
of time, about i00 tests, composed of items
Motor Coordination, which does not lend
to the use of a separate answer sheet. It was
such as arithmetic, vocabulary, and surface de-
number of new
necessary to construct a large
velopment were del eloped. In addition, certain
apparatus tests were devised. By a process of
test items to allow for the elimination of some
analy-
items as a result of the findings of item
factor analysis (see Chapter 3 of this Section)
sis studies which were to be conducted, and to
11 paper-and-pencil tests and 4 apparatus tests
provide a sufficient number of items for the de-
were selected from this group of tests as
the
of an
alternate .form
each
of
best measures of 10 factors or abilities. These
velopment
separate-answer-sheet test to be included in
tests formed the first edition of the GATB,
of
P,--1002. The primary task in the revision
B-1001. Thus, in about 21/a hours it was possi-
the B-1001 items to adapt them for a separate
ble to measure all of the major abilities repre-
the multiple-
answer sheet was conversion to
sented in the entire stock of USES tests. Since
choice type of all items that were not already
1945 the GATB has been used as the standard
in this form. In developing new test items, an
experimental battery in every aptitude study
effort was made to construct items that would
that has been undertaken. for the development
abili-
measure, as closely as possible, the same
of occupational norms. Previously about 15
ties that were measured by the test items that
tests would be chosen as the experimental bat-
had been used in the original edition of the
tery for the study of an occupation, as a result
General Aptitude Test Battery, The items that
of estimates derived from the job analysis, and
use and the newly
constructed
had been in
for
a different experimental battery wes used
items were arranged in the experimental form
each study. Consequently, there was a possibil-
of each test in apparent order of difficulty. The
ity that some ability might have turned out to
relative difficult!, had to be determined subjec-
be sig-niilcant in the job when tests of that
tively at this point because the performance of
ability were not tried out in the experimental
examinees on all of these items was not yet
battery. Mcreover, the grouping of jobs into
known. The experimental form of each test in-
families, on the basis of similarities in abili-
cluded approximately 20 percent more than
ties, could not readily be accomplished, because
twice the number of items to be included in
all the occupational samples had not been given
each final form of the test. For example, if for
the same tests.
1
AIANITAI. FOR THE GATB, SECTION III
5. After the experimental data were col-
was planned to have 50
a particular test
it
lected, item analysis studies were conducted to
items. in the final form and 50 items in its al-
dc4rmine the difficulty level and discriminat-
ternate, the experimental form of that test in-
ing value of each item (except for items on the
cluded about 120 items.
Motor Coordination test). The difficulty level
2. An IBM 805 separate answer sheet was
number of cor-
was determined by finding the
constructed for the experimental form of each
To
rect responses that were made to each item.
paper- and pencil test. except for the test meas-
determine the discriminating power of each
uring Motor Coordination. At this point, there
item. each sample was divided into quartiles
was an individual separate answer sheet for
based on the distribution of the total scores on
each test, even though plans called for the in-
each test; subsequently. for each item, the sig-
clusion of several tests on each answer sheet in
nificance of the difference between the percent-
the final form of the battery. An attempt was
highest and
age of correct responses in the
made to. devise 'answer sheets Nv h MI would re_
lowest quartiles was determined. The signifi-
suit in maximum clarity for the examinees and
in each
cance of the difference was determined
would facilitatethe administration of the tests.
instance by obtaining the critical ratio equal to
An appropriate:scoring stencil was devised for
the difference divided by the standard error of
each of the ansWer sheets, and directions were
the difference. (See Chapter 2 of this Section.)
prepared for administration and scoring of the
fa For the final form of each test (except
tests for experimental purposes.
the Motor Coordination test) items were se-
The next step was to administer the ex-
lected that met the criteria established for dis-
perimental form of each test (except the Motor
criminating- value and difficulty level. In gen-
Coordination test), untimed. to a sample of ap-
eral, items with the lowest critical ratios or
proximately 200 people to obtain item analysis
items that were too easy were eliminated or re-
data and information such as the time required
vised. (See Chapter 2 of this Section.) A few
for the test to be completed, difficulties occa-
very easy items were placed at the beginning
sioned by use of the separate answer sheet and
of each test for warm-up purposes. and all
any problems encountered in test administra-
items in the final form of the test were Ar-
tion. The administration directions called for
ranged in increasing order of difficulty. Alter-
the examiner to record his observations on
nate forms of each test were made as equal as
these points. In most instances only one of the
possible with respect to the difficulty levels and
(;ATIt tests was administered to an experi-
discriminating values of the items included on
mental sample; hut, in a few cases, the experi-
were long
form. Time
which
limits,
mental sample took two of the tests. The ex-
each
enough to enable obtaining a sufficient sample
iwrimental administration of each test was
of each examinee's performance with respect
without a time limit in order to permit each
to each test, and which were short enough to
examinee to attempt all of the test items so
insure that very few, if any. examinees would
that item analysis data would he =ivailable for
complete each test, were set in accordance with
every item. and to collect data for the estab-
the findings of the experimental studies.
suitalde time limits for the tests
lkhment Irf
7. The final forms of the IBM 805 answer
1. Some experimental work was also done
sheets were constructed
accordance with.
with the motor tests to determine the time lim-
in
findings of the experimental studies and sug-
it; and scoring' i}rocedures which would yield
gestions made by the test examiners who par-
optimum results with respect to the reliability
'. Answer sheets wcre
ticipated in these studi
of the tests ;111(1 the time requ;red for adminis-
devised so that each one included spaces for
tering and scoring-. This involved administering
the responses to several tests and at the same
these tests to various samples for several test -
time were arranged to facilitate the tasks for
reliability
studies
retest
different
in
NO) ich
both the examinees and the test examiners.
time limits and scoring techniques were em-
Appropriate scoring- stencils were devised for
ployed and the number of
trials was
test
the answer sheets.
varied.
3
CONSTRUCTION OF TESTS
Aptitude (see
to the measurement of Spatial
S. IZe.suits (df the eXperilnentai studies On the
It
Chapter ;1 of this Section), and since Part
limits
motor tests were analyzed, :ind the time
by itself had shown substantially high test-
and scoring procedures were determined ac-
it was concluded that
retest reliability
(.8.11,
cordigly. As
studies,
these
a
of
result
:1
without
Part F timid be omitted from B-1002
change \\-as made which simplified the :;coring
battery.
the
or
the
effectiveness
reducing
the paper-and-pencil motor test.
was
of
It.
Therefore, only one measure of Spatial Apti-
found that none of the experimental time lim-
tude was included in B-1002.
its ot. modifications in administration and scor-
In 11-1001 there had been some overlapping
ing procedures for the apparatus tests resulted
A-- Aiming 0)
among the measures of Aptitude
sufficient increase in reliability over the reli-
in
Eye-Hand Coordination and Aptitude T--IJo-
ability obtained with the procedures used in
been
tor Speed. Eye-Hand Coordination had
to justify the necessary increase in
I-1-1001
measured by the tests designated as Part C
ltesting-4tinie that would be required if the new
and Part K and Motor Speed had heen
jyrp,,,Lidtirt,s were put into Ilse. Therefore, it was
vali-
ured by Part G and Part K. Since litany
decided to use the same adlnillistlatinn and
dation studies on occupational samples yielded
1(11)2 that had been
scoring procedures for
results which were quite similar for Eye-IIand
used for the apparatus tests in 11-1001. (See
it was con-
Coordination and
11.1otor Speed,
for llrr
I of the .1Ion
Section
(;.-AT1.. )
it. was not necessary to have two
cluded that
9. The directions for the administration Will
separate measures of these aptitudes included
scoring for the final form of B--1002 \ee pre-
in the battery. Therefore, only Part K, which
paed. The findings of all experimental studies
Coordination
:t measure of both Eye-Iland
\Yene taken into account in the preparation
of
is
and Motor Speed, was selected from the three
these adniinist ation and scoring- procedures.
pape -and-pencil tests of motor abilities (Parts
(i:l7'1;.)
(See Section
I of the .11 ore mil few
C, G, and K) that had been in B-1001 for in-
to
II). Several StUdieti
ET(' also roll(111(1.e(1
E-1002. Further evidence of the
determine the alternate form rliability
clusion
in
:Intl
overlapping of these two aptitudes was found in
the separate-ans\er-
comparability of each o
tabulat-
a study of 121 knitting mill workers,
tests. These ste lies
that
sheet
ilaVe
sh()W11
ing- machine operators, and hand decorators, in
Forms A and It of each test art' nut sufficiently
orrelation of .81 was obtained be-
which a
identical \ith respect tc their ra\v score ineans
and
Motor
Coordination
Eye-Ifand
and standard deviations to use the same con-
tween
Speed (Honig-et., 1952). The test-retest reliabil-
\esion table for Volans A and It of each test
ity of Part K (.91) justifies using it as a single
to convert raw test scores to aptitude scores.
measure. Part K of B-1001 has been desig-
Therefore. ;1 si_paritte conversion table \vas de-
nated as Part S in II-1002. The aptitude meas-
\-eloped to convert the raw test scures of Form
tired by fart S in
002 was named Motor
It of each test to aptitude Sr)l'eS. fiea;;unably
Coordination.
close agreement het \Veen the
scores
:q
tests
included
Thus. whereas
IS
B-1001
derived front Forms A and 11 of the separate-
aptitudes, B-1002 includes 12
measuring-
\":1-; obtained in the altel'-
antilVer-Sileet tests
1i)
tests measuring 9 aptitudes. The 12 tests in-
nate form reliability studies. (See Chapter I.
cluded in 11--1002 and the 9 aptitudes that they
of this Se(tion.)
of this
measure :te described in Chapter
11. Consideration \vas given to the possibil-
.1
Section.
ity of reducing the administration time of the
inswer sheet for
Iii the late
1950's an
battery witInnit any appreciable
in Incas_
12.
the GA!: which could be scored by optical
omitting
ureinent
..veral
front
It -104)9
by
scanning, equipment Was developed in a special
tests that had been ;Winded in
TWo
1- IOU]
research study conducted by William J. Schrader
arid Part
tests, designated as Par..
II, had
of the
".S. Army Ordnance Corps and Dr. Ken-
been included
Spa-
its nleaSttres
part
Ifoyt of the State University of Iowa
ttai Aptitude.
ja. had been II.) .ighl 11,1,
neth
It.
fp use
Center
Measurement
so that it contributed an insignitican4 .imount
1Zesearch
on
GATI1, SI.:4"I'I0N
N A I ,
FOR 'I'
I I
I
1
version of the Pegboard used to measure
equipment. Examinees had difficulty
(MI;(')
1r:ic
Parts II and 10. This Pe2fioard and the pegs
using the first answer sheet (MIZ(' --A); thee-
made of durable
plastic,
with
;ire
prePhed
it
fore
used
revised
Sheet
;Lnti\VCI.
a
NV;l5
whereas tither versions or the Pegboard and
th irereill'eS Were found
i)
AM.(
.
Be_
the pegs used with them are made of wood.
bet \\.(ten scores made tin the
S )5 a 11S\
I ;
I
I
cause of tie possible effect of different types
Of
sheet :old those Thade on the 1111al- A for Parts
itus on 5()1'05 obtained, several compara-
7 of the (1ATII. A similar comparison be-
:iplr:
I
t
bility studies Were conducted, A study com-
reN-ealeil no signifi-
tvecn :111:r A ;ind
cant differences. Dire to administrative /woe_
Security
Employment
by
the
pleted
1970, indi-
Ceinmissien or North Carolina in
!ems, a direct comparisen betveen the IP:11 xis:,
cated that there are no significant differences
ans\er sheets was not made.
and the MIN'
between sores obtained with the wooden and
In 1902, the employment service also be-
1:t.
plastic Pegboard. As this study involved a re-
gan work to develop an answer sheet for
view nr all known previous research on the
(;ATit
could he scored by optical sc;111-
the
as independent research,
matter as
nin,r equipment. Tile DocuTr;in (science E.e-
\yell
two types of Peg-boards ,dintild he considered
search Associates) answer sheet developed \\.as
follo\ving a
interciningeable.
into operational use in
put
196:1
comparability study conducted in
(*alit:mill:I,
10. In 1909 answer sheets for Forms A and
Pennsylvania and West Virginia. The conlp:na-
It of the CATI1 were developed which could be
bility study showed that adjustrnents for raw
I MI 12:10, 12:11 or 12:12 optical scan-
scored on
(desribed
in
1. 5 and 7 on t he -DocuTran
scores on Parts 1. :1,
This
study
ning
equil)111('Ilt.
Chapter 7 of this Section) was conducted by
answer sheet \vere needed to make them corn-
805 answer sheets. The
parahle to scores on
the Vtah Test Development ('enter in coopera-
1)octiTran answer sheet 11;e1 Vert' cramped re-
tion with the California, :11ichigan, Texas, and
sponse areas, Therefore. w-hen the expanded
Ohio agencies. The results showed that slight
intio-
adjustments were needed in Part. 5 scores to
NtS answer sheet described belo\v
fell
(3uced, use of the 1)octiTran answer sheet
make the scores comparable to the scores ob-
off quickly. Although the DoetiTran answer
tained using the 111M 8O answer sheet. There-
is no 101.1-rer available, the development
fore, separate aptitude conversion tables were
sheet
of this answer sheet represented the employ-
prepared for that test for the IBM 12:10-1232
ment service's entry into the area of optical
answer sheets.
scannim., of ans\ver sheets and computerized
17. ln 1970 a Digit el: answer sheet (produced
conversion of raw scores to aptitude scores.
by the Optical Scanning ('orporation) was de-
Computer Systems
National
In
P.01
veloped for Form B. A comparability study
1.I.
(N('S) ;i1ISNVer sheets for Forms A and It of
conducted by the Ohio State Department of
de\-eleped on the
the C.ATB,
11- ln2,
adjustments were
Nk'ere
that
indicated
Education
stud (desibed iii
basis of a coniIn
needed in' scores obtained on Part 1 of the Digi-
Chapter 7 of this Section). The results showed
tek ;ins w e r sheet to make them emnparable to
t 11:it 1(1.ili:4inelitS Were required on Parts 1, 2,
score, on the
1 BM 805 allSWere sheet.
5 and 7 on the NCS answer sheet to make
them cnnip;trable to scores on the If111 805 an-
REFERENCE
swer sheets. Therefore. separate aptitude con-
-version tables were developed for those tests
IL The generalized distance lune-
.1.
differential aptitude testing. Un-
for the :\ CS answer sheets.
1. ion and
doctoral dissertation, (Iniver. of
puliiished
15. In the mid- 1960's one of the apparatus
sum:hers developed a lighter and more
innesota, 1952.
corn-
2. Item Analysis
RESULTS OF STUDIES
COLLECTION OF' DATA
The results of the item analysis studies dif-
The experimental forms of the tests to be in-
fered for the power tests (such as the numeri-
cluded in the separate-answer-sheet form of
cal and verbal tests) and speed tests (such as
the CATB (B-1002) were administered un-
the name-comparison test). As would be ex-
timed to several experimental samples to ob-
pected, the power tests yielded a wider range of
tain data for item analysis purposes. The tests
item difficulty than the speed tests as well as
were administered untimed so that each exami-
exhibiting a correspondingly wider ronge than
nee would have an opportunity to work all of
the speed tests for the discriminating power or
the items. In all, a total of 10 samples, ranging
'diagnostic values of the items. In the selection
in size from 196 to 236 examinees each, were
of items for the final forms of the power tests,
tested for this purpose in Colorado, Florida,
items that were too easy and those that did not
Michigan, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin.
show sufficiently great diagnostic power were
The experimental samples included local Em-
eliminated. In general, items that had critical
ployment Service office applicants, high school
ratios of less than 2 were not included in the
juniors and seniors, college sophomores and
final forms of the tests. However, several very
juniors, commissioned and noncommissioned
beginning of
easy items were placed at the
officers of the United States Air Force, and
each test for warm-up purposes. The alternate
some groups such as buSiness women's clubs
forms of each test were mad( ;Is equivalent as
and civic luncheon groups.
possible by including in each form an equal
number of items of the same difficulty level
METHODS OF ITEM ANALYSIS
and discriminating power. The items on the
final form of each test were arranged in in-
The data were analyzed to determine the dif-
ficulty level and diagnostic value or discrimi-
creasing order of difficulty.
nating power of each item. The difficulty level
Since differentiation of individuals on speed
was determined by counting the number of
tests is determined primarily by the rate at
correct responses to each item. To determine
which each examinee works items that are rel-
the discriminating power of each item, each
atively homogeneous in difficulty, the criteria.,
selecting items for the
sample was divided into quartiles based on the
employed for
final
distribution of total scores for each test; subse-
forms of the power tests were not applied to
quently, for each item, the significance of the
the same extent to the speed tests. However,
difference between the percentage of correct
since some of the speed-test items did vary in
responses in the highest and lowest quartiles
difficulty level and discriminating power from
was determined. The significance of the differ-
others, these factors were used as guides in se-
ence was determined in each instance by ob-
lecting items for and arranging them on the
taining the critical ratio equal to the difference
final forms of the speed tests.
The results of the item analysis studies
divided by the standard error of the difference.
To eliminate the necessity of calculating each
made it quite apparent that the tests measur-
critical ratio, reference was made to an abac
ing Form Perception and Clerical Perception
devised by Mosier & McQuitty (1940) from
are primarily speed tests and those measuring
which the critical ratios could be read directly
Intelligence, Numerical Aptitude, Spatial Apti-
tude, and Verbal Aptitude are primarily power
once the percentage of correct responses in the
tests. No item in the tests of Form Perception
highest and lowest quartiles was known.
5
mANt'Ai, rolt
GATII, SECTION HI
fi
and (lericLI
l'ereeption was failed hy more
pliclde to these types of tests, are also speed
10 percent of the experitmtal sample
than
tests.
during the utitned administration; vhereas
the range for the percent failing items on the
EFEH EN(:E
other tests extended up to 91 percent. The tests
Methods of
1losier',
('.
& A1cQuitty,
measuring- :\lotor Coordination, Finger Dexter-
item vali(lation and ;times for ite-test cor-
ity, and Nlatitial Dexterity, vhicli
not
i 11-
the item
studies
lio of tipper-lower dif-
Chided
relation and (Tit iCal
in
I)ec :ruse
standard Item analysis procedures are not ap-
Terence. P,,q/choiiiitiiii.rt, 1910, 5, 57-65.