Norms In Organizational Testing – Coursework Example
Testing Norms As each individual possesses his/her psychological and physiological peculiarities, thus the tests provided to participants must be adapted in terms of gender, age and other aspects. In organizations, too, decisions about individuals are to be taken based on the results of the tests that have narrower specificity, so that these decisions are more objective and relevant. Organizations of people – particularly chosen for testing – might be heterogeneous in its constitution, thus, certain norms and limitations should exist in test scoring and interpretation. If general group-level norms are used, test outcomes might be somewhat confusing and too generalized to provide objective unbiased information. On the other hand, group-level norms is testing of formal organization could help to create an integrated framework for results interpretation, evaluation and decision-making process.
The method of test data scoring and interpretation that allows test developers to obtain more plausible information is multidimensional scaling (Carroll & Arabie). The main distinctive feature and advantage of this method in examinations of social-psychological phenomena is systematic nature of data obtained in the process of participants’ testing and test interpretation. This systematic nature is predetermined by the fact that primary information is scored with help of special multidimensional questionnaires that enable the fullest recording of respondents’ opinion in three dimensions – 2 dimensions can be represented by feedback forms, and the third one can be presented in the form of instructions for a respondent that includes a certain measuring scale and is to be used while taking a test. Multidimensional scaling in group-level tests for organizations has many advantages as it enables personality studies based not on narrow experimental situations, but on professional activity, overcoming the difficulties connected with that.
Carroll, J. D., & Arabie, P. Multidimensional scaling. Annual Review of Psychology, 1980, 31(1), 607–649.