Vienna Test System 2011 en Catalog SCHUHFRIED

Quality by competence since 1947 www.schuhfried.com

2011

Psychological assessmentVIENNA TEST SYSTEM

Order our newsletter at

www.schuhfried.com @For an immediate free callback go to www.schuhfried.com

Trust the no. 1 company!SCHUHFRIED is world market leader in computerized psychological assessment.

SCHUHFRIED GmbH Hyrtlstrasse 452340 MoedlingAustriaTel: +43 2236 42315Fax: +43 2236 46597E-mail [email protected]

VIEN

NA

TEST

SYS

TEM

Psy

chol

ogic

al a

sses

smen

t20

11

Psychological assessment Cognitive training Multimedia systemVIENNA TEST SYSTEM

CogniPlus, which is available in a wide range of languages, is used to train cogni-tive functions. Efficient. Multimedia. Mo-tivating.

7 reasons to choose CogniPlus

1. Developed by prominent scientists 2. Based on a defi cit-oriented intervention approach 3. Embedded in a context of scientifi c theory 4. Realistic and motivating design 5. Adapts automatically to the client‘s ability6. Training at all ability levels7. Recommended by respected institutions

You too can profi t from a state-of-the-art pro-gram that covers all the areas of cognitive train-ing and comes with user-friendly management software.

BIOFEEDBACK 2000x-pert is the innova-tive wireless biofeedback system from SCHUHFRIED. It can be used for relaxa-tion, rehabilitation and assessment. Buy only the modules that you need.

The key features of BIOFEEDBACK 2000x-pert

User-friendly, easy-to-operate software Modular design of software and hardware Transfer of readings via wireless technology

(Bluetooth®) by means of small, lightweight modules worn directly on the body Complete freedom of movement during

measurement Highly sensitive sensors with high stability

against artefacts

Other quality products from SCHUHFRIED

Order your free copy now!COGNIPLUS Catalog

E-Mail [email protected]

Order your free copy now!BIOFEEDBACK 2000x-pert Catalog


Quality by competence since 1947

Get in touch!

About this document: SCHUHFRIED GmbH

Hyrtlstrasse 45

2340 Moedling

Austria

E-mail: [email protected]

Internet: www.schuhfried.at

Tel: +43 2236 42315

Fax: +43 2236 46597

Media owner and editor: SCHUHFRIED GmbH

Place of publication: Mödling

Publisher: Paul Gerin Druckerei, Wolkersdorf

Editor-in-chief: Doreen Kallweit Responsible in law: Gerald Schuhfried

Graphics: Johanna Kurz, Vienna, www.johannakurz.com Photos: SCHUHFRIED GmbH, fotolia, istock, pixelio: p. 8

Konstantin Gastmann and p. 26 Thomas S.

Copyright © SCHUHFRIED GmbH, Moedling.

All rights reserved.

[email protected]

Telephone+43 2236 42315

Free callbackFree Call via www.schuhfried.com

Fax+43 2236 46597

Websitewww.schuhfried.com

AddressSCHUHFRIED GmbHHyrtlstrasse 452340 Moedling Austria

[email protected]

Telephone+ 43 2236 42315-60

For queries and catalog ordersMon. - Thurs.: 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Fri.: 8 a.m. - 2 p.m. (GMT + 1h)

Current dates and retrospective review at www.schuhfried.com

Seminars, workshops and webinars

Help DeskQueries on installation and operation for our customersMon. - Thurs.: 8.30 a.m. – 4.30 p.m. (GMT + 1h)Fri.: 8.30 a.m. – 1.30 p.m. (GMT + 1h)

Psychological assessment

Cognitive training

Multimedia system

For the sake of readability the masculine form has been used throughout to designate both genders.

Cognitive training Multimedia system

Your own personal online demonstration of the Vienna Test SystemFast, efficient, personal. Upon request a member of the SCHUHFRIED team will – in the same way as in a webinar – take you through the Vienna Test System online and answer your questions on computerized psychologi-cal assessment. You don’t need anything for this personal consultation except a telephone, a computer with internet access and a little time.

[email protected]

Telephone+ 43 2236 42315

Contents

VIENNA TEST SYSTEM . 3

6 YOU GET MORE 6 The Vienna Test System – a recipe for success 7 Introducing SCHUHFRIED 8 Our product promise 9 Language options and internationalization 10 Areas in which the Vienna Test System is used 12 THE VIENNA TEST SYSTEM 12 Input devIces and accessorIes 14 user Interface 15 testIng wIth the vIenna test system 15 Testselection 15 Testadministration 16 Testscoring 17 Reportgeneration 18 specIal functIons 18 VTSHelp 18 Clientdatabase 18 Scoringprogramforpaper&penciltests 18 NormTableExplorer 18 Twomonitors–onetestsystem 18 HardwareTest 19 Dataexport&import 19 Integrationintootherprograms 19 Dataprotection 20 addItIonal programs 20 Ranking 20 Calibrationmodule 20 Individualnorms 21 the test generator 22 networked systems 22 Grouptestingsystem 23 Decentralizedtesting 23 Onlinetesting 24 expert systems

26 INTERLINKING OF THE VIENNA TEST SYSTEM AND COGNIPLUS

27 QUALITY MANAGEMENT

28 SERVICE 28 Demo version 28 VTS updates 28 Webinars

31 TESTS see next page for detailed list

117 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

119 FIND IT FAST120 All tests from A-Z 121 All tests by dimensions 124 All tests by languages 126 All tests by areas of use

4 . VIENNA TEST SYSTEM

32 IntellIgence test BatterIes 32 IBF BasicIntelligenceFunctions 33 INSBAT Intelligence-StructureBattery 35 INSSV IntelligenceStructureBattery–shortform 36 specIal IntellIgence tests 36 2D Visualization 37 3D SpatialOrientation 38 A3DW AdaptiveSpatialAbilityTest 39 AMT AdaptiveMatricesTest 40 ANF AdaptiveNumericalFlexibilityTest 41 APM Raven’sAdvancedProgressiveMatrices 42 CPM Raven’sColouredProgressiveMatrices 43 FOLO InductiveReasoning 44 HCTA HalpernCriticalThinkingAssessment 45 MIP MathematicsinPractice 46 MR MentalRotation 47 NTA N-TestAlpha 48 PST Pilot’sSpatialTest 49 RIS CalculatingwithSymbols 50 SPM Raven’sStandardProgressiveMatrices 51 SPMPLS Raven’sStandardProgressiveMatricesPlus 52 VISGED VisualMemoryTest

53 specIal aBIlIty tests 53 2HAND Two-HandCoordination 54 ALS WorkPerformanceSeries 55 ATAVT AdaptiveTachistoscopicTrafficPerceptionTest 56 B19 DoubleLabyrinthTest 57 COG Cognitrone 58 CORSI CorsiBlock-TappingTest 59 DAKT DifferentialAttentionTest 60 DAUF SustainedAttention 61 DT DeterminationTest 62 DTKI DeterminationTestforChildren 63 ELST EnglishLanguageSkillsTest 64 F1 FormulaUno 65 FLIM Flicker/FusionFrequency 66 FVW ContinuousVisualRecognitionTask 67 GESTA GestaltPerceptionTest 68 LVT VisualPursuitTest 69 MDT MovementDetectionTest 70 MLS MotorPerformanceSeries 71 MTA Mechanical/TechnicalComprehension 72 NVLT Non-verbalLearningTest 73 PERSEV PerseverationTest 74 PP PeripheralPerception 75 RA ReactionTimeAnalysis 76 RT ReactionTest 77 SIGNAL SignalDetection 78 SIMKAP SimultaneousCapacity/Multi-Tasking 79 SMK SensomotorCoordination 80 STROOP StroopInterferenceTest 81 VIGIL Vigilance 82 WAF PerceptionandAttentionFunctions 84 ZBA Time/MovementAnticipation

85 personalIty structure InventorIes 85 4DPI 4-DimensionalPersonalityInventory 86 BFSI Big-FiveStructureInventory 87 EPP6 EysenckPersonalityProfilerV6 88 TCI TemperamentandCharacterInventory

TEST

StestsContents


89 specIal personalIty tests89 AGDIA AggressionAssessmentMethod 90 AVEM Work-relatedBehaviourandExperiencePatterns 91 AVIS AggressiveDrivingBehavior 92 DSI DifferentialStressInventory 93 DSIHR DifferentialStressInventoryHR 94 EBF Recovery-StressQuestionnaire 95 FET AttitudetoLeadership 96 IPS InventoryforPersonalityAssessmentinSituations 97 IVPE InventoryofDriving-relatedPersonalityTraits 98 MMG Multi-MotiveGrid 99 SBUSB ScalesfortheAssessmentofSubjectiveOccupationalStress andDissatisfaction100 SKASUK CustomerServiceandOrientationScales

101 oBjectIve personalIty tests101 AHA AttitudetowardsWork102 BACO ResilienceAssessment103 HKSD HyperkineticSyndromeAssessmentMethod104 OLMT ObjectiveAchievementMotivation-Test105 RISIKO RiskChoice106 WRBTR ViennaRisk-TakingTest–revisedversion107 WRBTV ViennaRisk-TakingTestTraffic

108 attItude and Interest tests108 AISTR GeneralInterestStructureTest–revisedversion109 MOI Multi-methodObjectiveInterestsTestBattery

110 clInIcal tests110 ATV IdentificationofAlcoholRisk111 FBS SuicideRiskEvaluationQuestionnaire112 FFT QuestionnaireConcerningFunctionalDrinking113 FSV QuestionnaireonReactiontoPain114 MSS Multi-DimensionalPainScale

115 test creatIon programs115 TQ TestGeneratorforQuestionnaireTests116 TT TestGeneratorforTachistoscopicTests

TEST

S


tests Contents

VIENNA TEST SYSTEM . 76 . VIENNA TEST SYSTEM

You get more

Take these ingredients …

management softwareEachnewsystemneedstheWINWTSmanagementsoftware.Thisisusedtoadministerthetests,scoretheresultsandmanagethedata.Ithasmanyfunctionsthatmakeeverydayworkeasier.

dongleThedonglecontainsdetailsofthelicencespurchasedandprovidesprotec-tionagainstunauthorizedcopying.ThedonglemaybeaUSBlicencestickorasoftwarecode.

testsFirstselectyourtests,thenforeachtestdecideononeofthesetwopric-ingmodels: Testusages:thetestcanbeusedacertainnumberof times;notimelimitisset. 7-yearlicence:thetestcanbeusedasoftenasrequiredforsevenyears.

Input devices and accessoriesThemajorityoftestscanbeworkedusingaconventionalcomputerkey-board or mouse. Some tests require special input devices and acces-sories.

… and your personally tailored Vienna Test System is com-plete!

Ready for you to use as a reliable means of measuring ability and personality traits in the context of psychological assess-ment. Objective Efficient. Accurate.

The Vienna Test System – a recipe for success

…abouttheuserinterface.

read more

Page 14

… about the tests. There aremorethan80!

read more

… about input devices and ac-cessories.

read more

Page 12

Page 31 onwards

7 reasons


You get more

Introducing SCHUHFRIED

SCHUHFRIED1| has experienceThe SCHUHFRIED company, founded in 1947 as afamily business, hasmore than60 years’ experiencebehindit.Todaythecompanyleadstheworldincom-puter-based psychological assessment. Each yearSCHUHFRIED’s Vienna Test System is used to con-ductsome12.5milliontestsessions.

SCHUHFRIED2| operates internationally36distributors.Usedin67countries.SCHUHFRIEDisathomeallovertheworld.Anditknowswhereitsrootsare.Everythingisstillcoordinatedfromourheadquar-tersinMoedlingontheoutskirtsofVienna(Austria).

SCHUHFRIED3| wins awards for excellence“Quality by competence” has been SCHUHFRIED’smottoformanyyears.ThecompanyreceivedISO9001certification in 2003 and has been awarded the Aus-trian coat of arms. This is the highest award grantedinAustriaand isonlyawarded tobusinesses that candemonstrateahighlevelofexports,afirst-classcreditrating,innovativeability,goodqualitymanagementandsignificant investment in research and development.

SCHUHFRIED4| has good contactsSCHUHFRIEDworkswithexperiencedexpertsineveryrelevantfield–scientists,computerspecialistsandmar-ketinggurus.Atcongresses,symposiumsandspecial-isteventsSCHUHFRIEDnetworkswiththeothermajorplayersinthesector,sothatitisalwaysintouchwiththelatesttrends.Orsettingthetrenditself.

5| SCHUHFRIED specializes in computer-based psychology

ThesuccessofSCHUHFRIEDproductsisbuiltontheuniqueinterplaybetweenthethreestrandsofpsychol-ogy,hardwareandsoftware.Allitsproductsaredevel-oped in-house, closely coordinatedand continuouslyimproved. The importance of product developmentat SCHUHFRIED is reflected in its expenditure onresearchanddevelopment,whichaccounts formorethan25percentofitsannualturnover.

6| SCHUHFRIED systems are simple and user-friendly

Using new technology can be a daunting prospect.Whynotcarryonusingtheoldfamiliarmethods,suchaspaper-and-penciltests?SCHUHFRIEDmakesnewventuressimple.Itssystemsareeasytouseandhavemanyadvantages.Sotheresultsof testsandtrainingprogramsaregeneratedautomatically,availableimme-diatelyandguaranteed tobeaccurate.Because timeismoney!

SCHUHFRIED7| is a strong partnerSCHUHFRIED goes the extramile for its clients. Thesalesteamisthefirstpointofcontactandcanturnmanyquestions asked into questions answered. The HelpDesk helps with technical queries. Psychologists areavailabletoanswerquestionsonpsychologicalmatters.Thisisappreciatedbymanybusinessesandorganiza-tions,including:

2,600 clinics, hospitals and rehabilitation centres 1,400 self-employed users 1,250 systems in private companies and recruitment agencies 1,350 systems in traffic examination centres 530 universities 250 systems within airlines and flight training centers 13 military institutions

7 reasons


You get more

More than 80 accurate and reliable tests – including special ability tests, objective personality tests, adaptive and multimedia tests – in up to 25 languages.

Easy to use thanks to a clear and customizable interface and intuitive mode of use.

Continuous test maintenance and updating of norms ensure that high quality standards are maintained.

Good value for money, especially if time-based licences are purchased.

Save time through efficiency and accuracy.

Standard test batteries and expert systems as useful readymade packages for greater convenience.

Our product promise



INTERNATIONAL SCHUHFRIED DEALERSHIPSschuhfrIed has a strong international outlook. the countries in which we have dealerships include:

…aboutallavailablelanguagever-sionsoftheViennaTestSystem.

read more

on page 124

The Vienna Test System speaks many languages

The management software is available in 13 different languages while individual tests are produced in up to 25 languages.

During the translation process tests are adapted if necessary to different cultural environments.

europe

BelgiumBulgariaCzechRepublicFranceGermanyGreatBritain&IrelandHungaryItalyNetherlandsPolandPortugalRomaniaSlovakiaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkey

america

BrazilChileColombiaUSA

africa

EgyptSouthAfricaTunisia

asia

ChinaIndiaIranIraqMalaysiaOmanRussiaSouthKoreaTaiwanR.O.C..

oceania

Australia

WorldwideYou get more

10 . VIENNA TEST SYSTEM VIENNA TEST SYSTEM . 11

You get more

Areas in which the Vienna Test System is used

CLINICAL & NEUROPSYCHOLOGY

Clinicalpsychologyusespsychologicalteststomeasurebothabilityfactorsandpersonalitytraits.Forexample,psychological assessment tests have proved useful indiagnosing depression, personality disorders, anxi-etystatesandperseverationtendencies.Theycanalsohelp to identifypain-relatedperformance impairments,stresslevelsthatarelikewiserelatedtopain,andcopingstrategies.

Neuropsychological assessment is used primarily tomakeadetaileddiagnosisofchangesinperformanceorpersonalitytraitsafterlesionsordiseaseprocessesaffectingthebrain.Thetestsusedincludetoolswhichmeasure basic mental functions, such as attention,

memory, motor skillsandexecutivefunctions,in reliable and validways. The tests can beusedtoprovideanojec-tive assessment anddescription of the func-tionalimpairment.

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY

InthefieldofHRpsychologicaltestsareusedinperson-nelselection,employeecounsellingandcareerguidance.

Inpersonnelselection,testsprovidevaluableinformationaboutcandidates’personalityandskills–informationthatisoftennoteasytogatherinaninterview.Testscanalsobeusedforpreselection.

DIN 33430 stipulates that tests used in the applicationprocessmustbeobjective,reliableandvalid.ThetestsoftheViennaTestSystemmeettheserequirements.

Inemployeecounsellingandcareerguidance testsareusedtoidentifypersonalstrengthsandweaknessesandanalysepotential. Interesttestsare indispensabletools.Theyhighlightanindividual’spreferencesandthushelpidentifythebestcareercoursetopursue.

order your free copy now!catalog neuropsychology

E-mail [email protected]

At a glance:Pickoutthetestsforyourspecialism–easilyrecognizedbythesymbolinthemargin.

Tests on p. 31 onwards

educationsporttransport: aviation

transport: rail

transport: roadpersonnel

neuro & clinical

CogniPlus, the SCHUHFRIED softwarepackageforcognitivetraining.Read more about the interlinking of theVIENNATESTSYSTEMandCOGNIPLUS

the perfect complement

on page 26

order your free copy now!catalog expert system hr



You get more

TRAFFIC PSYCHOLOGY

Inthefieldoftrafficpsychology,testsareusedtoassessfitnesstodriveandwillingnesstoadapttotrafficcondi-tions.

Ofparticularinterestinassessingfitnesstodrivearetheabilitytogainanoverview,reactionbehavior,concentra-tion,sensomotorskillsand intelligenceormemory. It isalsoimportanttocheckreactiveendurance.

Willingnesstoadapttotrafficconditionsisassessedus-ingpersonalitytests.Theaspectsofpersonalitythatcanbetestedincludeaperson’ssenseofsocialresponsibility,self-control,emotionalstability,willingness to takerisksandtendencytoaggressiveinteractioninroadtraffic.

Assessmentinthefieldofaviationpsychologycoversthetestingofpilots,applicantsforpilottrainingandairtrafficcontrolstaff.InbothcivilandmilitaryaviationpsychologytestsareusedtoassessthesuitabilitycriteriaspecifiedintheJAR-FCL3guidelines.Withthehelpofthesetestsitispossibletoreliablypreselectapplicantsforpilottrain-ingbycheckingbothforspecificabilitiesandforrelevantpersonalitytraits.Itisalsopossibletoverifytheabilityofpilotswhoarealreadylicensedtofly.

SPORTS PSYCHOLOGY

In sports psychology psychological tests are used tomeasurebothabilityfactorsandpersonalitytraits.

Thespecificaspectsofperformancethataremeasuredinclude concentration, reaction ability, resilience, eye-handcoordination,peripheralperceptionandanticipa-tionoftimeandmovement.

Informationonaspectsofpersonalityrelevanttosportisprovidedbyteststhatmeasureachievementmotivation,frustration toleration, stress management, impulsivityvs.reflectivityandaspirationlevel.

EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

Theaimofeducationalpsychologicalassessmentistomeasurerelevantaspectsofperformanceandlearningabilityinordertomakethebestpossiblerecommenda-tions for the individual’s continuing educational or ca-reer pathway. Psychological tests are used to identifystrengthsandweaknessesaswellaspersonalinterests.The findings can be compared with the requirementsof different educational and career training programs.Alongsidetestsforassessingintelligencestructure,in-terest and achievementmotivation tests are thereforean indispensable component of the repertoire of testsusedineducationalpsychologicalassessment.

order your free copy now!catalog expert system avIatIon


order your free copy now!catalog sport psychology


order your free copy now!catalog expert system traffIc



The Vienna Test System

Input devices and accessories

LIGHT PEN This device is particularly popular with respondentswho rarely use a computer. To enable test responsestobeentered,targetpointsarepositionedontheCRTscreen.Thepointslightupwhentherespondentpointsthelightpenatthem.Acrossappears,showingthattheresponsehasbeenrecorded.

RESPONSE PANELSTwo special keyboards, known as response panels,have been developed. They provide a user-friendlymeans of entering responses and can be used to ad-ministerawiderangeoftests.

Many of the tests in the Vienna Test System (VTS) can be worked using the computer mouse and keyboard; for some, though, special input devices or accessories are needed.

It should also be borne in mind that some respondents may be disadvantaged because they cannot readily use the mouse, keyboard or touch screen. SCHUHFRIED’s hardware designers have therefore developed special ergonomic input devices as alternatives to the computer keyboard, mouse and touch screen.

Easier input devices (e.g. ResponsePanel instead of computer keyboard)can increase respondents’motivationandacceptance.

worth knowing

TheStandardandUniversalresponsepanelscanalsobeusedasinputde-vicesforCogniPlus.

worth knowing

Light pen ThelightpeninterfaceprovidestheinterfacetothePC

Targetpoints

standard response panel 7colorkeys 10numberkeys 1sensorkey Connectionforfoot-operatedkeys USBconnection

universal response panel 2twistknobs 2analogjoysticks 7colorkeys 10numberkeys 1sensorkey Connectionforfoot-operatedkeys USBconnection



MOTOR PERFORMANCE SERIESNeededforthetest:MLS–MotorPerformanceSeries

TheMotorPerformanceSeriesisahighly reliable and state-of-the-arttest thathasbeendevelopedfromFleishman’s factor analysis of fine

motorskills.Bothdynamicandstaticdimensionsoffin-ger/hand/armmovementaremeasured.

the mls work panel features: holesofdifferentdiametersforsteadiness,one-andtwo-handed agroovewithseveralbendsandanglesforlinetrack-ing,one-handed 2x20contactpointsforaiming,one-andtwo-handed 25smallholesonbothleftandrightsidesforinserting pins,one-andtwo-handed two small metal plates for tapping, one- and two-handed USBconnection

FLICKER TUbENeededforthetest:FLIMFlicker/FusionFrequency

The flicker frequency analysismeasuresCNSactivation(arousal).

stimuluslightfrom10.0to80.0Hzinstepsof0.1Hz minimalinfluenceofextraneousphysiologicaland physicalvariables

PERIPHERAL PERCEPTIONNeededforthetest:PPPeripheralPerception

The Peripheral Perception testmeasurestheabilitytoperceiveandprocessperipheralstimuli.

The respondent’s attention is held in the center of thefieldofviewbyaskinghimtocarryoutatrackingtask.Atthesametimeperipherallightstimuliarepresentedandtherespondentisrequiredtoreactselectivelytothese.

peripheraldisplay: lightdiodematrix,8 rowsand64columnsoneachside light stimuli from the center to the periphery of thevisualfield ultrasound distance measurement determines head position

…aboutMLS.

read more

on page 70

MLS Work Panel

Flicker tube

Peripheral Perception

…aboutFLIM.

read more

on page 65

…aboutPP.

read more

on page 74


“client list” tabIn the “Client list” existing client-related data can beeditedanddetailsofnewclientscanbeentered.Theclientdatabasecanbeadapted to individual require-ments by adding additional data fields to those pro-vided as standard, thereby creating a personalizeddatabase.

“testing” tab“Testing” is used to call up and administer individualtestsandtestbatteries.

The user interface of the Vienna Test System

“scoring” tab The“Scoring” tabcontainsadatabaseofclients’ testscores.

“setup” tabUnder “Setup” important basic settings for the TestSystemcanbespecifiedand ifnecessaryadapted toindividual requirements.Forexample, it ispossible todefine inputdevicesandoptions for theoutputof re-sults,toinstallnewtestsanddefineaccessrights.

The user interface of the VTS management software is divided into convenient and intuitively arranged index cards, making it easy for the user to navigate and to switch between the different functions. The four main tabs are:



Testing with the Vienna Test System

TEST SELECTIONIndividualtestsandpredefinedtestbatteriesareavail-able.

“tests” tabIf particular tests are to beadministered,theyshouldbeselected in the test list.Thedimensions list provides an

additionalmeansofconvenientaccess.Inthislist,sim-ply clickon thecharacteristics thatneed tobe tested:theViennaTestSystemthensuggeststhemostsuitabletest and test form. The average time needed to com-plete the test isalso shown.The “Manual” buttoncanbeusedtoopenthedescriptionofthesuggestedtest.

“dimensions” tabThe dimensions list is con-veniently structured and di-vided into categories. Thefollowing lists are currentlyavailable:

standard catalog: approx. 50 generally formulateddimensions fullcatalogue:approx.150morefinelydifferentiated dimensions humanresources:personnel-specificcharacteristics sport:sport-relatedcharacteristics

“test batteries” tabAswellasindividualtests,atestbatterycanbeadmin-istered.Inatestbattery,completingthelastitemofonetestleadsautomaticallytothestartofthenexttest.Tostandardizethetestadministrationprocess,atestbat-terycanbesavedinadvanceandmadeavailabletoa

test administrator.When re-quired theadministrator canthen call up the test batteryandadministerit.

test forms and language selectionMany testsareavailable indifferent test formswhichmay,forexample,varyintestlengthordifficulty.Differ-enttestformshavebeendesignedforusewithspecificgroups(e.g.children,giftedindividuals)orforparticu-larmeasurementpurposes(e.g.screening).Thisena-blesdifferentformsofthesametesttobeusedtomeetdifferentrequirements.Since the Vienna Test System is designed for inter-national use, it supports many different languages.Regardlessofthelanguageoftheuserinterface,testadministrationandoutputofresultscaneachbecon-ducted in different languages–withnoadditional installationrequired.

TEST ADMINISTRATIONOncetheclient’sdetailshavebeenentered,therequiredtestsor testbatteriesareselectedandthetestsessionisstarted.

InstructionsEachtestbeginswith instructions, inwhichthetask isdescribed.

practice phaseThisisfollowedbyapracticephasewhichcheckswheth-er the client has understood the task. The instructionsandpracticephasesareoftenlinkedandcontainaseriesofstagesbasedontheprinciplesofprogrammedlearn-ing.Asaresult,theclientquicklygraspswhatisrequired;if he does not, the test administrator can intervene.

test phaseThe client nowworks the test items.There is no in-volvementof thetestadministratorat thisstage;thisensuresahighlevelofobjectivity.

Newlanguagesarecontinuallybeingadded to the Vienna Test System.Pleaseenquire!

worth knowing

A test battery is a fixed sequence ofindividualtests.

worth knowing

Search the Demo DVD by dimensi-ons ifyouarenotyet familiarwith theSCHUHFRIEDtests.

worth knowing

… about predefined test batteries inthesection“Expertsystems”

read more

page 24



TEST SCORINGAftercompletionofthetestorteststheresultsareimme-diatelyavailable.Theresultsarepresentedinastand-ardizedwayinbothtabularanddiagrammaticform.

results tableTheresultstableliststhetestvariables,therawscoresobtainedandthecorrespondingnormscores.Thenormscorecomparisonsrelateeithertoanoverallsampleortosubsamplesbasedonage,gender,educationallevelorothercriteria.Inadditiontopercentileranks,T-scoresand/orZ-scoresareusuallydisplayed.Ifreliabilitiesex-ist,confidenceintervalsarealsogiven.

Testing with the Vienna Test System

profile diagramThecolouredprofilediagramenablesinformationtobetakeninataglance.Thenormalrangeisshadedgrey,so that deviations are immediately obvious. In sometests additional explanations of the test variables arealsodisplayed.

test protocolThe test protocol givesdetails of the client’s respons-es and his working time per item and showswhetherany answers were corrected. For many question-naires an item analysis protocol is available, show-ing the questions posed and the answers given. Ifthe client’s responses are implausible or incom-plete,warningson interpretationof the test aregiven.

freely adaptable title line

Brief description of the test

clearly presented information in the colored profile

test protocol and item analysis for detailed information on the course of the test

explanations of the test variables

notes on test interpretation

raw score, norm score comparison with choice of sample, confidence intervals

data from the client database



profile comparisonIt isoftenuseful foraclient to repeataparticular testafter intervention (e.g. treatment, training) has takenplace.TheViennaTestSystemcancarryoutaprofilecomparison thatenables the resultsof theserepeatedteststobequicklycompared.Thisspecialscoringmeth-od involves superimposing the profiles of the differenttest sessions on each other.All changes can then beidentifiedat aglance.Theseparateprofile curvesareshown indifferentcolorsand/ordifferent typesof line.Uptosevenprofilescanbecompared.

TEST bATTERY SCORINGIncontrasttothestandardscoringsysteminwhichtheresultsofeachtestinatestbatteryarepresentedsepa-

rately,thetestbatteryscor-ing system presents thetest results one below theother. All the display op-tions (results table, profileetc.)areavailable.

Pleasecontactusifyouwouldliketousethis formofscoring.Weshallbepleasedtosetupthisadditionalfunc-tionforparticulartestbatteries.

worth knowing

Expert System Traffic

DEMO record!born 16.06.1966, male, 42;9 years, Education level 4Test administration: 19.03.2009

20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0.1 2.3 15.9 50.0 84.1 97.7 99.9

T

AMT General intelligenceDT Number of correct reactionsRT Mean reaction timeRT Mean motor timeCOG Mean time "correct rejections"ATAVT Getting an overviewPP Field of visionPP Tracking deviation

Profile:

PRComment(s): The highlighted range marks the required characteristics of the examined ability and personality dimensions for the settraffic-psychological question (group 1 - motorists without increased responsibility)

Serial number of the examination center: 000000

REPORT GENERATION Thetestsystemcontainsafunctionwhichenablesthesystemto incorporate individual test results intoare-port templateattheclickofamouse.Thisreportcanbeedited,printedandsavedusingMicrosoftWord©.

A report template is sup-plied for the Aviation, HR,Sport and Traffic ExpertSystemsand for individualtests.

Driving-related psychological opinion Doe, John, 21.09.1980

Page 2 of 3

Case history: <insert text> Test results: The test battery lasted all together 41 minutes and shows the following results: General Intelligence was measured with the Adaptive Matrices Test, where Mr. Doe reached a performance parameter of -1.117. This corresponds to a percentile rank of 37. In the Determination Test, a test to assess the relative stress tolerance, Mr. Doe had 252 correct reactions. This corresponds to a percentile rank of 66. In the Reaction Test to assess the reaction ability Mr. Doe reached a mean reaction time of 486 milliseconds – which corresponds to a percentile rank of 25 – and a mean motor time of 126 milliseconds – which corresponds to a percentile rank of 79. Whan assessing concentration by means of the Cognitrone a mean time "correct rejections" of 2.18 seconds was achieved, which corresponds to a percentile rank of 83. In the Tachistoscopic Traffic Test, by which the ability to get an overview was measured, the client grasped 17 traffic situations completely correct, which corresponds to a percentile rank of 93. In summary these test results lead to an allocation certainty to the group of the persons with adequate driving related ability of 78%. All reported percentile ranks result from a comparison with the age independent norm sample.

…aboutexpertsystems.

read more

page 24



Special functions

VTS HELPThe Vienna Test System includes extensive context-sensitivehelp–onmattersrangingfrominstallationanduseoftheVTStoTipsandTricksandliteraturereferenc-es.AsinMicrosoftWindows®,topicscanbesearchedforusing“Content”,“Index”or“Search”.Manualsforin-dividualtestsareavailableindigitalform.

vts help is divided into the following sections: basic information on computer-aided psychological assessment theViennaTestSystem theTestGenerator updateinfo testdocumentation

CUSTOMIzAbLE CLIENT DATAbASETheclientdatabasecontainsthestandardfieldsName,First name, Date of birth, Gender, Education, Scoringcode and Language. Additional self-defined fields canbeaddedas required.An individual template can thusbecreated.

SCORING PROGRAM FOR PAPER & PENCIL TESTSThe Vienna Test System includes a special scoringprogramthatenablestestsadministered inpaper-and-pencilformtobescoredandmanagedviathecomputer.The respondent’s answers on the response sheet areeitherenteredviathekeyboardorscannedin.ThetestresultscanthenbedisplayedandexportedinthesamewayasforcomputerizedVTStests.Comparisonswithanormcanalsobecarriedout.Thescoringprogramcanbeusedforallthetestsinthetestsystem.

NORM TAbLE ExPLORERForeach installed test the rawscoresonall test vari-ablesareexpressedaspercentile ranksandT-scores(orintheformofthenormedtestscoreusuallyusedforthetestinquestion,e.g.asZ-scoresorStenscores).Ifavailable,reliabilitiesarealsogiven.Inmostcasesthesamplesize,genderdistribution,agerangeanddistribu-tionofeducationallevelsarequoted.

TWO MONITORS – ONE TEST SYSTEMItisoftennotpracticalforthetestadministratorandtheclient touse thesamescreen.The lightpen interfacemakes it possible to connect twomonitors, thus ena-bling the administrator to observe the progress of thetest sessiononaseparatemonitor and to interveneif necessary. The client’smonitorisusedonlyfortestadministration.

HARDWARE TESTTheHardwareTestcanbeusedtotestthefunctioningofthe individual componentsof the Test System. Uponcompletionof the testa re-portappearsonthescreenand can be printed out ifnecessary.

…aboutthelightpeninterfaceinthesection“Inputdevicesandaccesso-ries”.

read more

page 12

Thereportservesasevidenceoftheequipmenttestingthatismandatoryinmanyinstitutions.

worth knowing



DATA ExPORT & IMPORTAll data (raw scores and/or norm scores on the testvariables)canbeexportedintostandardstatisticalpro-grams(suchasExcelandSPSS) for furtherstatisticalprocessing. An ASCII file can also be produced. It islikewiseeasyto“exchange”clientdatabetweentwoVi-ennaTestSystemsviaanetworkorexternaldatastor-agemedium.Toensureconfidentialityduringdataex-port,theclientcodescanbeencrypted.

INTEGRATING THE VIENNA TEST SYSTEM INTO OTHER PROGRAMSTheViennaTestSystemiseasytointegrateintoexist-ingworkflowsorsoftwareprograms,thusensuringthathigh-quality testing forms part of a clear and efficientwork process. The Vienna Test System is frequentlyintegratedintoapplicantmanagementsystemsusedinpersonnel selectionandmanagementand into ITsys-temsusedinclinics.Inbothareasthereisalsothepos-sibility of combiningonline (decentralized) testingwithlocaltestadministration.Integrationanddataexchange

between different softwareprogramsaremadepossiblebytheopeninterfacedesignoftheViennaTestSystem.

OTHER SPECIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE languages:managementsoftwareinupto13languages, testadministrationinupto25languagesandscoringof resultsinupto14languages,allavailableflexibly,atno extracostandwithnoneedforadditionalinstallation easyimportingofself-generatednorms creationofdecision-oriented(conditional)testbatteries reportonthenumberoftestsadministered scopeofresultsoutputcanbeindividuallydefined measurementofchangethroughprofilecomparison

DATA PROTECTIONForpurposesofdataprotectiontheViennaTestSystemincludesfunctionsthatpreventunauthorizeduseofthesystemandthedatacollectedbyit–especiallyperson-specificdata.Accesscanbeauthorizedatdifferentlev-els and is controlled by four passwords, enabling thefollowingusergroupstobedefined:

securIty level 0:test administration unrestricted, access to database unrestricted, functions unrestricted AllthefunctionsoftheTestSystemcanbeaccessed.

securIty level 1:test administration unrestricted, access to database unrestricted, functions partially blocked Testbatteriescannotbecreatedorchanged,defaultsettingscannotbechangedandtestscannotbeinstalledordeleted.Temporarychangescanbemadetosamplesandtestresultdisplays, but these changes cannot be saved. Data exportoptions cannot be changed. The test system can thereforebe used to administer tests and unrestricted access to thedatabasesispermitted.

securIty level 2:test administration unrestricted, access to database restricted, functions partially blocked The testsystemcanbeusedonly toadministerandscoretests;accesstoallotherfunctionsisbarred.Thedatabasecanonlybeusedtoevaluateandscorethedatageneratedduring administration of the tests. Other data in the data-basecannotbeaccessed.

securIty level 3:test administration unrestricted, access to database blocked, functions partially blocked The test system can be used only for test administration.Accesstoallotherfunctionsandtothedatabaseisbarred.

…aboutnetworkedsystems.

read more

page 22



RANKINGAspecialmodule in theViennaTestSystemenablesdifferentapplicantsand their test results tobedirect-ly comparedwith each other.Once the requirementsprofilehasbeenenteredandthedifferentaspectsofitweighted,themoduleidentifiesthemostsuitableper-son.Rankingisbasedonthedegreeofdeviationfromtherequirementsyouhavespecified.

TheAssignment function indicates which position oroccupationanindividualisbestsuitedfor.Itisusefulifyouhaveanumberofpoststofillor ifyouwishtoes-tablishindividuals’suitabilityforparticularoccupations.

You first define re-quirements profilesfor the positions oroccupations. In theevaluationthesystemshows to what ex-tent the individual fitstheseprofiles.

Additional programs

'OMED noitceles lennosreP' fo gniknaR

tneilCstnioPknaR 41V31V21V11V01V9V8V7V6V5V4V3V2V1V 61V51V

:)elbaliava yletelpmoc ton era stluser tset( gnitar oN3791.01.13 ;ymmiJ ,reffoH- -4-94-1 +68

6791.01.50 ;lliB ,yarruM- -23-76 +53 -375591.10.91 ;ittaP ,htimS- +67 4- +18+767591.01.41 ;kciR ,redynS- -85 +19+68 -35

1791.30.61 ;yhtaK ,rebbeW- -03-5 +87+52

:gniknar eht fo noitatupmoc eht rof desu saw eliforp boj gniwollof ehT

elbairaV ecnaveleRegnar laedI

ytivitcA knar elitnecreP - 0001/CA-RP 1S/6PPE = 1V 05.0001-52noisserggA knar elitnecreP - 0001/GA-RP 1S/6PPE = 2V 57.005-0

noitibmA knar elitnecreP - 0001/MA-RP 1S/6PPE = 3V 57.009-05ssenevitressA knar elitnecreP - 0001/SA-RP 1S/6PPE = 4V 57.057-52

citamgoD knar elitnecreP - 0001/OD-RP 1S/6PPE = 5V 57.057-52ssenevisserpxE knar elitnecreP - 0001/XE-RP 1S/6PPE = 6V 05.057-52

ssenevislupmI knar elitnecreP - 0001/MI-RP 1S/6PPE = 7V 05.057-01ytilibisnopserrI knar elitnecreP - 0001/RI-RP 1S/6PPE = 8V 00.152-0

noitalumissiD knar elitnecreP - 0001/IL-RP 1S/6PPE = 9V 00.209-0ssenevitalupinaM knar elitnecreP - 0001/AM-RP 1S/6PPE = 01V 05.057-52

gnikaT-ksiR knar elitnecreP - 0001/IR-RP 1S/6PPE = 11V 57.006-01ytilibaicoS knar elitnecreP - 0001/OS-RP 1S/6PPE = 21V 57.009-52

yromem mret-gnoL knar elitnecreP - 0001/GZLZ-RP 1S/FBI = 31V 00.1001-57snoitcnuf ecnegilletni laciremuN knar elitnecreP - 0001/INZ-RP 1S/FBI = 41V 00.1001-05

noitasilausiV knar elitnecreP - 0001/VRZ-RP 1S/FBI = 51V 57.0001-52snoitcnuf ecnegilletni labreV knar elitnecreP - 0001/IVZ-RP 1S/FBI = 61V 33.1001-57

'OMED noitceles lennosreP' fo gniknaR - metsyS tseT anneiV 1 fo 1 egap ,9002.40.01

CALIbRATION MODULEFor time-critical tests calibration of the computer sys-temusedisrecommended.Thisguaranteesthehighestlevelofmeasurementprecision.

In some computer systems stimulus output may besignificantly delayed (by up to 100milliseconds). Thiscould result in erroneous interpretation of the results.Thetime-criticaltestsoftheViennaTestSystemarede-signed to identify thesesourcesof technicalerrorandallow for them. This ensures thatmeasurement preci-sionisaccuratetoaroundthreepercentilerankpoints.

Especially in areas inwhich even greater precision isneeded,useofthecalibrationmoduleisrecommended.Thisenablesmeasurementtobeaccuratetothenear-estpercentilerankirrespectiveofthecomputersystemused.

INDIVIDUAL GENERATION OF NORMS WITH FLExNORMThis SCHUHFRIED software program is aWindows-basedtoolthatprovidesasimpleandefficientmeansofcreatingnormsfortheViennaTestSystem.Inonlyafeweasilylearnedstepstheusercanproduceoverallnormsornormspartitionedbygender,education,ageorotherself-definedvariables.Thenormsthuscreatedcan be readily imported into theViennaTestSystemusinganytexteditor.Topreventmistakesthereisalsotheoptiontocheckself-generatednormsforsyntacticerrors.

Test battery occupational counselling

Winch, Garyborn 28.03.1963, male, 45;8 years, Education level 3Test administration: 02.12.2008

Test results:

QITRPerocs waRelbairav tseTCognitive ability

0738.4-ecnegilletni lareneG (0-1) 20 (16-24) 55 (49-61)

3288.1-snoitcnuf ecnegilletni labreV (1-11) 31 (24-38) 72 (62-82)

0521.2-snoitcnuf ecnegilletni laciremuN (0-1) 20 (15-25) 55 (48-62)

63667.0-yromem mret-gnoL (13-66) 46 (39-54) 95 (83-106)

33579.0-noitasilausiV (11-63) 46 (38-53) 93 (82-105)

Occupational personality242212ytilibaicoS757722ssenevisserpxE153542ssenevitressA947422noitibmA166802citamgoD755771noisserggA841491gnikaT-ksiR550732ssenevislupmI558602ytilibisnopserrI153561ssenevitalupinaM

Occupational intersts050572stseretni lacinhcet dna lacitcarP559633stseretni evitagitsevni dna lautcelletnI559623stseretni citsiugnil dna citsitrA842472stseretni laicoS559643stseretni lairuenerpertnE

Organizational and administrational interests 28 66 54

Occupational aptitude 586snoisseforp lacinhcet rof edutitpA 1

066snoisseforp laicremmoc rof edutitpA 1

646snoisseforp laicos rof edutitpA 1

Comment(s): The confidence intervals are displayed next to each of the comparison scores (in parentheses).1The variable indicates the match to the ideal profile in per mill.

Vienna Test System - 02.12.2008Test results Winch, Gary; 02.12.2008

Test battery occupational counselling

Winch, Garyborn 28.03.1963, male, 45;8 years, Education level 3Test administration: 02.12.2008

Test results:

QITRPerocs waRelbairav tseTCognitive ability

0738.4-ecnegilletni lareneG (0-1) 20 (16-24) 55 (49-61)

3288.1-snoitcnuf ecnegilletni labreV (1-11) 31 (24-38) 72 (62-82)

0521.2-snoitcnuf ecnegilletni laciremuN (0-1) 20 (15-25) 55 (48-62)

63667.0-yromem mret-gnoL (13-66) 46 (39-54) 95 (83-106)

33579.0-noitasilausiV (11-63) 46 (38-53) 93 (82-105)

Occupational personality242212ytilibaicoS757722ssenevisserpxE153542ssenevitressA947422noitibmA166802citamgoD755771noisserggA841491gnikaT-ksiR550732ssenevislupmI558602ytilibisnopserrI153561ssenevitalupinaM

Occupational intersts050572stseretni lacinhcet dna lacitcarP559633stseretni evitagitsevni dna lautcelletnI559623stseretni citsiugnil dna citsitrA842472stseretni laicoS559643stseretni lairuenerpertnE

Organizational and administrational interests 28 66 54

Occupational aptitude 586snoisseforp lacinhcet rof edutitpA 1

066snoisseforp laicremmoc rof edutitpA 1

646snoisseforp laicos rof edutitpA 1

Comment(s): The confidence intervals are displayed next to each of the comparison scores (in parentheses).1The variable indicates the match to the ideal profile in per mill.

Vienna Test System - 02.12.2008Test results Winch, Gary; 02.12.2008

target and ideal ranges can

be defined for rankingnew



The Test Generator

TheTestGeneratorisavailableforquestionnairetests(TQ)andtachistoscopictests(TT).

advantages noprogrammingknowledgerequired testsarequicktoproduce norms–eitherself-generatedoradoptedfrom elsewhere–areeasytoincorporate maximumflexibility adaptabletoindividualrequirements

QUESTIONNAIRESQuestionnairescanbedesignedeitheraspower testsoraspersonalitytests.Questionscanbeentereddirect-

ly into the Test Generator orcan utilizemultimedia options(graphics, photos, scanned-inmaterial,audioandvideofiles).

TACHISTOSCOPIC TESTSCreating tachistoscopic tests involvesprovidingyourownpicturesorpictureseriesanddefiningthelength

of time forwhich theywillbeshown. The questions to beputtotherespondentafterta-chistoscopicon-screenpres-entation of the pictures arealsoeasytoproduce.

QUESTIONNAIRES AND SURVEYS USING THE TEST GENERATORUseoftheTestGeneratortoadministeraquestionnaireisverypopular.Thesequestionnairesarenottestsbutsimplesurveys.Forexample,thismethodisusedinclin-ics to ask patients about their current state of health,whileincompaniesitcanbeusedtestaperson‘sknowl-edge or obtain biographical information, e.g. from jobapplicants.

…abouttheTestGeneratorforquestionnairetests(TQ).

read more

on page 145

Incorporate your own tests into the Vienna Test SystemUsing the Test Generator, tests that you have developed yourself can be administered within the Vienna Test System (VTS). The same functions are available for these self-generated tests as for all other tests in the Vienna Test System.

The Test Generator in use in a clinic

The Test Generator in use in a company


…abouttheTestGeneratorfortachistoscopictests(TT).

read more

on page 146

attractive pricing modelnew


the group testing procedure

All the candidates invited for testing are entered in the database.

Each candidate is assigned a test battery and a code number.

The test administrator gives each candidate his assigned code number.

The candidate uses his code number to log on to one of the test computers.

The test battery assigned to him is then presented automatically.

The test administrator uses the control monitor to monitor the progress of testing.

At the end of the series of tests the program instructs the applicant to contact

the test administrator.

the candidate contacts the test administrator.

TEST SYSTEM NETWORKUseofatestsystemnetworkisrecommendedifalargenumberof respondentsneed tobe testedat thesametime.

How it works: In one or more test rooms you set up computers onwhichtheViennaTestSystemisinstalled;thecomput-ersarelinkedtoformalocalnetwork.Oneworkstationisallocated to the testadministratorand theothers totheclients.At the testadministratorworkstationclientdata iscol-lected,testbatteriespreparedandscoringcarriedout.

At the client workstations the various candidates canworkthetestssimultaneouslybutcompletelyindepend-entlyofeachotherandattheirownpace.Differenttestsor testbatteriescanbeadministeredateachworksta-tion.

Two functions that make group testing even easier:

1) control monitorThecontrolmonitorisaseparateprogramusedtomoni-torandmanagetheindividualworkstationsinatestsys-temnetwork.Itisrunatatestadministratorworkstation;foreachclientworkstationitshowsinformationsuchastestlength,testformandclientdata.

2) autotestTheAutoTest functionenables the test administrator toprepare test sessions for different clients in advance.EachclientisgivenanIDnumber.UsingthisIDtheclientcanlogonatanyworkstation,wherethetestsassignedtohimwill thenbeadministeredautomatically. Immedi-atelyaftertestingtheresultscanbedisplayedorprintedout.

Networked systemsThe Vienna Test System


DECENTRALIzED TESTINGComputersatdifferentsites,onwhichtheViennaTestSystemisinstalled,areconnectedtoaserver.TheVTSsettings,candidates’detailsandtestresultsarestoredinacentraldatabaseontheserver.Testingisthuscon-ductedatdifferentsitesbut thedata ismanagedcen-trally.

The VTS user rights function is used to define the rights assigned to different workstations. Youcansetupacentralworkstationwith full accessrightsatwhichagroupofexpertscanadjustsettings,managedataandselecttests.Attheperipheralwork-stations rights are restricted and depend onwhethertheuserisatestadministratororatestcandidate.

Thisenablesorganizationsthathavedispersedorglo-balnetworkstoadministertestsatdifferent locations.

Sincealldataiscollectedin one database, usefulcomparison studies canalsobecarriedout.

single workstation systemor (mobile)

online testing LocalinstallationoftheVienna

TestSystemnotrequired www

test system networks Simultaneoustestingofanumber

ofindividuals

decentralized testing Anumberofsingleworkstationsystemswithashareddatabase

Decentralized testing isalsouseful ininstitutionswith a number of differentdepartments.Forexample, inaclinic,where patients may be moved fromoneward toanother, thepsychologiston thenewwardcan immediatelyac-cessthepatient’sdetails.

worth knowing

ONLINE TESTINGInonlinetestingtheViennaTestSystemisinstalledonaserverrather thanon individualcomputers.Testingcanbecarriedoutonanycomputerwithinternetaccess.

Fromhis computer the test administrator accesses theVTS control interface on the server, which has all thefunctionalityoftheofflineversionoftheViennaTestSys-tem.Hemanagesthecandidates’data,drawsuptestbat-teriesandevaluatestestresults.

Candidates complete thetestsontheirowncomputer.Invitations towork the testsaresentoutbye-mail.

VTS Online uses a modern remotedesktoptechnologyratherthanawebbrowser. This enables testing to becarriedout under conditions that arevirtually indistinguishablefromofflinetesting.

worth knowing

The symbol next to the test de-scriptions (page 31 onwards) shows which tests are available online. onlinetest



Expert systems

ExPERT SYSTEM HR

The Expert System HR is a version of the Vienna TestSystemdevelopedespecially forpersonnelselectionandpotentialanalysis.Itcombinesscientificallybasedqualitywith ease of use and can be used to test aptitude for alargenumberofoccupations - fromcall centerworker toadministrator, fromapprenticetoengineer, frommanagertotechnicalspecialist.

TheHRmanagerselectsfromalistof job-specificabilityand personality dimensions those that are to be tested.The system then selects the appropriate tests and sub-tests.At theendof thetestsessiontheresultsareavail-ableinatable,asaneasy-to-readdiagramorasawrittenreport. A less detailed version of the report is also pro-vided for theclient.Auseful ranking functionshowsataglancewhichcandidateisbestsuitedtothejob.

TheExpertSystemHRisavailableinStandardandPre-miumversions.Theusercanchoosefromtestsmeasur-ing19success-relatedpersonalityandabilityfactors:

standard generalintelligence(precision) generalintelligence(screening) generalworkhabits vocationalinterests memory customerorientation mathematicalabilities visualization riskappetite inductivereasoning languageabilities abilitytoworkinateam technicalcomprehension

premIum Standardpackage+ workingaccuracyvs.workingspeed eye-handcoordination Englishasaforeignlanguage finemotorskills multi-tasking stress-relatedworkbehaviour

profilingPredefinedprofilesareprovidedforassessmentsituationsrelevanttoHR.Theseprofilesincludenotonlytheready-made test battery settings but also a predefined rankingandaspecific testbatteryscoringsystem.The followingprofiles are available for psychological personnel selec-tionandpotentialanalysis:

assistant callcenters manufacturingwork salesandmarketing financeandcontrolling IT productdevelopmentandresearch technical administrationandprocessing management juniormanagement talentassessment careercounselling

ExPERT SYSTEM TRAFFIC

ThetestbatteriesoftheExpertSystemTrafficcanbeusedtoassessdriving-specificabilitiesandwillingnesstoadapttotrafficconditions.

In addition to the results of the individual tests, an overallassessmentofdriving-specificabilityisprovided.Theoverallassessmentisbasedonamodel–whichhasbeenvalidatedinanumberof independentstudies–ofthecorrelationbe-tweenthetestresultsandtheassessmentofdrivingbehav-iourinastandardizeddrivingtest.

Atthepressofabuttonallpersonaldetails,testresults,rawscoresandpercentilerankingscanbeincorporatedintotheWord template of a traffic-psychological assessment. TheresultingWord report canbeeditedandhenceadapted toindividualrequirements.

TheExpertSystemTrafficachievesa classification rateof86%withavaliditycoefficientof0.78.

SCHUHFRIED’s expert systems are standardized test batteries with an overall assessment to which all the tests contribute.

Fixed package price with1-year licence! Use the testsasoftenasyouwishforayear.

worth knowing

order your free copy now!catalog expert system hr


order your free copy now!catalog expert system traffIc




ExPERT SYSTEM AVIATION

The Expert System Aviation contains a standardized andvalidatedtestbatteryfortestingapplicantsforpilottraining.Thisassessesalltheabilityandpersonalityfactorsrecom-mendedintheinternationalJAR-FCL3guidelines,includinglogical reasoning, concentration, spatial visualization,psy-chomotorcoordinationanddecisionquality.

Using the testbatterydataanda requirementsprofile, thesystemcalculatesanoverallassessmentofthecandidate’scognitiveabilityandsafety-relatedpersonalitytraits.

TheExpertSystemAviationachievesaclassificationrateof92%withavaliditycoefficientof0.85.

ExPERT SYSTEM SPORT

Thissportpsychologypackageiseasytouse.Fromalistofsport-relateddimensionstheuserselectstheonesthataretobetested.Thesystemthenchoosestheappropriatetests.Theresultsareprovidedintheformofaverbalreportandaranking.

The Expert System Sport isavailableinStandardandPre-mium versions. The supple-mentarychildren’smodulecanbeaddedtoeitherversion.

standard generalsport-relatedpersonalitycharacteristics anticipationofmovement memory concentration reactionbehaviorunderstress abilitytoreact selectiveattention timing visualperception

premIum Standardpackage+ distractibility eye-handcoordination stressscreening sustainedattention visualfield informationprocessing leadership achievementmotivation spatialvisualization readinesstotakerisks independenceofexternalinfluences

supplementary children’s module finemotorskills–children memory(children) reactionbehaviorunderstress(children)

profilingPredefinedprofilesareprovided forparticularsport-relatedassessment situations. These profiles include not only theready-madetestbatterysettingsbutalsoapredefinedrank-ingandaspecifictestbatteryscoringsystem.Thefollowingprofilesareavailableforpsychologicalsportassessment: successfactors–motorsport successfactors–games(team) potentialscreening–children(6-10years) potentialscreening–children(11-14years)

order your free copy now!catalog expert system avIatIon



Fixed package price with1-year licence! Use the testsasoftenasyouwishforayear.

worth knowing


1|TEST

2|TRAIN

3|TEST THE SUCCESS OF TRAINING

The neuropsychological tests of theVienna Test System and the trainingproceduresofCogniPlusare inter-co-ordinated. The training programs arebasedonthesametheoreticalmodelsastheteststowhichtheycorrespond;thisprovidesanefficientandtheoreti-callysoundlinkbetweenassessment/training and the subsequent analysisofeffectiveness.

The corresponding tests and train-ingprogramsarebasedon thesametheoret ica l lyclearlydefinedconstructs butinvolve differ-enttasks.Thisenablesa reli-able distinction to be made betweenthe material–specific learning effectand thematerial-independent trainingeffectwhichisbeingaimedat.

ThesummaryshowswhichCogniPlustraining programmes are specificallytailoredtothedeficitstestedbytheVi-ennaTestSystem.

Attention

Alertness WAFA ALERT

Vigilance WAFV VIG

Selective WAFS SELECT

Focused WAFF FOCUS

Divided WAFG DIVID

Neglect-/visualfield training

Visuo-spatialattention WAFR SPACE

Working memory

Visuo-spatial CORSI VISP

Spatial and temporal encoding CORSI CODING

Updating - visual NbN NbACK

Long-termmemory

Learning of face-name associations GNL* NAMES

Executive functions

Response inhibition INHIb HIbIT

Planing and action skills PLAN TEST* PLAND

Spatial processing Mental rotation A3DW ROTATE

Visuomotor skills Visuomotorcoordination

MLS2HAND VISMO

*| in implementation |

CogniPlusisatrainingsystemfortrainingcognitivefunctions.

worth knowing

order your free copy now!catalog cognIplus E-mail [email protected]

The Vienna Test System and CogniPlus: they go together!

26 . VIENNA TEST SYSTEM WIENER TESTSYSTEM . 27

Quality management

QUALITY MANAGEMENTSCHUHFRIEDGmbHhasaqualitymanagementsys-teminaccordancewithENISO13485:2003,whichisa version of EN ISO 9001:2000 adapted to medicalproducts.

ProductsofSCHUHFRIEDGmbHaredevelopedandproducedinaccordancewithEUDirective93/42/EEG.TheycomplywiththeMedicalProductsActandthere-fore carry the CE mark. This confirms that productscomply with technical safety regulations and EMCguidelinesformedicalelectricalappliances(EN60601),bio-compatibilityguidelines(EN30993)andotherprod-uct-specificrequirements.

The development and production guidelines whichhavebeendrawnupaspartofourqualitymanagementsystemensurethatourproductsaredurable,highlyre-liableandfault-free.

RESEARCH LAbORATORYTofacilitateempiricaldatacollection,aresearchandde-velopmentlaboratorywitheighttestplaceshasbeensetupneartheuniversityinVienna.TheSCHUHFRIEDre-searchlaboratoryismainlyconcernedwithnormingworkinvolving representative samples.DIN33430 stipulatesthat the norms of tests used in suitability assessmentmustbecheckedeveryeight years toensure that theyarestillappropriate.SCHUHFRIEDGmbHcomplieswiththisrequirementforalltheteststhatitsells.


Service

DEMO VERSIONOrdertheDemoDVDandbrowsethroughtheViennaTestSystem!

Those who are already VTS users will also find aglance at the latest demo version helpful: in “updateinfo“intheHelpmenuyouwillfindalistofalladditionsand changes (language versions, norms, test forms),someofwhichmaybeofinteresttoyou.

VTS UPDATESTheViennaTestSystemistheresultofmanyyearsofdevelopmentworkandcontinuousproductmain-tenance. Know-how from our development depart-ments (psychology, software, hardware), insightsfromourtestandresearchlaboratoryandthepracti-calexperienceofourclientsandusersareallincor-poratedintoitsimplementation.Updates enable you to benefit on favorable termsfrom the improvements thatwe regularly introduce,givingyouaccessto: newtestforms newnorms newlanguages updatedtestitems newadditionalfunctions compatibilitywithcurrentoperatingsystemsand computerhardware

UPDATE AGREEMENTSAnupdateagreement isthe idealwaytoensurethatyourViennaTestSystem isalwayscompletelyup todate.Conveniently presented update information enablesyoutoseeataglancewhatchangeshavebeenmade.Asanalternativetoanupdateagreementyoucanre-questanupdateatanytime.

AllSCHUHFRIEDcontactdetailsat

aglance.

read more

page 2

order your free copy now!vIenna test system demo dvd


IfyouwouldliketotesttheDemoVer-siononline,justcontactus.

worth knowing

SCHUHFRIED regularly organizes webinars. Forth-comingeventsarelistedatwww.schuhfried.com.Alsoon thewebsite are recordings of past webinars andpresentationdocuments.

weBInars


As a traffic psychologistI rely on

SCHUHFRIED

TesTs

Main areas of application

Neuro & cliNical

PersoNNel

TransporT:road

TransporT:rail

TransporT:aviaTion

sPort

eDucatioN

32 . VIENNA TEST SYSTEM VIENNA TEST SYSTEM 33

Economical intelligence screening battery based on Thurstone’s primary factors.

ITB Institut für Test- und Begabungsforschung GmbH, Bonn (Directors: E. Fay, G. Trost); G. Gittler, Institute of Psychology of the University of Vienna © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationAssessment of intelligence level and intelligence structure; suitable for respondents aged 13 and upwards in all rele-vant contexts. The IBF is particularly useful as a screen-ing test when a quick global overview of intelligence level is required. In addition the intelligence profile can be used to provide initial information before a more detailed investiga-tion of particular ability areas.

Theoretical backgroundThe test aims to provide a differentiated assessment of the main areas of ability which are hierarchically structured at a level of medium abstraction.Building on Thurstone’s primary factors of intelligence (1938), this tool for analysing the intelligence structure cov-ers the following four ability dimensions: Verbal Intelligence (35 items), Numerical Intelligence (40 items), Visualisation (17 items) and Memory (20 items).

AdministrationThere is a time limit for the completion of each group of items. Standardised instructions and practice items are presented before each group is worked. The respondent chooses the right answer from a multiple-choice selection. Amendments can be made to individual answers within an item group, repeatedly if necessary. Within the permissible time limits it is possible to go back to any item in the group in order to change the answer.

Test formsTwo test forms are available: Form S1 (Standard form)Form S2 (Easy short form)

ScoringThe results of the IBF are given in the form of z-transformed factor scores for the ability areas of Verbal Intelligence, Nu-merical Intelligence, Visualisation and Memory. An overall intelligence score is also provided, based on a hierarchical linear structural equation model. All test scores are compared with the norms and percen-tile ranks, T-scores and an optional IQ score are reported. The test protocol indicates how the individual items were answered (correct, incorrect, amended, omitted) and how much time was required for the test.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the individual ability areas lies between r=0.84 (Visualisation) and r=0.94 (Numerical Intelligence). For the test as a whole a value of r=0.95 was obtained. The internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the individual ability areas in the short form lies between r=0.74 and r=0.92. For the test as a whole the value is r=0.93. The test has been optimised to combine an eco-nomical test length with a very high degree of reliability.

Validity Studies show correlations with Raven’s matrix tests APM (Raven, Raven & Court, 1998) and SPM (Raven, Raven & Court, 1979) of r=0.30 to r=0.41 (APM, N=237) and r=0.42 to r=0.52 (SPM, N= 256) for the item groups and r=0.52 and r=0.66 for the overall test score. Correlations with INKA (Hey-de, 1995) are between r=0.36 and r=0.47, or r=0.54 for the test as a whole (N=320).

Norms For Form S1 computer norms are available for 4771 indi-viduals; these norms have also been separated according to age, education and gender for individuals aged 14 and upwards. In addition for Form S2 norms for 5581 individuals aged 13 and over are available.

Testing time Form S1: approx. 45-65 minutes (actual test time).Form S2: approx. 30-45 minutes (actual test time).

Intelligence Test Batteries

Basic Intelligence FunctionsIBF

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


INsBAT

A modular intelligence test battery constructed on theory-led principles and designed to measure work-related abilities both fairly and economically.

ApplicationAssessment of intelligence level and intelligence structure, for respondents aged 14 and over.

Theoretical backgroundINSBAT, a decision-oriented psychological assessment tool, is constructed modularly. This means that only those subtests that are maximally informative for the purpose of the investigation need be presented.INSBAT is based on the hierarchical intelligence model of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (Carroll, 1993; Horn, 1989; Horn & Noll, 1997). The model assumes that the intercorrelations between the subtests for measuring the primary factors can be explained by nine second-order factors that are broader in content than the primary ones. The correlations between the second-order factors are explained by a general factor of intelligence, which forms the peak or tip of the hierarchi-cal intelligence model. The validity of this factor structure has been replicated in many studies from different countries (e.g. Arendasy, Hergovich & Sommer, 2008, Brickley, Keith & Wolfe, 1995; Carroll, 1989; Gustafsson, 1984; Horn & Stankov, 1982; Undheim & Gustafsson, 1987).For the construction of INSBAT the following second-order factors were selected as being relevant to practical areas of application such as work psychology, commercial/industrial and organisational psychology and educational psychology: Fluid intelligence: the ability to recognise relationships be-tween stimuli, understand implications and draw valid logi-cal conclusions (subtests: Numerical Inductive Reasoning, Figural Inductive Reasoning, Verbal Deductive Reasoning). Crystallised intelligence: the breadth and depth of acquired cultural knowledge as well as word fluency and verbal com-prehension (subtests: Lexical Knowledge, Verbal Fluency, Word Meaning). Short-term memory: the ability to retain visual and verbal information in the short term and to re-produce it accurately (subtests: Visual Short-term Memory, Verbal Short-term Memory). Long-term memory: the ability to retain information in the longer term, integrate it into one’s own knowledge base and recall it accurately (subtest: Long-term Memory). Visual processing: the ability to imagine how objects will look after they have been mentally rotated or transformed (subtest: Spatial Perception). Processing speed: defined as the number of basic cognitive operations that can be carried out in a particular period of time (subtest: Inspection Time). Decision quality: defined as the number of basic cognitive operations required in order to make a fast and accurate decision in the context of non-trivial tasks (subtest: Decision Quality). Quantitative reasoning: the abili-ty to understand and apply mathematical skills and concepts (subtests: Computational Estimation, Arithmetical Compe-tence, Arithmetical Flexibility, Algebraic Reasoning).In all there are therefore 16 subtests available. The items of these subtests were devised with the aid of various method of automatic item generation (AIG: Arendasy & Sommer, in press; Irvine & Kyllonen, 2002), drawing on the findings of current research in the cognitive sciences and applied psy-chometrics.

The items were constructed either by human item writers or completely automatically using item generators. With regard to the psychometric properties of the item material it was considered important that (1) the items of the individual sub-tests should be scaleable in accordance with the 1PL Rasch model and (2) the theoretical model on which the items are based should be able to explain at least 50% of the variance in the item difficulty parameters. This has the advantages for the practitioner of scaling fairness and unambiguity of interpretation of the individual subtest results.

AdministrationINSBAT has been designed as a modular intelligence test bat-tery. This means that only those subtests that are relevant to the purpose of the particular assessment situation need be presented. This can be done using Variable Form I (S1) or Vari-able Form II (S2). While Form S1 allows only for the choice of subtests to be changed, Form S2 incorporates the additional possibility of changing the order of the subtests and the end conditions of the adaptive tests in line with the requirements of the test situation. These two test forms are particularly useful for predicting educational and career success in fields where there are clearly defined requirement profiles. For the differen-tiated assessment of intelligence level and intelligence struc-ture each second-order factor should be measured by a marker subtest (Figural Inductive Reasoning, Lexical Knowledge, Vis-ual Short-term Memory, Long-term Memory, Spatial Percep-tion and Inspection Time). To complement the picture a second subtest can be administered for each second-order factor, thus ensuring that the whole breadth of the second-order factor’s content is adequately covered. This approach is realised in the Global Form (S3). According to Schmidt and Hunter (1998), this procedure is particularly suitable for predicting the work-relat-ed performance of people in occupations involving very diverse and heterogeneous activities. If insufficient time is available for the separate assessment of an individual’s different abilities, the Short Form (S4) can be used. Each subtest is provided with standardised instructions and practice examples based on the principles of programmed in-struction and “mastery learning”. Depending on the subtest, the respondent’s answers are given either in multiple-choice for-mat or as automated free responses. The tasks in the individual subtests are presented partly in power test form and partly with a time limit on each item. In 11 of the subtests the items are presented as an adaptive test (CAT) with the test starting point

Intelligence-Structure Battery


Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

M. Arendasy, L. F. Hornke, M. Sommer, J. Häusler, M. Wagner-Menghin, G. Gittler, B. Bognar, M. Wenzl © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH



INsBAT Intelligence-Structure Battery

being selected on the basis of socio-demographic data; this maximises the information gain without using items that are either too easy or too difficult for the respondent.

Test formsFour test forms are available: Form S1 (variable form 1), Form S2 (variable form II), Form S3 (global form) and Form S4 (short form)

ScoringFor each of the selected subtests the ability parameter in accordance with the Rasch model is reported. While the number of correctly worked items is merely a measure of an individual’s performance, the ability parameter makes it pos-sible to estimate the underlying latent ability dimension. This represents an important and at the same time diagnostically necessary inferential step. This inferential step is, however, linked to the fit of the Rasch model, which has been dem-onstrated for the subtests of INSBAT (cf. van der Linden & Hambelton, 1997).If more than one subtest relating to a particular second-or-der factor has been selected, an ability parameter is calcu-lated for that second-order factor. The ability parameter for the general factor General Intelligence (G) is calculated if at least one subtest has been selected for each of the six sec-ond-order factors Fluid Intelligence (Gf), Crystallised Intel-ligence (Gc), Visual Processing (Gv), Quantitative Reason-ing (Gq), Short-term Memory (Gstm) and Long-term Memory (Gltm). Alongside the provision of the ability parameters and factor scores a norm comparison (percentile ranks and IQ; confidence interval) is carried out. At the conclusion of test-ing the results are displayed both in tabular form and as a profile, and these can be printed out. The test protocol for each subtest provides a record of the latency times for each item, the selected answer, scoring information and statistics relating to the adaptive process.In addition INSBAT has provision for transferring the test re-sults automatically into a report template.

ReliabilityDue to the adaptive presentation mode used in some sub-tests and the applicability of a probabilistic test model that this requires, any desired level of reliability can be achieved. For reasons of economy the reliability of the individual task groups lies between r=0.70 and r=0.95. The stability of the subtests after some 15 months fluctuates between r=0.63 and r=0.87.

ValidityThe construct representation (Embretson, 1983) of the indi-vidual INSBAT subtests has been demonstrated in studies in which the item difficulties were predicted from task charac-teristics derived from the theoretical models for the solving of these types of tasks. The multiple correlations between the item difficulty parameters of the Rasch model (Rasch, 1980) and the item features thus obtained fluctuate for the individual subtests between R=0.70 and R=0.97. This means that between 50% and 94% of the difference in the difficulty of the individual items can be explained by the theoretical models on which construction of the items in the individual subtests is based. In addition, a number of studies of the nomothetic span (Em-bretson, 1983) of the individual subtests are now available. A study by Sommer and Arendasy (2005; Sommer, Arendasy & Häusler, 2005) provided evidence of construct validity for the test battery as a whole and for the global form and short form. By means of a confirmatory factor analysis the authors were able to confirm the theory-led assignment of the indi-vidual subtests to the second-order factors of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model. These results were supplemented by studies carried out by Arendasy and Sommer (2007) and Arendasy, Hergovich and Sommer (2008), in which the re-sults previously reported were replicated on an independent sample using alternative subtests.Evidence of the criterion validity of the individual INSBAT subtests has come from the fields of aviation psychology (se-lection of trainee pilots) and educational counselling (predic-tion of student success at universities of applied sciences).

NormsNorms are available for 904 adults aged between 16 and 73, as well as norms of a sample of 1595 young people aged between 12 and 15. Both norms are also available separated according to age, gender and education.

Testing timeThe time required for completing Variable Form I (S1) and Variable Form II (S2) depends on the subtests selected and the chosen reliability. The length of the individual subtests varies between 3 and 40 minutes. In the case of forms S3 and S4, which consist of a fixed sequence of subtests, the time required for the tests is 2 hours 52 minutes and 1 hour 27 minutes respectively.

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


INSSV is an intelligence test battery constructed on theory-led principles and designed to measure work-related abilities in a fair and economical manner.

Intelligence Structure Battery – short form INssV

ApplicationAssessment of intelligence level and intelligence structure, for respondents aged 14 and over.

Theoretical backgroundAs its name indicates, the Intelligence Structure Battery – Short Form is a simplified version of the Intelligence Structure Battery (INSBAT). Like INSBAT, it is based on the hierarchical intelli-gence model of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (Carroll, 1993, 2003; Horn, 1989; Horn & Noll, 1997), which assumes that there are broad-based secondary factors that underlie the correlations between the individual primary factors or subtests. The correlations be-tween the secondary factors are in turn explained by a general factor of intelligence, which forms the peak or tip of the hierar-chical intelligence model. The validity of this factor structure has been replicated in many studies from different countries (e.g. Arendasy, Hergovich & Sommer, 2008, Brickley, Keith & Wolfe, 1995; Carroll, 1989, 2003; Gustafsson, 1984; Undheim & Gus-tafsson, 1987).For the Intelligence Structure Battery – Short Form the follow-ing secondary factors were selected: fluid intelligence, crystal-lised intelligence, quantitative reasoning, visual processing and long-term memory. With the exception of visual processing and long-term memory, each of the selected secondary factors is measured by two subtests - the subtest with the highest loading onto the factor in question and an additional subtest that helps to depict the breadth of content of the secondary factory. The eight subtests of the Intelligence Structure Battery – Short Form were created using a variety of approaches to automatic item generation (AIG: Arendasy & Sommer, in press; Irvine & Kyllonen, 2002), taking account of recent research findings in the cognitive sciences and applied psychometrics.

Test formsThere is one test form.

AdministrationUnlike in INSBAT, the user of the Intelligence Structure Bat-tery – Short Form can only omit entire secondary factors; it is not possible to omit individual subtests or to adjust their reliability to specific assessment needs. Each subtest is pro-vided with standardised instructions and practice examples based on the principles of programmed instruction and “mas-tery learning”. Depending on the subtest, the respondent’s answers are given either in multiple-choice format or as au-tomated free responses. The items in the individual subtests are presented partly in power test form and partly with a time limit on each item. In seven of the eight subtests the items are presented as an adaptive test (CAT) with a starting item se-lected on the basis of sociodemographic data, thereby max-imising reliability and test security.

ScoringFor each subtest the ability parameter is first calculated ac-cording to the 1PL Rasch model. However, since the reli-ability of the individual subtests is deliberately set low as standard, these test scores are not reported. They merely form the starting point for calculation of the real factors of in-

terest – the secondary factors, which can be used to assess both intelligence structure and level. Alongside the reporting of the factor scores a norm comparison (percentile ranks and IQ; confidence interval) is carried out. At the conclusion of testing the results are displayed both in tabular form and as a profile, and these can be printed out. In addition INSSV has provision for transferring the test results automatically into a report template.

ReliabilityThe reliability of the five secondary factors lies between 0.70 and 0.84. The reliability of the general factor is 0.91.

ValidityThe construct representation (Embretson, 1983) of the indi-vidual subtests has been demonstrated in studies in which the item difficulties were predicted from task characteristics de-rived from the theoretical models for the solving of these types of task. The multiple correlations between the item difficulty parameters of the Rasch model (Rasch, 1980) and the item characteristics thus obtained vary for the individual subtests between R=0.70 and R=0.97. This means that between 50% and 94% of the difference in the difficulties of the individual items can be explained by the theoretical models on which construction of the items in the individual subtests is based. Many other studies of construct validity are now available that confirm the theory-led assignment of the individual subtests to the secondary factors of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model (Aren-dasy & Sommer, 2007; Arendasy, Hergovich & Sommer, 2008; Sommer & Arendasy, 2005; Sommer, Arendasy & Häusler, 2005).Evidence of criterion validity has come from the fields of avia-tion psychology (selection of trainee pilots) and educational counselling (prediction of student success at universities of applied sciences).

NormsISSV has been normed on 904 adults aged between 16 and 73. The total norm has also been partitioned according to age, gender and education.

Testing timeThe time required depends on the subdimensions selected.

M. Arendasy, L. F. Hornke, M. Sommer, G. Gittler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

NEW

Onlinetest


Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Visualization

Special Intelligence Tests

Onlinetest

O. Bratfisch, E. Hagman © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

2D

Visualization, as it is assessed in this test, is an aspect of intellectual capacity providing the psychologist with essential information about the respondent which cannot be assessed with other cognitive tests. It is the ability to think in various dimensions and to organize thoughts on the basis of mental pictures.

ApplicationNon-verbal test for assessing mental visualisation and the ability to apply transformations to objects in three-dimen-sional space; suitable for use with respondents age 15 and upwards.

Theoretical backgroundThe primary factor measured by the 2D test is that of Spa-tial Ability (S) as defined by Thurstone in his Primary Factor Theory (Thurstone, 1938). This factor has been repeatedly confirmed both by adher-ents of factor theories (e.g. Guilford, 1956) and by those who support hierarchical models of intelligence (e.g. Spearman, 1927; Burt, 1949; Vernon, 1950). More recent research on cognitive intelligence describes the factor as one of the “mul-tiple intelligences” (e.g. Gardner, 2001). Sternberg’s Three Factor Theory (Sternberg, 2000) also includes abilities which by definition correspond to the S-factor. On account of its very varied manifestations the factor has been very important in research.

AdministrationA given figure has to be completed. The starting point is a bar that has a gap in it; in each item the gap is of a different shape. Below the bar are 16 different segments, all of which are also of different shapes. For each item one, two or three of these segments must be selected to fill the gap and thus complete the bar. The test has 22 items. For the first 8 items only one segment is needed to complete the bar, for the next 8 two segments are needed, and for the last 6 three are required.


ScoringThe number of correctly worked items is taken as the meas-ure of spatial visualisation ability. Both raw scores and per-centile ranks are reported in the results protocol.

ReliabilityThe split-half reliability coefficients vary between 0.84 and 0.86 for respondents of different educational level.

ValidityThe test’s psychological validity is evident – respondents im-mediately associate the test with “understanding of shapes” and “doing a jigsaw puzzle”. Logical validity arises from the operational definition of what is measured. Construct validity has been demonstrated by correlation analysis. The content of the 2D test is similar to that of other tests that measure spatial ability and that have good predictive validity for a variety of occupations. It can therefore be assumed that 2D also has predictive validity. We are currently planning our own study of the test’s predictive validity.

NormsStandardization was performed on a respresentative sam-ple of normal individuals (N=364) who were tested at the SCHUHFRIED company’s research laboratory between 2004 and 2007. These norms are available partitioned by gender, age and educational level. Norms for a sample of 547 Swedish adults are also avail-able. The norms are also available separated according to age and education.

Testing timeThe test itself takes 6 minutes to complete. A further 2 – 3 minutes are required for the instructions and practice exam-ples.

Now available in Czech and Slovakian!NeW


Spatial Orientation 3DO. Bratfisch, E. Hagman © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

OnlinetestNow available in Czech and Slovakian!NeWSpatial orientation, as it is assessed in this test, is an aspect of intellectual capacity providing the psychologist with essential information about the respondent which cannot be assessed with other cognitive tests. It is the ability to think in various dimensions and to organize thoughts on the basis of mental pictures.

ApplicationNon-verbal test for assessing mental visualization and the ability to apply transformations to objects in three-dimen-sional space; suitable for use with respondents age 15 and upwards.

Theoretical backgroundNon-verbal test for assessing mental visualization and the ability to apply transformations to objects in three-dimen-sional space; suitable for use with respondents age 15 and upwards.

AdministrationEach item consists of a picture of a number of building blocks of the same shape and size that are placed togeth-er to form a structure. The respondent is asked to imagine how each arrangement of building blocks would look when viewed from a different angle, as indicated by an arrow. He is given four alternative answers, from which he must select the picture that correctly depicts how the bricks would ap-pear from the perspective indicated. The 3D test consists of 30 items


ScoringThe number of correctly worked items is taken as the meas-ure of spatial ability. Both raw scores and percentile ranks are reported in the results protocol.

ReliabilityThe split-half reliability coefficients vary between 0.82 and 0.87 for respondents of different educational level.

ValidityThe test’s face validity is evident – respondents immediately associate the test with “understanding of shapes”. Logi-cal validity arises from the operational definition of what is measured. Construct validity has been demonstrated by correlation analysis. The content of 3D is similar to the content of other tests that measure spatial ability and that have good predic-tive validity for a variety of occupations. This confirms the predictive validity of the present test. We are currently plan-ning our own study of the test’s predictive validity.

NormsStandardization was carried out on a representative sam-ple of 357 individuals who were tested at the SCHUHFRIED Company’s research laboratory in 2004 and 2007. A quota plan was used. These norms are also available partitioned according to gender, age and educational level. Norms for a sample of 547 Swedish adults are also avail-able. These norms are likewise partitioned according to gender, age and educational level.

Testing timeThe test itself takes 3 minutes to complete. A further 2-3 minutes are required for the instructions and practice ex-amples.


Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Now available in Czech and Slovakian!NeWOnlinetestWith the creation of the A3DW, a test has become available to which the often mentioned critical comment does not apply that spatial perception tests are not suited for a comparison of gender- specific performance as men and women use dif-ferent task-solving strategies.

ApplicationThis Rasch-homogenous and adaptive test assesses the (non-verbal) ability to perceive and transform spatial elements (spatial perception) for both adolescents aged 13 years and over and adults.

Theoretical backgroundSpatial perception is one of the primary intelligence dimen-sions. The unidimensionality (Rasch-homogenity) of the A3DW was proven in many empirical studies. This means that the same latent ability dimension is assessed in all re-spondents. Thus the criticism that spatial perception tests are usually not suited for a comparison of gender-specific performance due to the fact that men and women use dif-ferent task-solving strategies, does not apply for the A3DW. Probabilistic characteristic values were estimated for the items. The resulting item pool allows for an adaptive test presentation with all advantages provided by modern com-puterized diagnostics: shorter administration time with increased measurement precision and highly motivated respondents due to an adequate and personalized item se-lection.

AdministrationThe presentation of items is adaptive. It is not possible to omit an item or to return to the previous one. The 8 answer options are designed to reduce guessing to a minimum.

Test formsThere are three test forms that vary as regards the precision of the person parameter estimation (PAR). The screening offers a quick overview, when testing a per-son does not have any consequences to him/her (e.g. for students where spatial perception is assessed as an addi-tional control factor).The long form S3 should only be administered in special cases, where increased measurement precision is of great importance (e.g. in court assessments). The increased measurement precision obviously extends the administration time.

ScoringThe person parameter of the variable “Spatial perception“ is determined as characteristic test value.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency is given due to the validity of the Rasch model (applied to all pool items). The numerical val-ues of the individual samples and reliability coefficients de-termined by various methods (split-half; Cronbach’s Alpha) vary between .82 and .91. The retest-reliabilities amount to r=.61 in school students that were retested after 21 months.

ValidityNumerous results of statistical correlation analyses and inter-group comparisons (including other tests and various external criteria) back up the convergent and discriminant validity of the test and allow a differentiated judgment of the A3DW with respect to various validity aspects. Just to men-tion an example: Students from technological colleges have significantly higher results than students from non-techno-logical colleges.

NormsArrer (1992) showed that the paper-and-pencil form of the 3DW is also valid for the computerized version of the test. The A3DW thus provides representative norms for Austria (n=4064), both gener specific and not, and categorized ac-cording to specific school types and grades (=age-equiva-lent); students: n=432; adults: n=161).

Testing time10 to 30 minutes.


Adaptive Spatial Ability TestA3DWG. Gittler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



Onlinetest

AMTAdaptive Matrices TestL. F. Hornke, S. Etzel, K. Rettig with the assistance of A. Küppers © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

The relation between test length and measurement precision is optimized. The AMT requires fewer items than most non-verbal intelligence tests for more accurate calculations.

ApplicationThis AMT is a non-verbal test for assessing general intel-ligence as revealed in the ability to think inductively. It is suitable for subjects aged 13 and over.

Theoretical backgroundThe items resemble classical matrices, but in contrast to these they are constructed on the basis of explicit psycho-logically-based principles involving detailed analysis of the cognitive processes used in solving problems of this type. A total of 289 items were created and they were evaluated in three extensive studies involving large numbers of people in Katowice (Poland), Moscow and Vienna. The items were analysed using the Rasch dichotomous probabilistic test model and the corresponding characteristic values were es-timated for the items (cf. Hornke, Küppers & Etzel, 2000).The resulting item pool means that the test can be presented adaptively and that it has all the advantages of modern com-puterized test procedures: shorter administration time but improved measurement precision, and high respondent mo-tivation because the items presented are appropriate to the respondent’s ability.

AdministrationItems are presented adaptively – that is, after an initial phase the respondent is presented only with items of a level of difficulty which is appropriate to his ability. It is not pos-sible to omit an item or to go back to a preceding one. The eight alternative answers to each question reduce the prob-ability of successful guesswork.

Test formsThere are four test forms S1, S2, S3 and S11; they differ in respect of the pre-set precision (standard measurement error) of the person parameter estimate and in the level of difficulty of the first item. The standard measurement error is set at 0.63 for test form S1, 0.44 for S2, 0.39 for S3 and 0.63 for S11 (corresponding to reliabilities of 0.70, 0.83, 0.86 and 0.70).

ScoringThe test yields an estimate of the respondent’s general intel-ligence. The estimate is produced on the basis of the Rasch model according to the maximum likelihood method. A per-centile ranking with reference to a norm sample is also given.

ReliabilityBecause of the validity of the Rasch model, reliability in the sense of internal consistency is given. For the four test forms it has been set at a standard measurement error (SEM) of 0.63, 0.44, 0.39 and 0.63, corresponding to reliabilities of 0.70, 0.83, 0.86 and 0.7.This reliability applies to all respondents and at all scale lev-els. This is the central and significant advantage over other widely-used psychometric tests based on classical test theory: all respondents are assessed with equal reliability.

ValidityAccording to Hornke, Etzel and Küppers (2000; Hornke, 2002), the construction rational correlates at 0.72 with the difficulty parameters. In addition, Sommer and Arendasy (2005; Sommer, Arendasy & Häusler, 2005) demonstrating using a confirmatory factor analysis that this test, together with tests of inductive and deductive thinking, loads onto the factor of fluid intelligence (Gf). Fluid intelligence was found to be the intelligence factor with the highest g-loading. A number of studies carried out in the fields of traffic and avi-ation psychology also confirm the test’s criterion validity.

NormsNorm data is available for an evaluation sample of N=1356 respondents and for a norm sample of N=461 respondents.

Testing timeBetween 20 and 60 minutes (including instruction and prac-tice phase), depending on test form.

Now available in Arabic!NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



OnlinetestThe ANF is the first test on the market to pro-vide an adaptive and fair assessment of cognitive flexibility in the area of mathematical problem solving.

ApplicationThe Adaptive Numerical Flexibility Test is a tool for assess-ing flexibility in mathematical problem-solving as one of the important sub-dimensions of quantitative thinking as de-fined in the modified Gf-Gc theory (Horn & Noll, 1997).

Theoretical backgroundQuantitative thinking is an important second-order factor both in the Three Stratum theory (Carroll, 1993) and in the modified Gf-Gc theory of Horn (1989; Horn & Noll, 1997). It covers not only number comprehension but also the under-standing of basic arithmetical operations and mathematical principles and the ability to apply them. The Adaptive Nu-merical Flexibility Test assesses the ability to understand the basic arithmetical operations and apply them flexibly in solving abstract arithmetical problems.

AdministrationItems are presented adaptively, so that after the initial phase the process of presenting only those items which are appro-priate to the respondent’s ability is increasingly refined. It is not possible to omit an item or to return to a preceding one. Each item presents the respondent with a series of unre-lated operands and an answer which can be obtained by appropriate linking of the operands. The respondent has to insert the correct arithmetical operators in the blank spaces, linking the operands in such a way that the given answer is achieved. Because any of the four basic arithmetical opera-tions can be used as often as required the probability of ar-riving at the correct answer by guesswork is very low.

Test formsThere are two adaptive test forms which differ in their pre-set precision of measurement (standard estimation error) of the person parameter estimate.

ScoringThe test yields an estimate of the respondent’s numerical flexibility. The estimate is made on the basis of the dichoto-mous logistical model of Rasch (1980) using an exact pa-rameter estimation process (Fischer, 2000). In addition a percentile ranking is provided based on comparison with a norm sample.

ReliabilityReliability in the sense of internal consistency as taken as given as a result of the validity of the Rasch model. Preci-sion is represented for the short form by a critical standard estimate of error of 0.55, which corresponds to a reliability of 0.70. For the standard form the critical standard estimate of error is 0.50, corresponding to a reliability of 0.75. In con-trast to linear test forms the quoted precision applies to all respondents across all parts of the range. This represents a decisive advantage over conventional psychometric tests constructed on the basis of classical test theory.

ValidityStudies are available both of the construct representation and of the convergent and discriminant validity of the Adap-tive Numerical Flexibility Test; these demonstrate the con-struct validity of the test.

NormsNorms are available (overall norm, and separated by gender and educational level) for a sample of N=1362 individuals (585 men, 777 women; age range 15-52). The data was col-lected at the end of 2004 and beginning of 2005.

Testing timeThe time required for the test is between 30 and 45 minutes.

M. Arendasy, M. Sommer, A. Hergovich © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ANF Adaptive Numerical Flexibility Test

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices APMJ. C. Raven, J. H. Court, J. Raven © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

For years the Progressive Matrices have played an important role as an instrument to assess non-verbal intelligence and especially logical reasoning. Comprehensive standardizations and validation studies have been conducted all over the world.

ApplicationNon-verbal assessment of general intelligance for perform-ances above average, based on eductive thinking; applica-ble to people 12 years of age and over.

Theoretical backgroundThe extensive administration of the Raven Standard Progres-sive Matrices (SPM) resulted in a demand for a short screen-ing form, as well as for a test to assess the upper 25% of the cogni-tive capacity range. The Advanced Progressive Matrices were developed to meet these de-mands. The APM consists of some exercises (Set I with 12 items) that can also be used for screening, and a second set (II) with 36 items to assess this area more thoroughly. As with all Raven Matri-ces Tests, the APM also assesses the ability to detect a cer-tain order in a chaos, or the meaning of apparently randomly compiled elements, i.e. the eductive ability (the word eductive comes from the Latin word educere: deduce). As perception in general is a process of understanding that includes the capacity to find a structure in a chaos, Raven’s Progressive Matrices (RPM) can be considered to assess logical rea-soning and recognition. Spearman and other psychologists agree that the general factor (g-factor) assessed in most in-telligence tests consists of two main components, eductive and reproductive abilities. From this point of view, the RPM measure one of the most basic human abilities.

AdministrationAfter an instruction phase, the items are presented accord-ing to difficulty level. The respondent selects one out of eight answers with the light pen, the mouse, the touchscreen or the computer keyboard. He or she can correct the selected answer and can return to the previous item. It is also possi-ble to omit items, which are represented again after the last item has been responded to. This version of the RPM can be administered without any time limit, just like the paper-and-pencil version.

Test formsThere are 5 test forms available. S1 (Set I + II) and S5 (Set II) with time limit, S2 (Set I + II), S3 (Set I), and S4 (Set II) without time limit.

ScoringThe following variables are scored:ii Number of correct for set I and set II

The test protocol indicates each individual answer as well as the time needed to respond.

ReliabilityIn a summary, the test authors indicate consistency coefficients between r=.83 and r=.87. The retest-reliability amounts to rtt=.91 (interval of 6-8 weeks).

ValidityThe current APM manual includes a detailed discussion about the issue validity. Among other things, it describes the influence of the eductive capacity on the effectiveness of per-formances demanded in social and professional fields. It also includes rather conventional studies that document the cor-relations of the APM scores with certain abilities to achieve a job position or to keep it. In addition, correlations with dif-ferentiated performances of students as well as with specific occupational groups are pointed out.

NormsA wide range of norms derived from the paper-and-pencil version is available if so desired. Various studies showed that the paper-and-pencil and the computerized version yield the same results.

ObjectivityThe APM provides objectivity in test interpretation, because it involves a standardized test of performance that provides an evaluation in numeric values that describe the position of the respondent on a testing scale and/or in relation to a standardized sample.

EconomyThe APM test can be considered economical, as it requires only a short test administration time, uses little material, is simple to use, and as it computerized, the scoring can be completely quickly and easily.

FairnessAccording to experience gained so far, the APM can be con-sidered a fair test. Persons with little or no computer expe-rience are not at an disadvantage, as very little computer literacy is required for administering the test, and the in-structional phase is sufficient for those with little or no com-puter experience to practice correctly entering the answers.

Testing timeii S1: 25-50 minutesii S2: 25-60 minutes ii S3: 7-15 minutesii S4: 20-50 minutesii S5: 20-40 minutes.

NoteThis test is only available for customers in the European Union.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road




ApplicationNon-verbal assessment of general intelligence in children and less gifted adults on the basis of logical reasoning; ap-plicable to people aged 5 years and over and to adults for purposes of clinical investigation.

Theoretical backgroundCPM is based on the same principle as Raven’s Stand-ard Progressive Matrices Test but is intended to measure performance in the lower part of the range. It measures the ability to identify a system in material that at first sight seems confusing – in other words, skills of understanding and logical reasoning. This eductive ability is one of two components of general intelligence (g-factor). The 36 items are presented in three sets of 12, in increasing order of dif-ficulty within each set. The three sets provide respondents with the opportunity to become familiar with the type of problem-solving (thought processes) that successful com-pletion of the test involves. The colourful and appealing de-sign is particularly attractive to children and helps to sustain their motivation.

AdministrationChild-friendly on-screen presentation was regarded as par-ticularly important. The instructions are short and simple; they should be read aloud to respondents who have reading difficulties. The instructions for adults are slightly modified.The answers are entered using a light pen, mouse or com-puter keyboard. Even pre-school children usually have no difficulty in using the light pen. It is possible to return to a preceding item, to omit items and to correct one’s answers.

AdministrationTwo test forms are available. Depending on the age that has been entered, the program presents either the instructions for children (up to 15) or those for adults.ii S1: Standard formii S2: Pattern completion form (with assistance): In this test form the form of presentation used in the instructions (the selected answer “jumps” into the incomplete pattern) is continued in the test itself, but without feedback on whether the answer is correct.ii S3: Parallel form to S1.

ScoringThe following variables are scored:ii Total of correct,ii Expected values of all sets compared to the raw scores for the entire test, ii Error distribution.

Results are reported in the form of raw scores and percen-tile ranks, together with an optional test protocol of the re-spondent’s answers to each item.

ReliabilityA number of reliability studies are quoted in the test manual. The results vary depending on the population studies; reli-abilities are usually lower for clinical and less gifted groups. The majority of the internal consistencies lie between r=0.80 and r=0.90; in most studies retest reliability is above r=0.80.

ValidityAll factor analytical studies show that the Raven Matrices Test is a good indicator for Spearman’s g-factor, although there are differences depending on the composition of the test battery. Correlations with school performance are usually lower that those between school performance and knowledge tests.

NormsPercentile ranks and T-score norms of the paper-and-pencil form are available for the following groups:ii Children aged 4;9 – 12;00,ii Adults aged 55 – 100.ii Form S2: this test form is provided with corrected norms of the standard form (without adult norms).

Testing timeBetween 10 and 30 minutes.


J. C. Raven, J. H. Court, J. Raven © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Raven’s Coloured Progressive MatricesCPM

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



FOLOInductive ReasoningE. Hagman, O. Bratfisch © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Nonverbal logical thinking, as it is tested here, is fundamental for all occupations where abstract information is being processed.

ApplicationFOLO is used to measure non-verbal logical reasoning. The items require the respondent to identify the rules underlying the constructin of a series of figures and to apply these rules correctly in continuing the series.

Theoretical backgroundFOLO measures logical inductive reasoning - the ability to deduce a general rule from a specific case. FOLO can thus be assigned to the intelligence factor of ‘Reasoning’ (Thurstone, 1938). The various definitions of this factor cover a broad spectrum: abstract reasoning, logical relationships, inductive reasoning, judgement ability, processing capacity etc. This intelligence factor is frequently regarded as forming the core of general intelligence.

AdministrationA series of six figures, constructed according to a specific rule, is presented. The respondent’s task is to identify the rule and state which two figures form an appropriate continuation of the series, selecting from the eight possible alternatives that are provided.

Test formsThere is one test form with 25 items.

ScoringThe number of correctly worked items is taken as the meas-ure of inductive reasoning ability. Raw and standard scores and percentile ranks are shown in the results protocol.

ObjektivitätLike all (normed) computerised tests, FOLO has maximum objectivity, i.e. test administrator independence and scoring objectivity.

ReliabilityThe split-half reliability coefficients vary (after application of the Spearman-Brown correction) between r=0.89 and r=0.91 for respondents of different educational level.

ValidityThe face validity of FOLO is evident – respondents imme-diately associate the test with logic and logical reasoning. Logical validity arises from the operational definition of what is measured. Construct validity has been demonstrated by factor analysis. Predictive validity has been demonstrated for occupations that require skill in logical reasoning.

NormsNorms for a sample of 1,147 Swedish adults are available. The norms are also available separated according to age and education. Additionally, norms are also available for 375 Austrian adults; these norms have also been partitioned ac-cording to education and age.

Testing timeApprox. 15 minutes

Now available in Polish!NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Onlinetest


D. Halpern © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationAssessment of critical thinking skills for respondents aged 15 years and older.

Theoretical backgroundThe development of critical thinking skills is listed as the most important outcome of education and the most prized ability for high-level success in the workforce (Stanovich, 2009). Stanovich describes the ability to think critically as “what in-telligence tests miss.” He makes strong arguments as to why the assessment of critical thinking, which he describes as ra-tional thinking, is more useful than informa-tion gained from standardized intelligence tests. But, what does it mean to “think critically”? Experts have generally reached consensus in describing a critical thinker as someone who will attempt and achieve a desired outcome by thinking rationally and in defining critical thinking skills as goal-directed, reasoned ef-forts (Ennis, 1993; Halpern, 2003). Critical thinking entails self-reflection, self-awareness, and cognitive management, abilities that require guidance and development (Kuhn, 2005). Practicing critical thought requires metacognition, which can be described generally as “thinking about one’s thinking,” but more specifically in educational contexts, as the ability to self-regulate in order to apply context-appropriate learn-ing strategies (Svinicki, 1999). Different authors use different terms and vary in the breadth of their definition, but overall there is considerable agreement about the importance of and the sorts of skills that are included under a critical thinking rubric.The definition of “critical thinking” used for construction of the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment characterizes critical thinking as those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. They are purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed. Critical thinking is the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulat-ing inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions. Critical thinkers use these skills appropriately, without prompting, and usually with conscious intent, in a variety of settings. That is, they are predisposed to think critically. When we think critically, we are evaluating the outcomes of our thought processes--how good a decision is or how well a problem is solved. Critical thinking also involves evaluating the thinking process--the reasoning that went into the conclusion we’ve arrived at or the kinds of factors considered in making a decision. Therefore, critical thinking has to be regarded as a hierarchical multidimen-sion-al construct comprising the facets verbal reasoning, argument analysis skills, skills in thinking as hypothesis testing, using likelihood and uncertainty, and decision making/problem solv-ing skills (Halpern, 1994; 1998; 2003).

AdministrationBoth test forms of HCTA consist of 25 scenarios of every-day events. No specialized domain-specific knowledge is needed. In test form S1, the scenarios are presented togeth-er with questions that use a constructed response format. Upon completion of the constructed response question, the respondent is asked to respond to a series of multiple choice questions pertaining to the same scenario. Test form S2 only contains the multiple choice questions to provide a quick screening of the critical thinking ability of the respondents.

Test formsTwo different test forms are available:S1: Standard version, which requires constructed response and multiple-choice answersS2: Multiple-choice short version.

ScoringThe two test forms differ with regard to the variables ob-tained. Test form S2 comprises responses to recognition variables; test form S1 enables the calculation of recogni-tion and free recall measures of critical thinking. The calcu-lation of the recognition variables is fully automatic; the free recall measures require scoring the respondents’ answers by the test administrator, who is guided by a series of ques-tions for each scenario. Results of an inter-rater reliability study indicated a high level of scoring objectivity of the free recall variables, which is attributable to the use a standard-ized computerized scoring module that has been developed in a series of usability examinations.

ReliabilityInternal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) lies between α=0.85 and α=0.97.

ValidityThe HCTA is content valid because it was derived from com-monly accepted definitions of critical thinking. HCTA has been administered to several hundred adults in multiple countries. Each administration has been validated using a variety of techniques, which are described in the manual. The results of these analyses jointly argue for the construct- and criterion validity of the Halpern Critical Thinking As-sessment.

NormsNorm samples of adults are available for both test forms. The norm sample consisted of 200 adults from the United States ranging in age from 18 to 72 (mean age = 32) with a range of educational backgrounds.

Testing timeDepending on the test form the completion requires be-tween 20 (short form—recognition items only) and 60 to 80 minutes (constructed response and recognition items). Time estimates include instruction and practice phase.

NEW Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment

HCTA is the first test that enables a content-repre-sentative assessment of recognition and recall aspects of critical thinking.

HCTA

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Onlinetest




Mathematics in PracticeO. Bratfisch, E. Hagman © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

MIP

The test measures the ability to apply the basic arithmetical operations - addition, subtraction, multiplication and division - quickly and correctly in “daily life“ situations.

ApplicationThe test is primarily conceived for personnel selection, ca-reer counseling, diagnosis and assessment. Additional ar-eas of use are within clinical settings. It is also used for training purposes at universities and colleges.

Theoretical backgroundThe object of measurement is Calculation capacity, i.e. the ability to adequately apply the basic arithmetic operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication and division) on “daily life” mathematical issues. Theoretically the test has to be placed in the borderland be-tween a cognitive intelligence test and a test of knowledge. It contains numerical as well as verbal and logical compo-nents in the sense of Thurstone’s model for primary abilities, and a knowledge element.

Administration“Daily life” calculation tasks are presented on the screen in writing. For calculation purposes, paper and pencil are pro-vided.

Test formsThere is one test form available.

ScoringThe number of correctly solved items constitutes the score for Calculation capacity. The print-out shows raw- and standard-scores for the total performance.

ReliabilityThe split-half reliability coefficients vary between rtt=.89 and .91 for respondents with different educational levels.

ValidityThe face validity is evident – the respondents think imme-diately of “calculations, arithmetic”. The logical validity is given by the operational definition of the task. Content va-lidity has been proven by correlation with a numerical test. Prognostic validity could be demonstrated for occupations demanding, among other prerequisites, a high degree of Calculation capacity. Criteria used were “completed occupa-tional education without complications” and “poor perform-ance on the job

NormsNorms for a European sample of 2607 persons are avail-able. They are composed of 2346 Swedish and 261 Austrian adults. Subgroup norms according to EU-educational level 1-3 and 4-5 are also presented.

Testing timeThe required time for instructions, solving the practice items and actual testing time (10 minutes) is approximately 13 min-utes.



This test distinguishes itself by using three-dimen-sional, multi-media test material for the recording of the spatial perception skill as well as by its scal-ing fairness due to the validity of the Rasch model.

ApplicationMental Rotation is a Rasch homogenous computerized test for assessing respondents’ spatial perception skills. This is, in other words, the respondent’s ability to mentally picture and manipulate spatial content; the test was designed for adolescents from the age of 16 and adults.Areas of use include: vocational, education and career counseling, as well as counseling in the context of univer-sity studies, personality development, skills assessment in psychological practice and in the clinical area (e.g. neurol-ogy and psychiatry). The MR can also be used for research purposes.

Theoretical backgroundPsychometric research into spatial ability began at the start of the 20th century and was analyzed with relative precision for the first time thanks to the introduction of multiple factor anal-ysis (Thurstone, 1931a,b). Shortly afterward, Thurstone es-tablished the existence of seven so-called primary factors of intelligence, of which one of them was spatial ability. Spatial ability research based on factor analysis led to the definition of a host of various spatial ability factors and factor-analysis based spatial perception tests. These were subject to criti-cism due to their homogeneousness and one-dimensionality. One-dimensionality (Rasch homogeneousness) has been proven for the Mental Rotation (MR) spatial perception test. This means that the same latent skill dimension is measured in all respondents.

AdministrationAfter a general instruction phase and three practice exam-ples, the test phase presents the respondents with a total of 20 items in sequence, one per screen, to be solved. The respondent has one minute to solve each item. It is not pos-sible to go back and correct answers to items already given.


ScoringThe test score has been defined as the number of correctly solved items and is presented as a standardized value (per-centile rank and t value). It describes the scope of the re-spondent’s spatial perception skills.

ReliabilityReliability in the sense of an internal consistency can be said to exist on the basis of the validity of the Rasch model. The reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) comes to .81.

ValidityInitial analysis based on correlation statistics points to the convergent and divergent validity of the MR.

NormsA norm sample (total norm, and broken down by gender, age and education level) of N = 195 (104 men and 91 women; age span 16-73 years) is available. The data was collected in Vienna in 2003.

Testing timeThe test takes a maximum of 20 minutes to complete. Five minutes should be allotted for the instruction phase.

H. Bauer, G. Guttmann, M. Leodolter, U. Leodolter © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

MR Mental Rotation

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Czech , Russian and Slovakian!

NeW



N-Test Alpha NTAO. Bratfisch, E. Hagman © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

The N-Test Alpha represents a reliable realization of Thurstone’s N-factor. It enables the measure-ment of the ability to handle a system of symbols in an automatical way.

ApplicationThe test is primarily conceived for personnel selection, ca-reer counseling, personnel selection, diagnosis and assess-ment. Additional areas of use are within clinical settings. It is also used for training purposes at universities and colleges.

Theoretical backgroundThe primary object of measurement is Numerical ability. The factor analytic school of intelligence research has identified this factor - N – as a primary intelligence factor. However, the name Numerical ability is an unfortunate one as it leads to the wrong conclusion that it concerns numbers and arithmetic only. The domain is broader than that. It concerns the ability to apply the rules of a symbol system (any symbol system, not only the number symbol system) in an automated way on tasks, which were originally solved by means of logical think-ing. Thus, it should be called Symbol system factor.

NTA measures not only the Symbol system factor but can also be used as a simple test for the assessment of Calcula-tion capacity (defined as the ability to handle each of the ba-sic arithmetic operations - addition, subtraction, multiplication and division – no matter if that is done automatically or not).

AdministrationNTA consists of 20 groups of tasks. Within each group two stimulus numbers have in turn to be added to each other, subtracted from each other, multiplied with each other and finally divided with each other. E.g. 5+8, 5-8, 5x8 and 5/8. Thus, the total number of tasks is 80. No calculation can be passed over; the subject is required to give an answer.

Test formsThere is one test form containing 80 items.

ScoringEach correct answer is scored as one point. In addition to the total score, the sum of correct answers is available sepa-rately for each of the four basic calculation operations. The print-out shows raw and standard scores.

ReliabilityThe reliability according to Cronbach’s Alpha (Cronbach, 1966) is 0.91 for different education levels.

ValidityThe face validity with respect to the assessment variable Calculation Ability is undoubtedly high – the respondents think immediately of “calculations, arithmetic”. The assess-ment variable Symbol system factor, on the other hand, is probably nor quite as evident. The logical validity is given by the operational definition of the measurement content. The construct validity has been proven through correlation with a test of Calculation Ability. Prognostic validity could be demonstrated for occupations demanding, amongst other prerequisites, to be able to apply the basic calculation oper-ations in an automated way. Criteria used where “completed occupational education without complications” and “poor performance on the job”.

NormsSamples of n=1587 Swedish adults as well as n=217 Aus-trian adults are available. Subsamples according to educa-tional level and age are also presented.

Testing timeThe testing time is 5 minutes. Add approximately three min-utes for instruction and solving the practice items.

Onlinetest



Rasch-homogenous test for pilot selection.

ApplicationThe test is a Rasch-homogenous procedure with the objec-tive of measuring, with high selectivity in the upper range of performance, navigation skills for spatial orientation for the purpose of performance and suitability diagnostics in avia-tion psychology.

Theoretical backgroundThe test requirements focus on two skill components: firstly, on the skill of rotating mental images about one or more of the three spatial axis (mental rotation), and secondly, on the ability of switching from an egocentric to an allocentric reference frame.A homogenization of the item pool according to the Rasch model guarantees that subjects cannot apply any other so-lution technique than that required and thereby utilize other skills.

AdministrationThe subject’s task consists of specifying the differences be-tween two pictures with regard to the depictured airplane’s position (rotation about the three spatial axes). He/she is presented with pairs of pictures giving information on flight position as in visual or instrument flights.

Test formsOne test form with 13 items is available.

ScoringScoring is based on the following variables: sum of correct answers, proportion of correct answers (in percentage), sum of incorrect answers, proportion of incorrect answers (in percentage), and working time. The test protocol shows types and assessments of solutions as related to the spatial axis.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) is rtt=.74.

ValidityValidity with respect to the external criterion (orientation, established on an instrument flight simulator) is rtc=.56, with respect to the internal criterion (Eliot Price Spatial Test) rtc=.64.

NormsNorms from an evaluation calibration sample comprised of 596 persons for the age groups 17 to 38 are available.

Testing timeApprox. 30 minutes.

PsT Pilot’s Spatial TestP. Grössenbrunner © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Czech and Slovakian!NeW


C. Schmotzer, K. Kubinger, C. Maryschka © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

RIsSpecial Intelligence Tests

Calculating with Symbols

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

In some professions and trainings it is an essential ability to keep to certain restrictions when competing a task. Calculating with Symbols makes possible a fair and reliable assessment of this sub-factor of reasoning.

ApplicationNon-verbal assessment of general intelligence based on de-ductive thinking.

Theoretical backgroundThe authors followed the factor “Reasoning“ which, accord-ing to Thurstone, encompasses the following abilities: in-ductive thinking, deductive thinking, and the ability to keep to restrictions for completing a task (Jäger, 1967). The RIS focuses mainly on the latter aspect.

AdministrationThe person taking the test is confronted with a series of sim-ple arithmetic equations using meaningless shapes instead of numbers. However, the algebraic symbols for these (ba-sic) calculations remain as usual. The solution is to find the number, which leads to the mathematical correct solution of the equation if used instead of the symbol. There is no time limit. It is not possible to omit items or to return to one that has already been completed.


ScoringThe number of correctly completed items is a measure for the ability of the test respondent

ReliabilityThe test is reliable in the sense of an internal consistency due to Rasch model. The results of the Rasch analyses could be reproduced with two further independent samples, and now even includes the assumption of item homogenity (Rost, 1996). The internal consistency according to Cronbach’s Al-pha amounts to r=.89.

ValidityValidity is given with respect to deductive thinking accord-ing to Thurstone. The construct validity results from the correspondence with the Rasch model. This is especially confirmed by the results of the Martin-Löf test for the exami-nation of item homogeneity. Correlations with the test WMT are situated at r = 0.71.

NormsT-scores and percentile ranks are available of a representa-tive sample of N=236 people between 16 and 84 years of age divided into two age groups. Furthermore, there are also T-scores and percentile ranks available based on the data of N=165 psychology students.

ReasonablenessThis test will be difficult for people with a performance below average.

Testing timeBetween 20 and 50 minutes.

Onlinetest




ApplicationNon-verbal assessment of general intelligence in people with average capacity on the basis of eductive thinking; ap-plicable to people ages 5 years and over.

Theoretical backgroundThe Raven Matrices Test assesses the ability to recognize a certain order in an apparent disorder, in other words: the ability to recognize and think clearly. Spearman and other psychologists showed that the eductive ability (eductive capacity) is one or two main components of general intel-ligence or the g-factor Eductive derives from the Latin word educere, e = out + ducere = to lead.

AdministrationAfter the instruction, the items are presented according to their difficulty level. The person taking the test selects one out of six or eight answers. There is the possibility for mul-tiple corrections by switching to another answer or even by returning to the previous item. In case a respondent is not able to select an answer, s/he may omit the item. All the omitted items will be presented again at the end of the test.

Test formsii S1: Standard form of the SPM according to Raven, inclu-ding 60 itemsii S4: Short form with 32 Rasch-homogeneous itemsii S5: just like S4, however, there is a time limit (time limited short form) of 15 minutesii S6: Short form for traffic-psychology; presenting the easi-est 47 items out of form S1ii S7: Parallel form of the Standard form S1.

Scoringii The sum of correct answers (with norm comparison) is the measure for the eductive component of the g-factor.

Additional scores (in test forms S1 and S7 only): In all 5 sub-sets, the raw-scores are compared with the expected results. In addition, the answering patterns of those taking the test are examined to find out whether or not they manipu-late the raw-scores intentionally (McKinzey, 1999).If this is really the case, a corresponding message is includ-ed into the scoring report. The test protocol depicts each item together with the time spent for answering it.

ReliabilityThe split-half-reliabilities were r > .90 in over 40 studies with people of differing age and from diverse cultural back-grounds.The test authors indicate retest-reliabilities varying between rtt=.83 and rtt=.93 in a summarizing overview. In this form of the SPM, an internal consistency between r=.77 and r=.96 was determined in various norm samples.

ValidityRaven Matrices Tests assess general intelligence, that is, the various fundamental abilities necessary in everyday life. This is why the correlations with other tests or external crite-ria are most of the time rather low. Intercorrelations are the highest with arithmetic, technological and scientific abilities. Correlations between the SPM and school performances re-sult in values up to r=.70.Correlations with other intelligence and ability tests vary be-tween r=.20 and r=.80. Factor-analytical calculations show high values in the g-factor, often amounting up to r=.95.

NormsA wide range of comparative norms of the paper-and-pencil form is available for test forms S1 and S7, among others age-specific norms from 6 to 80 years, as well as some ethnic and job-specific groups. Norms collected with the computerized version are also available for spezial groups (people with organic disorders, psychiatric patients, working people, job applicants, job-seekers). Special test forms S4 to S6 are provided with norms of the computerized version: ii S4: Representative sample; applicants; job seekersii S5: Applicants; forklift truck driversii S6: Applicants.

Testing timeDepending on test form, age, and capacity of the respond-ent, about 10 to 30 minutes.


sPM Raven’s Standard Progressive MatricesTest: J. C. Raven, Manual: J. C. Raven, J. H. Court, J. Raven © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



sPMPLsRaven’s Standard Progressive Matrices PlusTest: J. C. Raven, Manual: J. C. Raven, J. H. Court, J. Raven © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


ApplicationNon-verbal Rasch-homogeneous assessment of general in-telligence on the basis of eductive thinking; extension of the SPM with some new and more difficult items, for respondents (ages 14 years and over) that are assumed to know the items of the SPM well.

Theoretical backgroundWhat triggered the development of the SPMPLS was mainly the opinion of practitioners that the SPM might generally be too well known. Studies for developing a parallel form were be-ing conducted (see also the description of the SPM). However, various reasons caused that these first efforts did not yield the desired results. Standardization studies (Raven, 1979, 1992) showed clearly the necessity to provide the test with some new and more difficult items so as to achieve the previously given differentiation capacity of this test which it had at the beginning. The items follow the test-ing model by Rasch. For further information see also the corresponding SPM catalog page.

AdministrationAfter the instruction, the items are presented according to their difficulty level. The person taking the test selects one out of six or eight answers by means of the light pen, the mouse, or the key-board. There is the possibility for multiple corrections by switching to another answer or even by re-turning to the previous item. In case a respondent is not able to select an answer, s/he may omit the item. All the omitted items will be presented again at the end of the test.


Scoringii The “Sum of correct answers“ (with norm comparison) is a measure for the eductive component of the g-factor. ii Additional scores: In all 5 sub-sets, the raw-scores are compared with the expected results.

ReliabilityThe split-half-reliabilities were r > .90 in over 40 studies with people of differing age and from diverse cultural back-grounds. The test authors indicate retestreliabilities varying between rtt=.83 and rtt=.93 in a summarizing overview.

ValidityRaven Matrices Tests assess general intelligence, that is, the various fundamental abilities necessary in everyday life. This is why the correlations with other tests or external crite-ria are most of the time rather low. Intercorrelations are the highest with arithmetic, technological and scientific abilities. Correlations between the SPM and school performances re-sult in values up to r=.70.Correlations with other intelligence and ability tests vary be-tween r=.20 and r=.80. Factor-analytical calculations show high values in the g-factor, often amounting up to r=.95.

NormsThree norm groups of the paper-and-pencil forms are avail-able: German norms (ages 14 years and over), USA norms (5 – 17 years), and Polish norms (ages 15 years and over). It is also possible to convert the raw-scores by means of a conversion table described in the manual to the ‘classic form’, in order to use the norms. In addition, Austrian norms (n=247) from the computerized version are also available.

Testing timeDepending on age and capacity of the respondent, about 30 minutes.




VIsGeD Visual Memory Test

The adaptive presentation provides that every respondent is required to complete just as many tasks as necessary. The respondents are only confronted with those tasks that correspond to their performance level. This is to avoid overstrain or under- stimulation.

S. Etzel, L. F. Hornke © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationThis test assesses visual memory performance by measur-ing how respondents receive and replay visual information (memorizing the position of symbols on a city map). Princi-pal areas of application are: performance and aptitude diag-nostics; career, education and study counseling; air traffic psychology; research.

Theoretical backgroundThe test items, created on the basis of a specific construc-tion rationale, assess visual memory performance. This visual memory is particularly important in the building up of so-called “memory point” knowledge, which is an aspect of a person’s ability to orientate him- or herself. The test items were constructed primarily on the basis of Kosslyn’s theory of visual representation (1980) and Hänggi’s integrative in-formation processing model (1989).

AdministrationThe respondent is initially presented with an on-screen city map on which typical locations (bars, offices, railway sta-tions etc.) are marked by symbols. The respondent has to memorize the positions of the individual symbols and after-wards recall them correctly. This is tested by presenting a city map without symbols and asking the respondent to mark the location on the map where the symbol used to be. As soon as the respondent has marked a spot on the map, the actual position of the symbol in question is displayed, thus giving the respondent feedback on the correctness of his/her answer. The individual tasks vary with regard to the number of symbols and the spatial characteristics.

Test formsThere are three test forms; these differ according to the de-gree of precision with which they estimate the person pa-rameter (PAR). The Screening Form can be used to provide a quick over-view in situations where the assessment has no particular consequences for the respondent (e.g. in studies in which visual memory is being measured as a control factor). The Precision Form should only be used in special diagnostic situations in which increased measurement precision is par-ticularly important (e.g. expert opinions in a legal context). The increase in measurement precision (= reduction of the error of estimation) of course requires a longer testing time.

ScoringThe test yields the person parameter and a norm compari-son (percentile ranking) with regard to the variable “visual memory performance”.

ReliabilityAll items conform to the criteria of probabilistic test theory and thus can be shown to measure the same aptitude dimen-sion. Since the item presentation occurs adaptively, there is optimal precision of measurement for any level of capability. The required degree of measurement precision can therefore be achieved with significantly fewer items than would other-wise be the case. The reliability is r=.64 for Test Form S1, r=.75 for Test Form S2 and r=.84 for Test Form S3.

ValidityThe construct validity of the test derives in part from the fact that the test items are underpinned by a construction ration-ale derived from psychological theory. The embedding of the tasks in a realistic scenario contributes to the ecological validity of the test. In this connection extensive use was made of the opportunities which the computer offers for cre-ating new item and reaction formats

NormsThe test produces a sample-independent person parameter according to Rasch which describes the respondent’s apti-tude. In addition norms are available for a student sample of N=590 and a representative sample of N=481 people in the age range 17-85. The latter sample is also available divided into four age groups.

Testing timeThe time needed for the test varies between 10 and 15 min-utes, depending on the number of items worked.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Portuguese, Czech, Russian and Slovakian!

NeW


The test 2HAND reliably assesses the eye-hand and hand-hand coordination. The layout of the track makes a comparison of the coordination per-formance possible for simple and more demanding tasks.

ApplicationTesting of visuomotor coordination (eye-hand and hand-hand coordination).

Theoretical backgroundThe test focuses on two components of ability: (1) sensori-motor coordination between eye and hand and (2) coordi-nation between left and right hand. The greatest difficulty in coordinating both hands arises from the need to make a correct visual assessment of the proportion of left- and right-hand controlled deviation from the target and to make adjustments accordingly. The ability to anticipate the direc-tion of movement also plays an important part.

AdministrationThe task is to make a red dot move along a given track. De-pending on the test form used, this is done either with two control knobs or two joysticks. The track consists of three sections that make different demands on the coordination of the left and right hand. The point is moved from right to left.

Test formsSix different test forms are available:ii S1: Administration with joysticks, 10 runsii S2: Administration with joysticks, 4 runsii S3: Administration with control knobs, 4 runsii S4: Administration with control knobs, 10 runsii S5: Administration with joysticks (inverse direction

assignment), 10 runsii S6: Administration with joysticks, one-sided, 10 runs

ScoringThe following variables are scored: Total mean duration, to-tal mean error duration, percent error duration (calculated as the ratio of total error duration to total duration), coordi-nation difficulty.

ReliabilityInternal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) lies between r=0.85 and r=0.98.

ValidityThe content validity of the test is given since it has logical validity. Karner and Neuwirth (2000) showed that perform-ance in the 2HAND correlates significantly (r=0.50) with an assessment of driving ability. These authors also found that individuals with a score of PR<33 received a significantly worse assessment of their performance in a standardised driving test.

NormsNorm samples of adults are available for all test forms. The sample sizes range from N=151 to N=297. In some cases norms are also available partitioned by gender, age and education. For Forms S1, S2 and S4, special norms are also available.


2HANDTwo-Hand Coordination

Special Ability Tests

G. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

VISMOCorresponding training in

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Russian!NeW





Enhanced version of the well-tried Pauli Test.

ApplicationAssessment of concentration, psychic saturation and fati-gability in mental tasks under time pressure (continuous arithmetic additions such as in the Pauli Test, but also more difficult test forms).

Theoretical backgroundThe ALS, an enhanced version of Kraepelin’s work and the Pauli Test, presents a respondent continuously with arith-metic additions in order to assess his/her performance over a period of time: The respondent is required to add to single-digit numbers as fast and error-free as possible for some time. The test is subdivided into time sections (partial times) allowing the test administrator to evaluate the course of the performance. The test can also be applied in a modified way. The modifications are obtained by varying the difficulty of the arithmetical problems and by including additional short-term memory tasks. This is how the test assesses fluid intel-ligence of the respondent.

AdministrationThe computerized administration of the ALS includes a standardized instruction and a practice phase, as well as a test phase of 20 minutes, during which the respondent is required to add as fast as possible two numbers at a time. They are displayed on top of each other on the screen. The respondent enters the results of the arithmetical problems via the keys of the panel. For the short-term memory tasks, the lower number moves up and is covered each time the respondent enters a result. Thus the respondent needs to memorize the lower number before entering the result in or-der to be able to carry out the next task.

Test forms3 standard test forms are available, yet providing always a result between 1 and 17.ii S1: Pauli Test: The respondent is required to add two numbers that are depicted on top of each other. This form includes 20 time sections of one minute each.ii S2: Pauli Test with short-term memory task: The respond-ent is required to add two numbers that are depicted on top of each other, including a short-term memory task. This form comprises 20 time sections of one minute each.ii S7: Luxembourg form: The respondent is required to add the numbers or distract them from each other. The compu-ter program makes sure that no numbers are chosen that would lead to a negative result. This form comprises 10 time sections of one minute each.

Scoring“Answered“ as a measurement for the working speed, “In-crease in items answered“ as a measurement for the re-spondent’s increase or drop in performance, “Error percent“ and “Corrections“ as a measurement for the respondent’s working accuracy.The results of the partial times depicted in diagrams show the course of the performance.Reliability:

Our own studies carried out with various samples show for the variables “Answered“ and “Errors” split-half-reliabilities varying between r=.91 and r=.99. They correlate to a great extent with data from the paper-and-pencil version, for which test-retest and split-half reliabilities for the variable ”Answered“ lie above r=.95, for “Errors” and “Corrections” they vary between r=.68 and r=.88.

ReliabilityOur own studies carried out with various samples show for the variables “Answered” and “Errors” split-half-reliabilities varying between r=.91 and r=.99. They correlate to a great extent with data from the paper-and-pencil version, for which test-retest and split-half reliabilities for the variable “Answered” lie above r=.95, for “Errors” and “Corrections” they vary between r=.68 and r=.88.

ValidityIn literature the assessment method of the ALS is described as sustained concentration for tasks under time pressure. This also includes personality traits such as resistance against distractions and disturbance, interferences, motiva-tion and willpower, as well as the ability to sustain one’s at-tention during a certain task.

Normsii S1 Austrian norms N=310

Job applicants N=662, various professions Job seekers N=187 from Austria and Sweden Organic disorders N=130 Older persons N=95ii S2 Job applicants N=105, various professions

Job seekers N=103 from Austria and Sweden Swedish adults N=199ii S7 Employees N=2907, various professions

Testing timeTest form S1 and S2 20 minutes, test form S7 10 minutes.

Work Performance SeriesALsG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





Now available in Czech, Hungarian, French, Slovakian, Turkish, Romanian and Russian!

NeW

ATAVTAdaptive Tachistoscopic Traffic Perception TestG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ATAVT uses an established and proven measure-ment principle to facilitate economical and precise assessment of observational ability and skill in gaining an overview.

ApplicationAssessment of visual observational ability and skill in ob-taining an overview, and also of visual orientation ability and speed of perception.

Theoretical backgroundThe ATAVT tests observational ability by briefly presenting pictures of traffic situations. The items are constructed using an explicit, theory-led rationale which is based on detailed analysis of the cognitive processes involved in working the test. The design of the ATAVT is based on the principles used in the well-established TAVTMB test but builds on these by taking account of recent research findings relat-ing to the perception of scenes and objects. 84 items were drawn up and evaluated using the 1PL Rasch model. The resulting item bank enables the test to be presented adap-tively, with all the associated advantages that this brings.

AdministrationThe respondent is briefly shown pictures of traffic situations. After seeing each picture, he is asked to state what was in it, choosing from five answer options that he is given. Items are presented adaptively – that is, after an initial phase the respondent is presented with items whose difficulty is in-creasingly tailored to match his ability.

Test formsThere are two test forms: S1 for use in countries in which traffic drives on the right and S2 for countries that drive on the left.

ScoringThe person parameter is reported, together with the corre-sponding percentile rank and T-score.

ReliabilityBecause of the validity of the 1PL Rasch model, reliability in the sense of internal consistency is given. The precision of measurement is set at a critical standard error of meas-urement of 0.49. This corresponds to a reliability of r=0.80. The pre-defined precision of measurement applies to all re-spondents at all ability levels.

ValiditySommer et al. (submitted) obtained a multiple correlation of R=0.90 between the difficulty parameters of the 1PL Rasch model and the construction rationale. Evidence of criterion

validity is provided by various studies of the prediction of global assessments of driving behaviour in standardized driving tests. For example, Sommer et al. (2004), using a test battery which included a precursor version of the ATA-VT, obtained a classification rate of 74.7% in the prediction of driving behaviour. Risser et al. (2008) reported classification rates of 80.2% and 86.5%, with the precursor version of the ATAVT that they used con-tributing a relative relevance of 17.6% and 5.8%. The results obtained by Risser et al. (2008) were replicated in a study by Sommer et al. (2008). In addition, the authors demonstrated the incremental validity of the ATAVT alongside ability tests and driving-related personality traits.

NormsA norm sample consisting of N=1190 individuals is available. Person parameters corrected for age are also provided.

Testing timeApprox. 10 minutes

NoteThe program automatically checks the graphics output speed and issues a warning if the requirements are not met. This can be tested before purchase simply by installing the Demo version.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





The Double Labyrinth Test makes possible a reliable assessment of visuomotor coordination in tasks of a pre-set speed.

B19 Double Labyrinth TestR. Bonnardel © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationAssessment of the eye-hand coordination ability in task of pre-determined speed.

Theoretical backgroundThis test is an enhanced version of the test “Le test du dou-ble labyrinthe“ by Bonnardel, which is a standard test in the traffic psychology in France. The original test was an instru-ment made of a cylinder, which rotated at a constant speed. The respondent had to maintain two markings in the middle of the track by means of two levers. Each time a marking touched the side of the track was counted as an error.The course of the track becomes gradually more difficult and requires constantly adjusted movements. The test as-sesses speed and reaction of adjusting the movements to the track. Up to now, the Double Labyrinth Tests is the only one among various psychomotor tests to form a synthesis of the factors coordination, precision in adjusting the move-ments to the track, and focused attention, taking into ac-count the capacity of visual perception.

AdministrationThe respondent is required to maintain to circles on a track by means of two control knobs. The left knob is to steer the left circle, the right knob for the right circle. The respondent is informed to make sure that the circles do not touch the edges of the track. If this is the case, the respondent has to adjust the position of the circle accordingly with the respec-tive control knob. After a practice phase of 40 seconds, the test phase starts and takes 2 minutes and 45 seconds.

Test formsThere is one test form that takes 2 minutes and 45 seconds.

ScoringThe following variables are being recorded:ii Number of mistakesii Length of mistakesii Length of mistakes in percentii Number of mistakes – left handii Length of mistakes – left handii Length of mistakes in percent – left handii Number of mistakes – right handii Length of mistakes – right handii Length of mistakes in percent – right hand

An optional depiction of the course of the test is possible.

ReliabilityThe present reliabilities (internal consistency) amount to 0.96 for the “Length of mistakes“ and 0.80 for the “Number of mistakes”. Furthermore there are also separately record-ed reliability coefficients available for the left hand and the right hand.

ValidityA validation study for the computerized version of the B19 showed significant correlations between the tests 2HAND and B19. Thus the test can be considered to provide a con-vergent validity.

NormsNorms of a representative comparative sample (N=567) are available.

Testing timeAbout 5 minutes.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Turkish!NeW





COGCognitroneG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Measurement of attention and concentration under validity of the Rasch model. Numerous vali-dation studies prove the construct and criterion validity.

ApplicationAssessment of attention and concentration through compar-ison of figures with regard to their congruence. Can be used with subjects from 4 years of age (depending on test form).

Theoretical backgroundThe Cognitrone is based on the theoretical model of Re-ulecke (1991), which sees concentration as a state that can in principle be described by three variables: 1. Energy: the concentrative state is demanding and consumes energy; 2. Function: the function of concentration in performing a task; 3. Precision: the quality of task performance. In the test forms with unlimited working time the variable “Energy” as defined by Reulecke (1991) is measured by the time taken at a pre-set level of precision and function.

AdministrationThe Response Panel or computer keyboard is used as the input device. An animated instruction phase and an error-sensitive practice phase lead on to the task itself. In the test forms with flexible working time the respondent’s task is to compare an abstract figure with a model and to de-cide whether the two are identical. Once the answer has been entered the next item follows automati-cally. In the test forms with fixed working time a reaction is required only if the figure is identical with the model. Once the presentation time has expired the next item follows automatically. It is not possible to omit an item or to go back to a preceding one.

Test formsThere are seven test forms with unlimited working time (S1-S3, S7-S9, S11) and three test forms with a fixed working time of 1.8 seconds per item (S4-S6). Within each of the pairs S1/S4, S2/S5 and S3/S6 the test forms contain the same stimulus material, although the three pairs differ with regard to the complexity of the material. Form S7 contains much simpler items: the figure in the task field has to be compared with just one figure in one of the display fields. S8 and S9 contain very simple, unvarying stimulus material; form S8 is the more difficult of the two. These two forms have a seven-minute time limit.

Scoringii Main variable of forms S1-S3, S7, S11: Mean time “correct

rejection” (sec); ii Main variables of forms S4-S6: Total “correct reactions”,

Total “incorrect reactions”. ii Main variables of forms S8-S9: Total “reactions” (correct

and incorrect reactions), percentage “incorrect reactions”.

ReliabilityThe reliabilities are very high, the majority of them being over r=0.95.

ValidityMany studies of different aspects of validity (content valid-ity, convergent and discriminant validity, construct validity, criterion validity) have been carried out; all these studies indicate that the test is valid. A number of studies carried out in the field of traffic psychology also confirm the validity of the test.

NormsFor the COG forms S1 – S5 and S8, S9 and S11 norm sam-ples ranging in size from N=165 to N=1475 are available. Most of the norms are also available separated according to age and educa-tional level. Special norms from among the following are also available for these forms: norms for driv-ers with conspicuous behaviour, Swedish adults, job seek-ers, schoolchildren.


Now available in Slovenian!NeW





ApplicationAssessment of visual short-term memory capacity and im-plicit visuo-spatial learning.

Theoretical backgroundTests of memory span involve primarily the short-term mem-ory, the capacity of which is limited. Measurement of the memory span identifies an important limiting factor. The short-term memory is made up of verbal and visuo-spatial subsystems. These subsystems may be damaged independ-ently of each other by brain injuries, confirming the fact that they are largely separate systems. The block-tapping test for assessing the “immediate block span” (German abbre-viation: UBS) measures the capacity of the visuo-spatial subsystem within the short-term memory. The theoretical basis utilises Baddeley’s concept of working memory. The block-tapping test for measuring the “supra-block span” (SBS) goes beyond the assessment of short-term memory: it uses sequences that exceed the respondent’s visual mem-ory span and therefore require the application of learning processes.

AdministrationNine irregularly positioned blocks are shown on the screen. A pointer “taps” on a number of these blocks in turn. The re-spondent is required to tap on the same blocks in the same order. After three items the number of blocks increases by one. The test stops when the respondent makes an error in three successive items.Implicit visuo-spatial learning (supra-block span) is as-sessed by first measuring the respondent’s immediate block span. Items are then presented that contain the number of blocks in the immediate block span plus one. The test con-sists of 24 items and contains a sequence that is repeated eight times (the target sequence). The test stops as soon as the respondent reproduces the target sequence correctly.

Test formsSix test forms are available. Two of these measure the im-mediate block span forwards of adults (S1) and children (S2). The next two measure the immediate and the supra-block span of adults (S3) and children (S4). The last two measure the immediate block span backwards of adults (S5) and chil-dren (S6).Test forms S2, S4 and S6 contain sequences of between 2 and 8 blocks, while forms S1, S3 and S5 use sequences of between 3 and 8 blocks.

ScoringThe variable immediate block span operationalises the vis-uo-spatial memory span. It indicates the longest sequence length that has been reproduced correctly at least once. The variable supra-block span operationalises implicit visuo-spatial learning. It indicates the number of attempts made by the respondent before the target sequence was correctly reproduced.

ReliabilityThe reliability of the test is between r=0.81 and r=0.89, de-pending on the test form used.

ValidityThe block-tapping test is frequently referred to in the neu-ropsychological literature as a test of visuo-spatial memory span and is also widely used in a clinical context. Studies of brain-damaged patients using the block-tapping test demon-strate that the test assesses a visuo-spatial function of short-term memory that is independent of the verbal subsystem.

NormsProvision of conventional norms is inappropriate, since the variable can assume only seven different values. Cut-off scores are therefore calculated instead. If a respondent’s block span lies below the cut-off score, a footnote to this ef-fect is included in the results.


CORsI Corsi Block-Tapping TestD. Schellig © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

VISP/CODING

Now available in Czech, Slovakian and Slovenian!

NeW

Corresponding trainings inNeuropsychological studies prove that the im-mediate block span can depict deficits that are not assessed by common tests for the registrations of the verbal memory span.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





Now available in Arabic , Russian and Czech!

NeWThe DAKT enables the reliable and valid measure-ment of „Perceptual speed” and „Accuracy/ Re-sistance to error” as basic elements of attention. Moreover, the test is suitable for the diagnosis of perceptual disorders, e.g. dyslexia.

O. Bratfisch, E. Hagman © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

DAKTDifferential Attention Test

ApplicationDAKT is used primarily to measure perceptual speed and accuracy – that is, the quantity and quality of concentration and attention.

Theoretical backgroundDAKT is a non-verbal test for measuring perceptual speed and accuracy. Perceptual speed is defined as the capacity to recognize details rapidly in a distracting perceptual environ-ment and to differentiate them from irrelevant material. The ratio between the number of errors and the quantitative per-formance is taken as the measure of accuracy. Research on mental ability using factor analysis has unambiguously identi-fied a perceptual factor which involves a major component of speed. DAKT focuses on this factor.

AdministrationDAKT consists of three subtests containing different mate-rial (numbers, letters and figures). The task is to identify and mark critical items as fast and accurately as possible.

Test formsThere are two parallel test forms (S1 and S2). Each of the subtests can be administered separately.

ScoringThe number of correctly solved items constitutes the meas-ure of perceptual speed; the percentage of errors in the total number of items worked is the measure of accuracy. The results protocol shows raw and standard scores for each subtest and for the test as a whole.

ReliabilityThe parallel-test reliability coefficients are r=0.96 for percep-tual speed and r=0.85 for accuracy.

ValidityThe psychological validity of DAKT is evident – the re-spondents think immediately of “attention and concentra-tion”. Logical validity is given by the operational definition of perceptual speed and accuracy. Content validity has been proven through factor analysis. Prognostic validity has been demonstrated for occupations requiring a high level of per-ceptual speed and accuracy.

NormsFor both test forms norms of an Austrian norm sample of N=436 persons as well as a Swedish norm sample of N=1120 are available. Both norm samples are available broken down by age. Statistically the overall Austrian norms do not differ from the overall Swedish norms, hence the samples can be regarded as parallel.

Testing timeThe testing time for each subtest is three minutes. Add ap-proximately four minutes for instructions and solving the practice items.

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





The simplified but efficient design of the items makes it possible to assess the individual long-term attention without disadvantaging respond-ents with a weaker performance.

ApplicationAssessment of long-term selective attention and concentra-tion and of general performance and commitment; can be used from 15 years of age.

Theoretical backgroundA basic definition of attention is that it is a selection process: perception and conceptualisation are oriented and focused on a portion of the stimuli with which a person is simulta-neously confronted. The sustained aspect highlights the fact that attention operations become more difficult when they need to be continuously repeated. In contrast to vigi-lance, sustained attention is operationally defined as se-lective awareness of stimuli that are either continuously or frequently present. Vigilance, on the other hand, requires relatively infrequent reactions to stimuli that occur at irregu-lar intervals and in diverse locations. Measurement of sus-tained attention assesses primarily aspects of general per-formance ability or performance readiness that are largely independent of intelligence.

AdministrationTriangles appear in a row on the screen, pointing either up or down. The respondent must press the reaction button when-ever a pre-defined number of triangles point downwards.

Test formsThree test forms are available, differing in the number of tri-angles and the regularity with which the lines change. Forms S1 and S2 are recommended for use only with clients whose attentional performance is thought to be impaired.

ScoringThe following variables are calculated: Sum correct, Mean time correct, Sum incorrect and Mean time incorrect.

ReliabilityFor Form S1 the values of Cronbach’s Alpha for the main var-iables in the total sample are 0.896 (Sum correct) and 0.98 (Mean time correct). For Form S2 the corresponding values are 0.91 (Sum correct) and 0.98 (Mean time correct) and for Form S3 0.98 (Sum correct) and 0.97 (Mean time correct).

ValidityCriterion validity is given. Sustained attention is a psycho-logical construct which refers in general terms to a prereq-uisite of performance that is relatively independent of intel-ligence and effective over relatively long periods of time. The possibility that the Sustained Attention Test requires the use of higher cognitive functions can be ruled out. The test reveals the stability of a person’s long-term attentional per-formance as an underlying requirement of cognitive abilities under speed conditions.

NormsNorms are available for “normal individuals” for sample siz-es of N=286 (S1), 295 (S2) and 302 (S3). The norms are also available partitioned according to age and in some cases according to educational level. For Form S1 a norm sample of N=369 neurological patients is also available.


Now available in Slovenian and Russian!NeW

Sustained AttentionDAUFG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





The DT is an especially accurate measurement instrument and applied to assess reactive stress tolerance.

ApplicationMeasurement of reactive stress tolerance, attention and re-action speed in situations requiring continuous, swift and varying responses to rapidly changing visual and acoustic stimuli.

Theoretical backgroundThe DT is used to measure reactive stress tolerance and the associated ability to react. The test requires the respondent to use his cognitive skills to distinguish different colours and sounds, to memorise the relevant characteristics of stimulus configurations, response buttons and assignment rules, and to select the relevant responses according to the assign-ment rules laid down in the instructions and/or learned in the course of the test. The difficulty of the DT arises from the need to sustain continuous, rapid and varying responses to rapidly changing stimuli.

AdministrationThe respondent is presented with colour stimuli and acous-tic signals. He/she reacts by pressing the appropriate but-tons on the response panel. The stimuli are presented in three different ways: (1) in Adaptive Mode, in which the pres-entation speed adjusts to the respondent’s performance lev-el, (2) in Action Mode with no time limit and (3) in Reaction Mode with fixed time limit. The use of headphones ensures the exclusion of distracting noises.

Test formsS1 (adaptive short); S2 (adaptive); S3-S6 and S16 are forms that vary in their reaction mode, length or stimulus material. Test forms S7-S15 have been developed primarily for pur-poses of clinical research.

ScoringDepending on the stimulus/reaction mode, the variables Me-dian reaction time, Number of correct reactions (on time, delayed), Number of incorrect reactions, Number of omitted reactions and Number of stimuli are scored.

ReliabilityFor all test forms the internal consistencies for the main vari-ables lie between r=0.98 and r=0.99.

ValidityAn extreme-group validation carried out by Karner (2000) found significant differences in the Determination Test be-tween drivers who had committed alcohol-related offences and the norm group. The test results of the drivers who had committed alcohol-related offences were significantly worse than those of the norm population. A study by Neuwirth and Dorfer (2000) showed that the Determination Test could dis-tinguish between all the referral groups tested in the course of a traffic-psychological assessment (psychiatric and neu-rological clients, clients who had been involved in alcohol abuse) and the norm group. A study by Karner & Neuwirth (2000) showed significant correlations between the result of the DT and a driving test. The convergent validity of the test was demonstrated by Karner & Biehl (2000), who found that it correlated with the construct-related RST3 test. Other studies carried out in the field of traffic psychology also con-firm the validity of the test.

NormsFor the DT forms S1 – S6 representative norms are available that vary in size between N=102 and N=1179; some of the norms are also available separated according to age, gen-der and educational level. Special norms from among the following are also available for these forms: norms for driv-ers with conspicuous behaviour, Portuguese norm sample, Portuguese norms for drivers with conspicuous behaviour, norms of stroke patients, norms of German professional drivers.


DT Determination TestG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road






The DTKI combines the proven test concept of the Determination Test with a multi-media mode of presentation which is especially designed for children.

ApplicationMeasurement of reactive stress tolerance and reaction speed and assessment of attention deficits in situations re-quiring continuous, swift and varying responses to rapidly changing visual and acoustic stimuli. As a children’s version of the well-established Determination Test (DT) the DTKI combines a measurement method which has proved its suc-cess over many years with an innovative and child-friendly mode of presentation.

Theoretical backgroundSince the test is designed to involve fast and accurate re-sponses under conditions of stress, the DTKI requires a high degree of selective attention and reactive stress tolerance. The difficulty of the DTKI arises from the need to sustain continuous, rapid and varying responses to rapidly changing stimuli. The level of difficulty depends primarily not on the stimulus-response pairing but on the speed with which the stimuli change and on the number of different stimuli and responses which the subject has to move between.

AdministrationThe test involves the presentation of coloured stimuli and acoustic signals. The child reacts by pressing the appro-priate buttons on the response panel. The stimuli are pre-sented adaptively – that is, the speed of presentation adapts to the ability level of the child. The use of a USB headset ensures that extraneous sounds do not intrude upon pres-entation of the acoustic signals; the headset is furthermore essential for the precise measurement of time intervals.

Test formsS1 Adaptive mode

ScoringThe test yields scores for the variables “correct reactions”, “incorrect reactions”, “omitted items”, “median reaction time”, “number of stimuli”, “on-time reactions”, “delayed re-actions” and “reactions”.

ReliabilityDepending on the age group, the internal consistency for the main variable lies between α=0.86 and α=0.94.

ValidityResults for the content validity of the DT are also applicable to the DTKI. Further studies of the validity of the test are currently being undertaken.

NormsThe DTKI has been normed on a sample of 545 schoolchil-dren (271 male, 274 female) age 6-14.

Testing timeApprox. 7-9 minutes including instruction and practice phase.

Determination Test for ChildrenDTKIC. Heidinger, J. Häusler, G. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





Now available in French!NeWELST is a demonstrably fair test, designed on a theory-led basis, for measuring English-language skills in the areas of text comprehension, vocabu-lary and grammatical knowledge.

ApplicationTesting knowledge of English in the areas of text compre-hension, vocabulary and grammar.

Theoretical backgroundELST measures English-language skills in the areas of vo-cabulary, grammar and text comprehension. Using a the-ory-led approach, the items were designed on the basis of occurrence frequencies (vocabulary, grammar) and text construction factors that influence text comprehension. The requirements arising from the test’s use as a foreign-lan-guage test were explicitly taken into account in the design process. The applicability of the dichotomous Rasch model – and hence the test’s fairness – was successfully proved for the test materials used in all three areas.

AdministrationThe test is presented as a multiple-choice ability test with a time limit for each item. For all the subtests, item selection yields a linear test; the subtests are newly compiled annu-ally from a larger item pool.

Test forms:Two test forms are available:ii S1 with instructions in the respondent’s languageii S2 with instructions in English.

Scoring:Results are reported in the form of a raw score and person parameter for each subtest, together with the corresponding norm scores.

ReliabilityBecause of the validity of the dichotomous Rasch model, reliability in the sense of internal consistency is given. It is calculated individually for the respondent and quoted in the test results as an aid to interpretation. For respondents in the average ability range, the individually measured reliabili-ties are around r=0.8.

ValidityThe items, which were designed in cooperation with linguists, have content validity. In addition, scores on all the subtests correlate at a moderate level with German-¬language verbal comprehension tests (0.20 ≥ r ≤ 0.41).

Construct validity was tested using the underlying construc-tion rationale.The theoretically assumed item difficulties in the vocabulary test (based on word frequencies in the British National Cor-pus taking into account the frequencies of the stimulus and solution words) explain in total 22% of the variance in the empirically observed difficulty parameters.The item difficulties of the grammar test can be explained in terms of the frequency of the grammatical forms used (44% of variance explained). Analysis of the text comprehension test shows that a signifi-cant proportion of the difficulty is explained by the item type (25%). In addition, rank correlations show a slight to moder-ate correlation between item difficulty and general text dif-ficulty (r = 0.33).

NormsA norm sample is available of N = 2978 Austrian applicants to universities of applied sciences in the years 2007-2008.

Testing timeText comprehension: approx. 20 mins.Grammar: approx. 10 mins.Vocabulary: approx. 10 mins.

English Language Skills Test eLsTG. Janous, T. M. Ortner, E. Lick © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





Formula UnoF1D. Hackfort © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Formula 1 is a reaction time measurement tool, constructed for assessing the individual reaction time

ApplicationF1 is designed to assess reaction time in combination with attention performance; it is based on the requirements that apply at the start of a motor racing event. The test can be used with respondents age 14 and upwards.

Theoretical backgroundAttention can be defined as a psychophysical state that can vary in intensity and in which the subject is alert to stimuli or signals. Concentration involves a restriction of attention to particular signals; a fixation on these signals constitutes focusing. In the classical definition, reaction time is taken to mean motor time – i.e. the time between the start of the response movement and its completion (= response move-ment). The test is concerned exclusively with reaction time as thus defined.

AdministrationThe test is administered using a peripheral device and the response panel. The respondent must place his finger on the panel’s gold rest button. The peripheral device contains five light diodes that light up in turn in red. The five diodes then turn white simultaneously; at this point the respondent must lift his finger as quickly as he can from the gold rest button. In forms S3 and S4 an acoustic signal sounds before the red diodes are extinguished; this signal is intended to activate the respondent’s attention.

Test formsThere are four test forms – S1, S2, S3 and S4. In S3 and S4 an acoustic cue is used; this is not the case in S1 and S2. In addition, in forms S1 and S3 the respondent receives feed-back on how the speed of his response compares with that of previous reactions; this feedback is not given in S2 and S4. There are thus four possible combinations:ii S1: no tone plus feedbackii S2: no tone plus no feedbackii S3: tone plus feedbackii S4: tone plus no feedback

ScoringThe following are provided by default:ii Mean reaction time (the mean of all reaction times)ii Median reaction time (the median of all reaction times)ii Minimum reaction time (the raw value of the shortest

reaction time)ii Maximum reaction time (the raw value of the longest ‘

reaction time)

Testing timeApproximately 6 minutes (including the instruction and prac-tice phase) for each test form.

NEW





Objective test for the assessment of the activation level without self-evaluation.

ApplicationAssessment of the central-nervous activation (arousal) with the help of threshold values, when high frequency light is recognized as constant light. To be used with adults.

Theoretical backgroundPhysiological studies prove that the activation (arousal) of the organism is centrally controlled. The flicker-fusion fre-quency is regarded, next to other criteria (e.g. EEG, SCR) as an indicator for this central-nervous function capacity.

AdministrationIn the increasing process the frequency of a flickering light is augmented until a constant light is perceived.

In the decreasing process the frequency of a higher frequency light, that the respondent perceives as constant, is reduced until it is subjectively perceived as flickering. The respondent has to confirm every change of perception by pressing a key. The crtitical frequency is then stored.

The median values of the critical frequencies in the increasing or decreasing mode are threshold values and they are called “Fusion frequency (VF)” and “Flicker fre-quency (FF)”.

Test formsThere are three standard test forms with five practice and by default eight measurement runs each available:ii S1: Deterines flicker and fusion frequency (increasing and decreasing measuring mode) ii S2: Determines only fusion frequency (increasing measur-ing mode)ii S3 Determines only flicker frequency (decreasing measur-ing mode).

Scoring:The following variables are scored:ii Fusion frequency VF (Hz)ii Flicker frequency FF (Hz)ii Error in measurement of VF (Hz)ii Error in measurement of FF (Hz).

The fusion frequency (VF) and flicker frequency (FF) mark the level of activation. The measurement errors of the me-dian values serve as control variables. They make an esti-mate possible on how precisely the respondent was able to determine the change from flicker to constant light. Addition-ally a diagram with the threshold values measured during the individual measurement cycles is displayed as well as the test protocol.

ReliabilitySpecial studies with senior executives produced split-half reliability coefficients of r=.92 for the fusion frequency (VF) and of r=.91 for the flicker frequency (FF). For a group of psychiatric patients values of r=.86 and r=.92 were found.The stability coefficients for test-retest interval of between two and eight hours were of r=.86 (VF) and r=.85 (FF) for senior executives.

ValidityIn pharmacological studies, this method revealed biologically relevant differences starting at 0.8 Hz. Parallel to the decrease of the flicker and fusion frequencies, corresponding changes in other performance parameters were found (memory, attention, reaction speed etc.).Pharmacological studies are a frequent area of application for the FLIM. A multitude of studies were conducted in this area. For example the flicker-fusion frequency is a highly reli-able indicator and a valid parameter for the measurement of sedation induced by medical drugs. A study by Görtelmeyer et al. (1982) found that the flicker-fusion frequency together with EEG-Variables are described by a common factor, which can be interpreted as the expression of cortically modulated attention.

NormsIn test form S1 (increasing and decreasing measuring modes) norms for the age groups 18-38, 39-55 and 56-80 are presented for the variables “Flicker frequency (FF)” and “Fusion frequency (VF)”. These comparative values (N=245) were gained from a comparative sample of psychiatric pa-tients and a group of senior executives.


Flicker/Fusion Frequency FLIMG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

i page 13

Test with peripheral unit.

Worth knowing ___________

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





J. Kessler, U. Pietrzyk © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Continuous Visual Recognition TaskFVW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

The diverging difficulties of the tasks make the test very suitable to assess the memory per-formance of each individual respondent. Effects of overstrain or under-stimulation can thus be avoided.

Application:Measurement of memory performance and cerebral deficits (quantification of mnestic deficits) based on the decision whether an item is new or has already been presented; ap-plicable to people aged 6 years and over.

Theoretical backgroundMost theories assume that every piece of information (item) in memory has a certain familiarity, which rises with the number of presentations. It is also assumed that this familiarity is respondent to random deviations, so that fa-miliar items might be evaluated as new and new items as familiar. Various results of this overlapping area are used to judge the certainty with which the respondent differenti-ates between familiar and new items. Memory deficits may be sensitive indicators of brain function disorders and are the most frequently cited symptom after brain damage has taken place. Recognition performance is also considered an indicator for pathological aging.

AdministrationDepending on the test form, words, objects, numbers, mean-ingless syllables, letter-number combinations, or difficult-to-name items are presented in sequence. The respondent has to decide whether an item is being shown for the first time or is being repeated on screen.

Test formsThe FVW is available in seven test forms (S2 to S8).The forms S2 to S5 differ in level of difficulty. Each test form contains 210 items (105 verbal and 105 nonverbal). S6 and S7 are short forms with a low level of difficulty, especially for use in the clinical field. S8 is a special test form for children.

ScoringThe following variables are scored:ii Number hits: This variable characterizes the number of correctly recognized items.ii Number incorrect positive: number of yes-answers

during distractions, i.e. an item which has only been shown once is seen as having been shown twice.ii Mean reaction time hitsii Discrimination ability: distribution-free measurement of the ability of the respondent to differentiate among items presented once or repeatedly (familiarity).ii Answer tendency: indicates whether or not a respondent answeres rather conservatively (when in doubt “No”) or liberally (when in doubt “Yes”).ii Working time

ReliabilityReliability (Cronbach’s alpha) lies between .78 and .86, de-pending on test form and sample.

ValidityThe test performance in FVW showed no correlation with the cognitive performance of the respondents in the CPM (Coloured Progressive Matrices) and the DAUF (Continuous Attention).

NormsTest form S2 was standardized with a sample of 226 normal persons of ages 10-99. There are overall norms and age norms are available.Comparison values of 53 normal persons of ages 16-90 are available for test form S3.Results of test form S4 can be compared with comparison values of 78 normal persons of ages 16-89.Test form S5 was standardized with a sample of 159 normal persons of ages 15-67.Overall norms and age norms from 763 adults of ages 17-91 are available for the clinical short form S6.Test form S8 was standardized with a sample of 240 children of ages 6-9.

Testing timeAbout 15 Minutes.

Now available in Czech, Slovakian and Slovenian!

NeW





Gestalt Perception Test

A Rasch-homogenous test based on the hierarchic model perception to assess the construct field dependence.

Application:Assessment of the cognitive style of field (in)dependence (field articulation) through identification of a specific shape embedded in a pattern.

Theoretical backgroundGESTA is based on the concept of field dependence. This typology differentiates between field-dependent and field-independent people. Field-dependent people are influenced in their perception by surrounding stimuli, so that their per-ception is always influenced by the surrounding “field”. It is not just perception but the entire “mental apparatus” (in-cluding cognitions and emotions) that is affected by this de-pendence on the “field”. The concept of field dependence has developed in four phases. The first tests were based on the theory of Witkin & Asch (1948). The first phase saw the introduction of the classic test for the assessment of field dependence, the Rod-and-Frame Test (RFT; Witkin, 1949). This was followed in the second stage of development by the test that is now most commonly used to measure field dependence: the Embedded Figures Test (EFT; Witkin et al, 1971).The Gestalt Perception Test was drawn up on the basis of the hierarchical model. The aim is to measure the ability to deconstruct structures and reassemble them. During de-velopment of the test, the explicit goal was to design what modern test theory would define as a unidimensional test that measures the construct of field dependence.

AdministrationThe task is to identify a specified shape (in the form of a house) within a pattern and to trace the outline of the house by marking the corners with the mouse. The test consists of 30 items, all containing different patterns. The patterns are not just a jumble of lines; to varying degrees they have a “good” gestalt or shape. The shape that the respondent is looking for (the house) is always shown at the side, outside the pattern area of the item, and thus serves as a model. For each item the respondent has 20 seconds to find the solution. An item is classed as solved if the outline of the house is traced correctly (corners marked in the correct or-der) within the time limit. A detailed instruction and practice phase precedes the test phase.


ScoringThe number of correctly solved items is calculated as the test score.

ReliabilityBecause of the validity of the Rasch model, the test can be assumed to have internal consistency. Cronbach’s Alpha varies in the different samples between r=0.89 and r=0.95. The split-half reliabilities are also very high, lying between r=0.83 and r=0.94.

ValidityFrom the point of view of probabilistic test theory, reliabil-ity can be considered as given since all items measure the same ability dimension. The results on convergent validity are also especially important. The study by Hergovich and Kriechbaum (1996) shows that the correlation between the subtest “Analyze and Synthesize“ of the AID and GESTA is r=0.66. The correlation between EFT and GESTA is at r=0.51. The two tests EFT and GESTA are also found to cor-relate in similar ways with other variables that were investi-gated (extraversion, social desirability, intelligence).

NormsNorms are available for a sample of N=443 individuals that is representative of the normal population in terms of age. Subsamples based on gender, age and education are also available. The data was gathered in two collection phas-es between 2002 and 2008 in the research laboratory of SCHUHFRIED GmbH, using a stratified quota sampling plan.

Testing timeThe time required for the text is a maximum of 20 minutes (including the instruction and practice phase).

GesTAA. Hergovich, H. Hörndler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Russian!NeW Onlinetest


Special Ability TestsSpecial Ability Tests

This test measures the visual orientation perfor-mance for simple structures in a complex environ-ment and is characterized by a high reliability and numerous criterion-related proofs of validity.

ApplicationAssessment of visual orientation ability and skill in gaining an overview, for use with adults.

Theoretical backgroundSpecial psychological tests are used to assess the more complex dimensions of perception. Most of these tests have been developed in connection with particular issues relevant to experimental psychology or practical situations. The present Visual Pursuit Test is not merely a new edi-tion of an old test, but has been developed from experience and observations gained from many previous versions. It assesses the aspect of visual orientation performance in-volved in tracking simple visual elements in a relatively com-plex environment. The respondent is required to work in a focused way, ignoring distractions, while being placed under time pressure. The test is thus also suited to the assessment of selective visual attention.

AdministrationThe test commences with a combined instruction and prac-tice phase. If the eight practice items are worked with fewer than three errors, the respondent moves on to the test phase items. The respondent is presented with an array of lines and must as quickly as possible find the end of a specified line. The respondent can work at his own speed.

Test formsThe forms available are S1 (long form with 80 items), S2 (short form with 40 items) and S3 (screening form).

ScoringThe following variables are scored:ii Score, median time of correct answers (sec.).

ReliabilityInternal consistency is r=0.96 for the long form, r=0.92 for the short form and r=0.92 for the screening form.

ValidityStudies by Calé (1992), Neuwirth and Karner (2000), and Sommer (2002) are currently available. These show that respondents who perform at a below-average level on the test have more accidents or receive a more unfavourable assessment of their driving ability. Sommer (2002) was also able to show that a test battery that included the LVT cor-rectly predicted 74.7% of global assessments of driving be-haviour in a standardised driving test. In addition, groups comparisons are available contrasting the normal popula-tion with drivers who had alcohol-related offences (Karner, 2000) and with psychiatric and neurological patients (Neu-wirth, 2001). These studies provide clear evidence of the criterion validity of the LVT. Evidence of construct validity is provided by the highly significant correlations between the characteristic values of the LVT and a test based on a similar construct, the ART90 (Karner, 2000), and between the LVT and other tests measuring attention and concentra-tion (Wagner, 1999).

NormsNorm samples of size N=407 to N=785 are available for the three forms of the LVT; some norms are also available sepa-rated by age and educational level. In addition, norms for drivers with conspicuous behaviour are available for Form S2 form.


Now available in Chinese!NeW

B. Biehl © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Visual Pursuit TestLVT

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Sport

Transport: Road

Education



Movement Detection Test MDTD. Hackfort © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

ApplicationMeasurement of attentional performance, decision speed and motor reaction speed in response to a succession of rapidly presented visual movement stimuli.

Theoretical backgroundThe attentional performance required in the MDT involves detecting direction of movement and responding to this movement as quickly as possible. The test measures both the time taken to detect movement, decide on its direction and select a response and – separately – the subsequent motor reaction time. It thus identifies both a cognitive com-ponent (decision time) and a motor component (reaction time). The reaction required in the MDT must take place within a narrow time window. Reactions that are too late or too early are also documented, as are omitted or incomplete reactions. The design of the test means that more is called for than simple yes/no decisions and simple choice reactions; its de-mands thus resemble those encountered in complex real-life situations such as arise when driving, participating in sport or engaging in motor racing.

AdministrationThe respondent’s task is to react as quickly as possible to the sudden movement of a central visual stimulus on the screen. There is a narrow time window in which this reac-tion must occur. A choice reaction or a simple reaction is required, depending on the test form. The tasks require a rapid response and are aimed at strong performers.

Test formsThere are three test forms of varying difficulty. Form S1 requires a simple reaction as soon as a movement is per-ceived by the respondent. Form S2 requires a choice reac-tion: a different color key must be pressed depending on the direction of the movement. Form S3 also requires a choice reaction: in this case the coding of the direction of move-ment to the color keys changes for each new item.

ScoringIn each test form the detection time is measured; the sepa-rate components of motor time and cognitive reaction time are also reported. For each of these times the following are given: median, mean, standard deviation, interquartile range, maximum and minimum. The medians are the main variables of the test.

ReliabilityThe test’s reliability was calculated using split-half reliabili-ties obtained from the norm samples. For the main variables (the medians of motor time, detection time and cognitive re-action time) the reliabilities thus measured were between 0.96 and 0.99 for Form S1, between 0.96 and 0.97 for Form S2 and between 0.92 and 0.97 for Form S3.

ValidityThe MDT has content validity, because the task used di-rectly involves both attention and movement detection. Validation studies in the field of sports psychology are cur-rently in preparation.

NormsNorm samples varying in size between N=269 and N=271 are available for each of the test forms S1, S2 and S3. These norms are also available partitioned according to gender and age.

Testing timeThe time required for each of the three test forms is around eight minutes.

The Movement Detection Test (MDT) assesses at-tentional performance and the speed of cognitive and motor reactions in response to rapidly present-ed visual movement stimuli. The test is intended for strong performers.

NEW


Intelligenz-Basis-FunktionenIBF



Comprehensive fine motor abilities test battery with special norms for Morbus Parkinson patients.

ApplicationMeasurement of fine motor abilities through static and dy-namic tasks for finger, hand and arm movement, applicable from seven years of age.

Theoretical backgroundThe Motor Performance Series (MLS) is a test battery devel-oped by Schoppe on the basis of Fleishman’s factor analysis of fine motor abilities. The MLS assesses the following six aspects of fine motor abilities: ii Aiming (accuracy of movement)ii Hand shake, tremorii Precision of arm-hand movementsii Manual dexterity and finger dexterityii Rate of arm and hand movementsii Wrist-finger speed.

AdministrationThe MLS Work Panel is required for the administration of the MLS. This Work Panel measures 300x300x15mm; it con-

tains holes, grooves and contact surfaces. A stylus is attached to either side of the panel. The sty-lus on the right is black; the one on the left is red. The following tasks are carried out using the Work Panel:

Steadiness (one or both hands), Line tracking (one hand), Aiming (one or both hands), Inserting pins (one or both hands), Tapping (one or both hands).

Test formsThe following test forms are available:ii S1: Standard form according to Schoppe & Hamster (17 subtests) ii S2: Short form according to Sturm & Büssing (8 subtests)ii S3: Short form according to Vassella (10 subtests)ii Individual subtests can be selected for administration.

ScoringResults table: Speed and/or accuracy scores are calcu-lated for the right and left hands for one-handed and two-handed performance.Results table for fine motor abilities aspects: Table of the mathematically estimated Fleishman factors for the right hand.Profile: The normed variables and the Fleishman factors can be displayed in a profile.

ReliabilityRetest coefficients for the subtest parameters Aiming, Line tracking and Tapping were calculated (test-retest interval 1 day). They varied between r=.52 and r=.92 for the right hand and r=.60 to r=.90 for the left hand. For the subtest Tapping (variable “Hits”) the consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s Al-pha) was calculated; it amounted to r=.94.

ValidityFactor-analytic control studies on clinical groups and a group of healthy persons showed that the six factors of the MLS explain over 85% of the total variance.

Comparisons between people with and without disorders of the central motor system revealed significant and highly sig-nificant differences in performance. This confirms that im-pairments in fine motor function can be objectified using the MLS. Only slight correla-tions of up to r=.35 were found be-tween the variables of the MLS and cognitive criteria, such as those measured by the HAWIE, CFT and the STROOP test, and between the MLS variables and various personality dimensions (e.g. extroversion, neuroticism, rigidity).

Normsii Test form S1: sample of school students between 13 and 19 years of age (N=300); university students between 18 and 26 years of age (N=100); sample of adults (N=420), representative norm sample (N=107), collected at the research laboratory of the Schuhfried company in 2004, sample of left-handed adults and young people between 14 and 66 years of age (N=89), collected at the research laboratory of the Schuhfried company during the period 2005-09.ii Test form S2: sample of patients without neurological symptoms (N=200), 2 samples of patients with Parkin-son’s disease (N=70 and N=114). ii Test form S3: right-handed children and young people (Vassella in Bern, N=352), right-handed children and young people (Hiebsch - Martin Luther University, Halle, Germany, N=93); left-handed children and adolescents (Hiebsch - Martin Luther University, Halle, Germany, N=29), left-handed people (educational counselling) (left-hander norm of the AHA! educational counselling service, N=109).

Testing timeApprox. 15-20 minutes (for the short form).

Motor Performance SeriesMLsK. J. Schoppe, W. Hamster © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

i page 13 Test with peripheral unit.


VISMOCorresponding training in

Now available in Czech!NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



Mechanical/Technical Comprehension MTAK. Liedl © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

The fact that this test consists of a mostly non-verbal task, of moving images and the obvious connection to practical activities makes it work even for those respondents, who tend to have a negative opinion about tests with a “typically school-like” content.

ApplicationTest that assesses the mechanical/technical understanding using animated items (instruments, to which a construction plan must be assigned); to be used with adolescents and adults.

Theoretical backgroundIn psychology there is a multitude of terms like “technical/constructive” or “practical/technical understanding”, which are used in connection with mechanical/technical under-standing. Pauli & Arnold (1972) limit the definition in the fol-lowing way: Technical understanding broadly contains the following abilities:ii a) to understand and describe technical drawings or instruments and to describe their usefulness.ii b) to recognize the functional importance of the individual parts and to explain their coaction.ii c) to correctly understand and describe basic technical laws (e.g. the effect of the lever), with which everybody is acquainted in daily life. ii d) the personal inner connection with technical problems (eagerness or revulsion).”

The MTA tries to cover the above-mentioned abilities from points a-c.

AdministrationIn the first run 4 plans per instrument are presented. The task consists of finding the one plan, which does not allow the sequence of movements shown before (in an anima-tion). If all four constructions allow this sequence of move-ments, then the answer “all constructions are correct” must be selected. In the second run, either one of the 4 plans per instrument must be selected as correct or the answer can be “all constructions are incorrect”. So in the first run one incorrect plan must be discovered among the four plans presented per instrument, whereas in the second run one correct plan must be found. The test has an “item-related time-limit”. This means that the next item appears automati-cally after a certain time interval (2 minutes) has elapsed.

Test formsThe defined test score is the number of items solved.

ScoringAls Testwert wird die Anzahl gelöster Items bestimmt.

ReliabilityThe reliability in the sense of an inner consistency is given due to the validity of the Rasch model.The following characteristic values for reliability were calcu-lated: split-half-reliability r=0.87, Cronbach’s alpha r=0.84 and Guttman’s lambda 3 r=0.84.

ValiditySince the tasks of the MTA coincide by their content as well as formally with those of other mechanical/technical tests that were checked for their external validity, the external va-lidity is deemed to be secure also for them.One external validity criterion (positive/negative completed retraining in a technical profession, r=.47) confirms the se-lection quality of the MTA.

NormsThe norms available are based on a sample of N=205 adults.Three additional samples are based on the data of N=556 students from vocational schools, which were further divided between professions with technical understanding (N=339) and professions without technical understanding (N=217).

Testing timeTest phase: 40 minutes at the maximum.





W. Sturm, K. Willmes © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Non-verbal Learning TestNVLT

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Homogenous assessment of non-verbal learning to detect material specific learning disorders in compari-son with the test VLT.

ApplicationNon-verbal learning is assessed by presenting for memori-sation graphic material that is difficult to verbalise. The ma-terial consists partly of geometric and partly of irregularly shaped figures. Some figures occur repeatedly in the course of the test. The memorised material is recalled using the recognition method.

Theoretical backgroundBased on the memory theories of Atkinson, Shiffrin and Baddeley, as well as on findings from neuropsychological research into amnesia, the NVLT was designed to assess learning ability with regard to non-verbal memory material that is stored in a material-specific long-term memory store. Through separate assessment of learning capacity in rela-tion to geometric (high-associative) and irregular (low-asso-ciative) items it is possible to test respondents’ and patients’ ability in the “dual” storing of memory material (Paivio 1971) in verbal and pictorial code. Dual coding is easier for the ge-ometric, high-associative items than for the low-associative ones, since it can be assumed that high-associative items can be encoded verbally as well as pictorially.

AdministrationMeaningless shapes are displayed on the computer screen for 2-3 seconds each; some of the figures are geometric and some are irregular. During the test, eight of the presented shapes are repeated seven times in the long form (seven item blocks), and five times in the short form. For each shape the respondent is required to decide whether he or she has seen it before or whether it is being presented for the first time. The respondent presses one of the two buttons (on the response panel or computer keyboard) assigned to the two possible answers, depending on his or her decision. If the results are below a percentile rank of 25, the respondent takes the visual discrimination test to check whether the test result was affected by impaired visual discrimination ability.

Test formsTwo long forms with 160 items, two short forms with 120 items and a visual discrimination test with 20 items.

ScoringThe test records the numbers of correct and incorrect “yes” answers, as well as the difference between these two pa-rameters per item block and the sum of each type of answer over all the blocks.In the long form the separate assessment of learning capac-ity in relation to geometric (high-associative) and irregular (low-associative) makes it possible to test respondents’ abil-ity in the “dual” storing of memory material (Paivio 1971) in verbal and pictorial code. In addition, the trend of these variables over the seven item blocks is recorded. A lability index is also determined as a measure of the stability of the learning process. The median reaction times for correct and incorrect “yes” answers are given and are also quoted separately for high-associative and low-associative items.

ReliabilitySplit-half reliability coefficients were calculated for the main variables of the NVLT. They vary for the long form between r=0.89 and r=0.93 (adults) and between r=0.80 and r=0.87 (children and young people) and for the short form between r=0.82 and r=0.90 (adults) and r=0.71 and r=0.84 (children and young people).

ValidityConstruct validity was analysed by investigating whether or not the process of learning over the course of the test was as monotonic as possible in terms of the Guttman Scale. This was the case to 78.7%-95.3% for the repeated geo-metric (high-associative) items, and to 50.3%-73.7% for the irregular (low-associative) shapes. However, the number of deviations from the ideal learning course is very low for both item types. An analysis of the performance intercorrelations between item blocks showed a structure that supports the inference that only one homogenous characteristic (learning ability) is assessed throughout all the item blocks. An inves-tigation of neurological patients with unilateral right- or left-hemisphere vascular cerebral lesions to test the differential validity of the NVLT and the parallel VLT showed that these two tests can detect material-specific learning disorders in the sense of double dissociations very precisely, not only for the groups as a whole but also in a high percentage of individual cases.

NormsFor the two test forms of NVLT representative norm sam-ples are available for adults (N=363). For Form A (S1+S2) there are also norms for children and young people (N=805). The norms for adults are available both for the sample as a whole and also separated according to educational level. In addition raw scores adjusted for age effects are available for the main variables; these have also been normed. The age range covered by the norms is 6-82 years

Testing timeBetween 9 and 12 minutes (including instruction and prac-tice phase), depending on test form. The visual discrimina-tion test takes approximately three minutes.

Now available in Turkish, Czech and Slovakian!

NeW





Perseveration Test PeRseV

Objective test for the assessment of the perse-veration tendency.


ApplicationAssessment of the perseveration tendency (stereotypies) can be used as of 6 years of age.

Theoretical backgroundThe consensus in scientific literature is that perseveration means an unwarranted repetition in cognitive processes and ways of behavior. Resistance to change and rigidity take the place of variability, flexibility and adaptability. The motor perseveration or “stereotypy” is marked by a high measure of repetitions of certain action sequences. Most theories see perseveration as an arousal phenomenon, which follows mental and central nervous processes. Mittenecker noted the perseveration tendency in a point-ing experiment. In this experiment the respondents have to touch numbers between 1 and 10 in an unsystematic way, with a pen. The extent of the individual repetition tendency was determined using information-theoretical values.

AdministrationNine big circles are displayed on the monitor. As in Mittene-necker’s experiment 64 “beeping sounds” are presented per minute. The task consists in pressing with the light pen on the circles, to the tact of the tones. The test contains an instruction and a practice phase, in which the respondent receives feedback. After 210 entries the program indicates the end of the test.


ScoringThe following information theoretical values are calculated:ii Redundancy of the first degree (R1) as relative prefer-ence of individual circles. Since this variable also shows very marked intra-individual variances and high standard deviations for healthy people, it should rather be viewed as control variable. A low percentage rank points to a prefer-ence for certain circles. ii Redundancy of the second degree (R2) as the measure for the preference for individual combinations of two circles (the respondent pointed the light pen preferably to circle Y after circle X). The person taking the test cannot control the 81 combination options consciously anymore. The lower the value is for R2, the greater the randomness of pointing the various circles, i.e. there is no preference for specific combinations of pairs. Patients with organic brain damages or patients with psychiatric symptoms display a marked preference for certain sequences of pairs. ii Control variables: “Omitted” and “Multiple reactions” in the interval between two beeping sounds.

ReliabilityThe split-half reliability (odd-even) varies between r=.86 and r=.91 for the Redundancy of the first degree.For the variable Redundancy of the second degree the same calculation mode was applied to produce reliabilities be-tween r=.81 and r=.87.

ValidityA number of studies with the pointing experiment showed a significantly higher perseveration for clinical respondent groups in the following ascending order: epileptics, respond-ents with organic brain dysfunctions or damages, depressive patients, neurotics and schizophrenics. These results were confirmed when applying the computerized Perseveration Test to patients with cranio-cerebral injuries. Additionally it is deemed evident, that rigidity and inflexibility of cognitive processes result in a greater repetition tendency of certain courses of action. In a study by Stoffers et al. (2001) it is reported, that when comparing two respondent groups with early signs of Morbus Parkinson (of which one groups was treated with medical drugs and the other one not) by the Per-severation Test, a marked reduction in the capacity to create patterns at random could be found in both groups.

NormsNorms of N=417 healthy persons between the ages of 6 to 95 years are available. Additionally, test results were com-pared to age-specific subsamples.


Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Chinese, Slovakian and Czech!

NeW





Objective and precise measurement of the visual filed of perception.

ApplicationThe test is designed to assess the perception and process-ing of peripheral visual information.

Theoretical backgroundGood visual perception is indispensable for many activities - such as driving a motor vehicle – in which humans interact with machines. Over 90% of the information received by a driver is perceived via the visual channel.In the literature relating to the visual aspects of driving, pe-ripheral visual perception is usually mentioned in connec-tion with three matters:1. Estimation of speed (high angular velocities arise in the

peripheral visual field)2. Handling the vehicle (objects at the side of the carriage-

way move past peripherally)3. Monitoring of the motoring environment (detection of

events and objects, e.g. overtaking cars or vehicles emerging from a side street).

The PP is designed as a purely behavior-based instrument that meets high methodological standards.

AdministrationLight-emitting diodes mounted on the apparatus gener-ate light stimuli that move at a pre-set speed (in regular “jumps”). Critical stimuli appear at pre-defined intervals; the respondent reacts to these critical stimuli by depressing the foot pedal. At the same time he must keep a moving ball in the cross-hairs on the screen.


ScoringThe following variables are scored:Overall field of vision, visual angles left/right, tracking devia-tion, number of hits left/right, number of incorrect reactions, number of omitted reactions, median reaction time left/right.

ReliabilityInternal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) for the variable Field of vision is r=0.96; internal consistency for the vari-able Tracking deviation is r=0.98..

ValidityLogical content validity or high face validity can be assumed. Critical stimuli are presented in the respondent’s visual field; the respondent has to react to these as quickly as possi-ble, as for example when driving a car. Traffic-psychological studies have demonstrated that the test has adequate valid-ity.

NormsA norm of N=351 (173 men, 178 women) adults is avail-able for the variable Field of vision and Tracking devia-tion. The data was collected in 2008 in Vienna. In addition to the total sample, three subsamples consisting of different age groups are available.

Testing timeThe time required for the text is approximately 15 minutes (including the instruction and practice phase).

Peripheral PerceptionPPG. Schuhfried, J. Prieler, W. Bauer © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

i page 13

Test with peripheral unit.


NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Slovenian, Chinese and Hindi!

NeW





With Reaction Time Analysis the slowing down of reactions can be assessed in a differentiated way according to the three stages of activity regula-tion (perception, cognitive processing and motor response organization. This shall be especially useful for the representation of the course of illnesses in an advanced age. But the RA can also be used as a tool for aptitude diagnostics.

ApplicationThe Reaction Time Analysis (RA) has been developed for the field of clinical psychodiagnostics. However, it can also be applied to the selection process of personnel and to the examinations of therapeutic developments when observing a therapy (diagnostics of individual cases).The aim is to differentiate the general statement about cogni-tive speed for tasks of the so-called speed-type regarding individual phases of action control. The phases concerned are perception, cognitive processing, and motor organization of responses. The items used in the test are choice reaction items as well as items of visual search.

Theoretical backgroundThe Reaction Time Analysis goes back to Sternberg’s Model of additive factors (Sternberg 1969). According to him there are serial and independent phases in a process, in which the measurable reaction time is the sum of the reaction times of all phases. What varies are the factors which have an influ-ence on the processing time of selective individual phases. The effects caused by the reaction time make it possible to draw conclusions on the reaction time of individual phases. In order to influence the perception phase, the difficulty of discrimination of the figures presented on the monitor (circle, rectangle, square, star, cross, ellipsis) is varied by a grid which partly covers the figures. The variation of the phase of cognitive processing is based on the model of visual search by Schneider and Shiffrin (1977). The authors showed that visual search processes are realized by serial steps of com-parison concluded by the respondent him/herself. In the test the respondent has to find one or two specific figures while two figures are presented on the monitor at the same time. This causes a variation of the number of necessary steps of comparison. A variation of the phase of motor organization of responses is achieved by a modification of the complex-ity of items. (Reaction entered with just one finger or with a sequence of three buttons). This affects the central motor elements of the programming process of responses in the brain (Rosenbaum and Saltzmann, 1984).

AdministrationThe respondent is guided through the experiment in an in-teractive way. The experiment includes 14 Subtests to be carried out with 20 individual stimuli each in choice reac-tion items, and 16 individual stimuli each in items of visual search.

Test formsThere is a standard test form available.

ScoringThe test is evaluated regarding the following parameters: ii frequency of errors (types of errors are incorrect positive and incorrect negative),ii median reaction time categorized according to the respec-tive test requirements andii difference of reaction times of comparable test require-ments as an indicator for cognitive speed in individual phases of action control.

ReliabilityThe internal consistencies of all the scales are situated be-tween .85 and .99 and can be considered very satisfactory.

ValidityThe Reaction Time Analysis was carried out while simulta-neously deducing event-related brain potentials (ERP)(Dor-mann, Pfeifer, Nickel, 1991). It was shown that varying test requirements which influence the stimulus assessment time (perception phase, phase of cognitive processing) also re-sult in a prolonged peak time of the late positive complex in ERP (P 300). On the other hand, varying test requirements which are effective after stimulus assessment (this concerns motor sequence for influencing a phase of motor organiza-tion of responses) do not result in differences in peak time of P 300. Thus the phase model was basically corroborated. Furthermore, findings for a deceleration caused by old age as well as a deceleration of the organic psychosyndrome were corroborated by comparative examinations.

NormsIt is possible to compare results with a comparative sample categorized into various relevant groups (age, level of edu-cation, N=162).


Reaction Time Analysis RAW. U. Dormann, Th. Pfeifer, J. Prieler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Bulgarian and Czech!NeW





ApplicationDepending on the test form used, RT can be used to meas-ure reaction time or reaction time and motor time. Forms S7 and S8 can also be used to measure phasic alertness. Forms S1-S3 can be used with children as young as six years of age.

Theoretical backgroundDorsch (1994) defines reaction time as the time that elapses between a signal and the start of the mechanical response movement when the respondent is instructed to react as quickly as possible. Since such response times need to be measured in milliseconds, the test instrument used must be very precise and highly reliable. With the RT is it possible to measure reaction time for both simple choice and a multiple-choice reactions. Light and sound stimulus modalities are available, with a choice of the colours red, yellow or white, so that different stimulus constellations for the measurement of reaction time can be created. These can range in the different test forms from individual stimuli to simultaneous or sequentially presented stimulus combinations. The use of a rest key and a reaction key makes it possible to distinguish between reaction and motor time.

AdministrationThe Response Panel is used as the input device. An animat-ed instruction phase and an error-sensitive practice phase lead on to the task itself. The test involves the presentation of coloured stimuli and/or acoustic signals. The respondent is instructed to press the reaction key only when specific stimuli are presented and, having pressed the key, to return his finger immediately to the rest key. Headphones can be used in group testing situations.

Test formsForms S1-S5 assess reaction time and motor time in re-sponse to simple and complex visual or acoustic signals. Forms S1 and S2 involve only one critical stimulus, to which the client must react. These two forms therefore do not measure incorrect reactions. By contrast, forms S3 to S5 contain critical stimulus combinations to which the client must react; incorrect reactions are measured in these forms. Form S6 is particularly suitable for measuring changes in reaction time over a relatively long period of time under mo-notonous stimulus conditions (vigilance). Forms S7-S8 are used to measure alertness. Forms S9-S10 are particularly suitable for assessment situations in which absolute reac-tion times are important; in these forms response times are not split into reaction time and motor time.

ScoringThe following main variables are calculated, depending on test form: mean reaction time and mean motor time, difference in mean reaction time with and without cue and difference in mean motor time with and without cue. Means are calculated using a Box-Cox transformation; this ensures that they provide an optimal representation of the central tendency of the distri-bution of the reaction times.

ReliabilityReliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha) in the norm sample vary between r=0.83 and r=0.98 for reaction time and between r=0.84 and r=0.95 for motor time.

ValidityContent (logical) validity is given for the Reaction Test. The presentation of an individual stimulus for one second is such a simple requirement that it can be assumed that nothing other than a reaction to that stimulus occurs. Studies of cri-terion validity in the field of traffic psychology yield signifi-cant correlations between the results of the RT and the out-come of a standardised driving test. Adequate convergent validity has also been demonstrated.

NormsNorm samples varying in size between N=75 and N=855 are available for the different forms of the RT; some norms are also available partitioned according to age, gender and edu-cational level. For a number of forms special norms are also available for school children and for drivers who have com-mitted motoring offences.


Due to its clever combination of different test forms, the RT is ideally suited as a test battery to examine attention.


Reaction TestRTG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





Based on the signal detection theory, this test as-sesses the visual detailed registration of complex stimuli under time pressure over a longer period of time.

ApplicationAssessment of long-term selective attention. The test meas-ures the visual differentiation of a relevant signal within ir-relevant signals. It is suitable for use with individuals from seven years of age.

Theoretical backgroundSignal discovery theory (synonymous with the signal detec-tion theory of Green and Swets 1966) describes the percep-tion of weak signals against a constantly changing (“noisy”) background. It is not concerned only with the visual differ-entiation of signals of a particular type that are close to the perception threshold. Much more generally it addresses the question: under what conditions can a person detect the presence of a weak signal against a background of irrelevant signals or among other signals that could be confused with the relevant signal? There is a close link here with statistical decision theory. The reaction “signal present” or “signal not present” is viewed not as an issue of sensitivity to differ-ences but as a decision-making problem; the testee must decide between two answer alternatives to which different probabilities attach.

AdministrationDots are displayed over the entire screen area; pseudo-ran-domly some of the dots disappear and others come into view. The respondent is required to detect the critical stimulus con-stellation and to respond by pressing a button whenever it oc-curs. This critical stimulus constellation consists of four dots forming a square.

Test formsii S1: Standard (white signals on a black background)ii S2: Standard, inverted (black signals on a white background) ii S3: Short signal durationii S4: Signal balance (neglect assessment)

ScoringThe main variables calculated are the numbers of correct, delayed and incorrect reactions as a measure of the reliabil-ity of the detection process, and the median detection time as a measure of the speed of the detection process.

ReliabilityFor the variable “number of correct and delayed reactions” split-half reliability coefficients (odd-even method) of be-tween r=0.74 and r=0.85 were obtained, depending on the test form and the comparison sample. For the median de-tection time the reliability calculated by the same method was between r=0.78 and r=0.84.

ValidityConstruct validity can be assumed because the aspects of performance measured constitute the criteria for the con-struct of signal detection in accordance with signal detection theory. Studies with extreme groups also yielded very good results.

NormsFor test forms S1 to S3 norm samples of between N=76 to N=904 are available. In some cases the norms are also available partitioned by gender, age and education. For Form S4 norms are available for N=71 neurological patients.


Signal Detection sIGNAL G. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Czech, Slovakian, Russian and Slovenian!

NeW





„Simultaneous Capacity” and „Stress Tolerance” are two of the essential requirements for a multitude of professions. The present test provides a reliable way to measure both constructs.

ApplicationSIMKAP is primarily intended for personnel selection, ca-reer counseling, diagnosis and assessment. Additional ar-eas of use are traffic psychology (especially railway and aviation psychology), military psychology as well as within clinical settings.

Theoretical backgroundOperationally SIMKAP is based on the definition of Simulta-neous Capacity and Stress Tolerance. Simultaneous Capacity is defined as the performance achieved when simultaneously dealing with routine tasks and tasks demanding cognitive performances (problem solving). More recently the term multi-tasking has been used to denote this talent. Stress Tolerance is defined as the extent to which perform-ance differs when dealing with corresponding routine tasks under normal (baseline) and stress conditions.

AdministrationSIMKAP consists of five subtests. In the long form (S1) the first three subtests represent the routine tasks and aim at measuring the baseline of Perceptual Speed and Accuracy. They differ in content (Numbers, Letters, Figures). In the short form (S2) perceptual speed and accuracy is measured using only numerical material. The fourth subtest of the long form (the second subtest of the short form) involves uncom-plicated intellectual tasks (problem-solving). The last subtest is the one that measures simultaneous capacity. It combines the previous requirements - both routine tasks of Perceptual Speed/Accuracy and tasks involving problem solving have to be dealt with simultaneously.

Test formsThere is a long form (S1) and a short form (S2).

ScoringThe main scoring variables are Simultaneous Capacity and Stress Tolerance. Moreover, Perceptual Speed and Accu-racy under normal (baseline) and stressful conditions are assessed.

ReliabilityIn the long and short forms the reliability coefficients regard-ing the total performance for Simultaneous Capacity and Stress Tolerance vary between 0.94 and 0.97 and between 0.89 and 0.91 respectively. The parallel test reliability coef-ficients are 0.96 for Perceptual Speed (baseline) and 0.84 for Accuracy (also baseline).

ValidityThe face validity is evident – the respondents think imme-diately of real situations where several things have to be handled simultaneously. The logical validity is given by the operational definition of Simultaneous Capacity and Stress Tolerance. Content validity has been proven through factor analysis. Prognostic validity has been demonstrated for oc-cupations demanding, amongst other prerequisites, a high degree of Simultaneous Capacity and Stress Tolerance. Cri-teria used were “completed occupational education without complications” and “poor performance on the job”.A further study on prognostic validity carried out by the Swedish Marine showed that the SIMKAP differentiates per-fectly among speed boat commanders.

NormsNorms of a sample of 436 Austrian adults are available for the long form (S1). The norms are also broken down by level of education and age. The short form (S2) was normed on 285 Austrian adults. The norms of the short form are also broken down by level of education and age.

Testing timeii Long form (S1): approximately 40 minutes (including inst-ruction and practice phase). ii Short form (S1): approximately 15 minutes (including inst-ruction and practice phase).

NoteA soundcard with speakers or headphone is required for ad-ministration of SIMKAP.

Now available in Arabic!NeW

Simultaneous Capacity/Multi-TaskingsIMKAPO. Bratfisch, E. Hagman © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





An impressive test with a striking elegance and sophistication in pretending 3 dimensions. The joystick helps to assess the sensomotor coordina-tion precisely.

H. Bauer, G. Guttmann, M. Leodolter, U. Leodolter © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationThis test assesses the coordination of eye-hand, hand-hand, or eye-hand-foot by maneuvering a circular segment that moves on its own about a 3-dimensional room.

Theoretical backgroundThe assumption is that movements are controlled through the use of sensor information coming from current activities. Occurring deviations between target value and actual value are revealed and corrected accordingly (the TOTE princi-ple). The necessary time to coordinate one’s movements is essentially determined by the received and processed feedback information. Two completely separate constructs are assessed: the “Anticipative coordination ability“ refers to sensomotor coordination necessary to maneuver an ele-ment to a pre-set goal (target is known beforehand). The “Reactive coordination ability“ refers to sensomotor coordi-nation necessary to react adequately to an element’s spon-taneous, unpredictable changes of direction (and size) (abil-ity to anticipate movements).

AdministrationThe element selected for this test is a geometrical shape (circular segment) that is easy to describe and is hardly in-fluenced by any previous experiences. The screen depicts a room with a target position (green bars forming an upside-down “T”) and a maneuverable element (yellow circular segment). The circular segment starts mov-ing about the room in unpredictable directions (that remain the same for all respondents). All test forms include a pre-ceding instruction and practice phase.

Test formsThere are four test forms:ii S1: Short form (screening; 10 minutes)ii S2: Standard form (15 minutes) ii S3: Long form (higher measurement accuracy; 20 minutes)ii S4: Special form for foot pedals (10 minutes).

ScoringThe following seven variables are assessed: “Time in ideal range“, Mean and distribution of “Angle deviation“, “Horizon-tal deviation“, and “Vertical deviation “.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency is situated above r=.90 in all scales.

ValidityThe results of statistical correlation analyses and inter-group comparisons (including other tests and various exter-nal criteria) back up the convergent and discriminant validity of the SMK. Extensive aviation psychological validations (pi-lot selection) have been conducted with the Austrian Federal Army.

NormsTest forms S1-S3 are provided with age- and education-specific samples (n=239). Test form S4 can be compared to age-, gender-, and education-specific samples (n=189).

Testing timeInstruction: about 5 minutes.S1: 10 minutes. S2: 15 minutes. S3: 20 minutes. S4: 10 min-utes.

Sensomotor Coordination sMK

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Czech and Russian!NeW





This test provides a fair and highly reliable assess-ment of the ability to inhibit overlearned answers to simple tasks.

ApplicationRegistration of the color-word interference tendency, i.e. im-pairment of the reading speed or color recognition due to interfering information; applicable to adults.

Theoretical backgroundThe present form of the Stroop Interference Test is the computerized Color- Word interference paradigm by Stroop (1935). It is based on the assumption that reading speed of a color-word is slower, if the word is written in a differently colored font. There is always a delay in naming the color of this word, if color and color-word do not match. This para-digm results in two experimental conditions without interfer-ence influences:1. determination of the reading speed of a color word alone

and2. determination of the color naming speed. This initial performance is used as “baseline” and can be re-lated to the two so-called interference conditions, which are described below:1. reading speed alone with the experimental set-up “color

interference”: reading speed of the color word decreases if the word is written in a different color,

and2. the experimental set-up “word interference”, where nam-

ing the color is made more difficult since color-word and color in which the color word is written do not match.

AdministrationThe task is to press the correct respective entry field or color button as fast as possible.

Test formsGenerally four test forms are available. Test forms S4, S7 and S10 determine first the “baseline” then the “interference condition”. The three test forms vary as regards the input medium and the instructions (the respondent names/does not name the color aloud).Test form S8 differentiates between so-called “congruent” items – color and meaning of the word match - and “incon-gruent” items – color and meaning of the word DO NOT match.

ScoringThe main variables are reading interference (the difference of the reaction time medians of the ”reading interference condition” and the “reading baseline”) and the naming inter-ference (the difference of the reaction time medians of the “naming interference condition” and the “naming baseline”).Additionally, the following variables are issued for each indi-vidual test part: ”Median reaction time“ and the ”Number of incorrect answers“.The test protocol shows each single reaction of the respond-ent with reaction time of the respondent and evaluation of the reaction.

ReliabilityThe split-half reliabilities for the norm sample varied be-tween r=.85 und r=.99.

ValidityThe validity of the test STROOP-Tests is confirmed by numerous comparative examinations with clinical groups and healthy people (extreme group validation), as well as by examinations regarding its convergent and divergent validity. The computerized form was designed exactly ac-cording to the paradigm of the color-word interference by Stroop, taking into account further scientific developments (e.g. Bäumler, 1985). It proved that patients with cerebral le-sions require much more time to do tasks under interference conditions, and that the test STROOP differentiates reliably between patients and healthy people (c.f. Perret, 1974; in Wittling, 1983; Beaumont, 1987).

NormsA comparative sample of N=254 normal people is available for form S4. A standardization to normal persons (repre-sentatively) is available in each case for forms S7 (N=343) and S8 (N=327). They consist of data from the Schuhfried Company’s research laboratory.


Stroop Interference TestsTROOPG. Schuhfried © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

NeW Now available in Spanish, French, Czech, Russian, Slovenian and Slovakian!

NeW





The assessment of vigilance based on monotonous monitoring tasks is realistic, valid and highly reli-able.


ApplicationAssessment of attention in the form of sustained vigilance in a low-stimulus observation situation; suitable for use with individuals aged 6 and over.

Theoretical backgroundChallenges involving vigilance are characterized by the fol-lowing conditions:- a lengthy test requires uninterrupted vig-ilance of the subject; the signals which need to be attended to appear irregularly and do not automatically attract atten-tion. The stimuli presented therefore need to be of relatively low intensity and critical events need to occur relatively in-frequently. As a general principle a maximum of 60 critical stimuli per hour is suggested. The decline in performance in vigilance experiments is explained by the lowering of the subject’s activation level and the attendant increase in re-sponse latency. According to neurophysiological activation theory, stimulus poverty leads to the cortex being insuffi-ciently stimulated by the ascending reticular activating sys-tem (ARAS). The cerebral cortex therefore fails to receive the wake-up impulse needed to sustain particular activities; this results in psychological exhaustion and hence in a de-cline in performance efficiency. It is this situation which has given rise to the concept of being “overchallenged by under-stimulation”.

AdministrationA white dot moves along a circular path in small jumps. Sometimes the dot makes a double jump; when this happens the respondent must react by pressing a button

Test formsii S1: The dots that make up the circular path are shown on the screen as small circles. This form differentiates only among performances that are well below average; it is intended primarily for use with patients whose vigilance is thought to be significantly impaired. Significant stimuli ap-pear considerably more frequently than in forms S2 and S4.ii S2: In this form the path is not marked out on the screen. The respondent must assess whether the white dot has made a double jump (=critical stimulus) or not.ii S4: Identical to S2, but the length of the test is increased to 66 minutes.

ScoringThe following variables are calculated: Number of correct, Number of incorrect, Mean value of reaction time correct (sec.), Gradient of correct and Gradient of reaction time cor-rect together with the associated measures of exactitude.

ReliabilityDepending on the test version and the comparison sample, the following split-half reliabilities were obtained for the main variables: Number of correct: r=0.65 – r=0.95; Number of incorrect: r=0.69 – r=0.93, Mean value of reaction time correct: r=0.87 – r=0.99.

ValidityCriterion validity is given: all the criteria required in the most important theories for the measurement of vigilance are met. Tests of extreme group validity found that patients with right-hemisphere cerebral lesions obtained significantly worse results than patients with comparable left-hemisphere brain injury.

Normsii S1: sample of adults N=292, sample of children/young people aged 6 – 17 N=619, Swedish job-seekers N=245, traffic-psychological clients N=143 and neurological pati-ents N=51.ii S2: Austrian norm sample N=271, sample of psychiatric patients N=111, Swedish job-seekers N=490 and Swedish applicants for technical occupations N=367. ii S4: Comparison scores of N=114 patients with sleep apnoea are available.


Vigilance VIGIL

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Slovakian, Slovenian and Czech!

NeW



ApplicationAssessment of sub-functions of attention, suitable for re-spondents from the age of 7.

Theoretical backgroundModern views of the dimensionality of attention can be summarised by the model proposed by van Zomeren and Brouwer (1994). One of the key features of this model is the distinction between the intensity and selectivity aspects of attention; each of these aspects can in turn be broken down into more specific components. The intensity aspect of attention comprises two elements, alertness and vigi-lance; alertness involves the short- and longer-term arousal of attention, while vigilance relates to the sustaining of this arousal. With regard to the selectivity aspect of attention processes the model distinguishes between focused or se-lective attention and divided attention.The spatial orienting of attention is a separate, additional di-mension. It does not form part of the model described above (Posner et al. 1978, 1984) but is included in more recent taxonomies (Sturm 2005). Both Posner and Raichle (1994) and Fernandez-Duque and Posner (2001) distinguish three types of attention networks: a) Orienting (corresponds to the network of spatial direc-tion of attention), b) Vigilance (corresponds to the intensity dimension) and c) Executive Attention (corresponds roughly to the selectivity dimension).

AdministrationThe WAF test battery consists of 6 tests that can be admin-istered independently of each other or, as a test battery, in any desired combination. In addition, WAFW can be used to make a differential assessment of sensory impairments.

ii WAFW – Pre-tests for perception functionsii WAFA – Alertness ii WAFV – Vigilance / sustained attention ii WAFS – Selective attentionii WAFF – Focused attentionii WAFG – Divided attentionii WAFR – Spatial attention and visual field / extinction - neglect

For each of the WAF tests different test forms are available, enabling dimensions of attention to be assessed under dif-ferent presentation modalities. There are thus separate sub-tests for visual, auditory and crossmodal presentation. In some subtests of the WAF test battery automated and controlled aspects of attention are measured separately; the stimuli either become more prominent because the intensity level is increased (“popping out”), or they become less promi-nent because their intensity is decreased and cognitively con-trolled “top down” processes are then required. Both attention processes are relevant in everyday life; both can interact and both can be selectively impaired, for example as a result of brain damage, since they are based on different cerebral net-works (Corbetta & Schulman 2002).

WAFWIn order to exclude the possibility that perceptual impair-ments may influence the processing of the stimuli used in WAF, thus impeding reliable diagnosis, WAFW can be used before the start of an assessment to determine whether the respondent has the perceptual ability necessary for comple-tion of the WAF tests.

WAFAWAFA measures reaction time in response to simple visual or auditory stimulus material. The stimulus is presented ei-ther with or without a warning signal in the same stimulus modality or the contrasting one (intrinsic vs. phasic alert-ness). A special standardisation process enables fatigue or stress parameters to be measured.

WAFVIn WAFV the respondent is presented with visual and audi-tory stimuli that occasionally diminish somewhat in intensity. The person’s task is to respond to these occasional cases; when sustained attention is being measured they constitute around 25% of the stimuli while in the case of vigilance they make up some 5% of the stimuli.

On account of their theory-led construction basis the tests of the WAF battery can be used for the differentiated assessment of almost all the sub-functions of attention which are currently regarded as relevant.

Perception and Attention FunctionsWAFW. Sturm © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Corresponding training in

ALERT

VIG

WAFA

WAFV

SELECTWAFS

FOCUSWAFF

DIVIDWAFG

SPACEWAFR

All WAF tests now available in Slovakian, Czech, Dutch and Turkish!WAFR and WAFS now available in Chinese!WAFG now available in Spanish!

NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road



Perception and Attention Functions WAF

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

WAFRThe spatial orienting of attention is measured using either 4 or 8 spatial positions in a task similar to a Posner paradigm. Peripheral (exogenous) and central (endogenous) spatial cues are used. In the neglect test stimuli are presented at various positions in the right or left visual field or simultane-ously in equivalent positions in both halves of the field of vision (extinction condition).WAFFThe respondent is presented - depending on the subtest – with relevant visual or auditory stimuli against a background of distracting stimuli. The person’s task is to respond when two predefined changes in relevant stimuli occur consecu-tively; all other stimuli are to be ignored.

WAFSThe respondent receives relevant and irrelevant stimuli in one or both presentation modalities; the task is to react to changes in the relevant stimuli while ignoring irrelevant ones.

WAFGThe respondent receives stimuli on two visual channels or on one visual one and one auditory one. The task is to moni-tor both channels to determine whether one of the stimuli changes twice in succession.

Test forms / subtests:WAFW: 4 test formsSeparate forms for distinguishing brightness, shape, tone-pitch and volume

WAFA: 6 subtestsIntrinsic (visual), phasic (unimodal visual), phasic (cross-modal visual/auditory), intrinsic (auditory), phasic (unimodal auditory), phasic (cross-modal auditory/visual)

WAFV: 4 test forms, 2 short forms (sustained attention 15 minutes) for children and young peopleSeparate forms for vigilance (visual), vigilance (auditory), sustained attention (visual), sustained attention (auditory). Separate short forms for sustained attention (visual) and sus-tained attention (auditory).

WAFR: 5 subtestsSubtests with either 4 or 8 stimulus positions and peripheral or central cues. In addition a test for visual field / neglect under extinction conditions.

WAFF: 3 subtestsUnimodal (visual), unimodal (auditory), crossmodal

WAFS: 3 subtestsUnimodal (visual), unimodal (auditory), crossmodal

WAFG: 2 subtestsUnimodal (visual), crossmodal

ScoringIn all WAF tests the reaction times and the various error types are scored. For most of the variables a norm comparison is also carried out, yielding percentile ranks and T scores.

ReliabilityEspecially given the short testing time, the reliabilities (Cron-bach’s alpha) obtained for the WAF tests are very good.

ii WAFA: depending on subtest between r=0.93 and r=0.98 (children and young people 0.92 - 0.97)ii WAFV: depending on test form between r=0.96 and r=0.99 (children and young people 0.96 - 0.97)ii WAFR: depending on test form between r=0.88 and r=0.97 (children and young people 0.92 - 0.94)ii WAFF: depending on subtest between r=0.93 and r=0.97 (children and young people 0.91 - 0.96)ii WAFS: depending on subtest between r=0.94 and r=0.97 (children and young people 0.93 - 0.94)ii WAFG: depending on subtest between r=0.96 and r=0.97 (children and young people 0.96)

ValidityA study of the tests’ construct validity involving a sample of N=256 adult respondents and 270 children and young peo-ple provided empirical confirmation of the theoretical model on which the WAF test battery is based and was able to distinguish it from other models.

NormsFor all WAF tests norms representative of the general popu-lation are available; the norms relate to N=295 individuals in the age range 16 - 77. The norms are available both for the sample as a whole and also separated according to educa-tional level. In addition, all WAF tests provide raw scores adjusted for age effects for the main variables; this is a particularly efficient method of standardisation for age. A norm sample of N=270 children and young people in the age range 7- 17 is also available.

Testing timeThe time required to complete the individual WAF tests is relatively short. It is therefore possible to create batteries of tests for complex assessment purposes without requiring too much of the respondent in terms of time or motivational commitment. It is usually not necessary to administer each test in all stimulus modalities. This must be decided by the user, taking into account any information about a patient’s difficulties or disabilities that has already been gathered. The test results cannot be interpreted with confidence unless the client/patient meets the sensory and motor requirements for satisfactory completion of the test.

ii WAFW: approx. 2 mins. for each pre-testii WAFA: approx. 5 mins. for each subtestii WAFV: 15 – 30 mins., depending on test formii WAFR: approx. 5 mins. for each test formii WAFF: approx. 10 mins. for each subtestii WAFS: approx. 8 mins. for each subtestii WAFG: approx. 12 mins. for each subtest

NoteA standard USB headset is required for administration of the auditory and crossmodal subtests of the WAF tests.




ApplicationEstimation of speed and movement of objects in space.

Theoretical backgroundAn important function in many areas of modern life is an individual’s ability to imagine the effect of a movement and correctly estimate the movement of objects in space. In traffic psychology, aviation psychology and sport this skill is particularly important. Since the ability to estimate move-ment is hard to assess by conventional methods, the ZBA test was developed as part of the Vienna Test System.

AdministrationA green ball appears on the screen, moving slowly. At an unpredictable moment the ball disappears and two red lines appear. One line passes through the point at which the ball has just disappeared. The other is the target line. Anticipa-tion of time is measured by instructing the respondent to indicate when the ball will reach the target line; he does this by pressing a button at what he considers to be the appropri-ate moment. To measure anticipation of movement, the respondent is ad-ditionally asked to indicate the point at which the ball will cross the target line. This is done by means of two keys that control an arrow on the screen. The respondent receives feedback only during the instruction phase; no feedback is given during the test phase.In both the long form S1 and the short form S2 the tasks vary in difficulty.

Test formsThere is a long form (S1) with 48 items, a short form (S2) with 12 items, a linear form (S3) with 8 items, and a linear form for time estimation only (S4) with 30 items.

ScoringAnticipation of time: the time error is measured as the time difference (accurate to hundredths of a second). Anticipation of movement: the position error is measured as the deviation from the correct position, in pixels. It is calculated only for test forms S1 to S3.

ReliabilityReliabilities (internal consistency) obtained for the long form, particularly for anticipation of time, are very high, ranging from r=0.92 to r=0.98. Reliabilities (internal consist-ency) for anticipation of movement in the long form are as follows: Median direction deviation overall r=0.76, Median direction deviation for linear path r=0.69, Median direction deviation for complex path r=0.72, Median direction devia-tion for sinusoidal path r=0.62.

ValidityValidity studies are currently available for a precursor ver-sion of the test. The results of an evaluation study involving a driving test show that in real-life traffic situations the over-estimation of distance causes more problems than underes-timation of distance.

NormsNorm samples varying in size between N=271 are N=433 are available for all forms of the test; some norms are also available separated by age and gender.


ZBA Time/Movement AnticipationH. Bauer, G. Guttmann, M. Trimmel, M. Leodolter, U. Leodolter © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Novel test for the appraisal of the ability to meas-ure speed and movement in space. This ability is especially relevant in traffic psychology.

Now available in Polish, Czech , Russian and Slovakian!

NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road




Personality Structure Inventories

4DPI4-Dimensional Personality Inventory

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

S. Menghin © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationThe 4DPI is a Rasch-homogenous personality structure test, where the answers are given in a wedge-shaped diagram.

Theoretical backgroundThe items of the 4DPI were not designed according to the well-proven “Dictionary method“ (Allport & Odbert) but fol-lowing the Repertory-Grid-Technique (RGT), as the author was only interested in behavioral characteristics that indi-cate the things people have in common or not.The great number of adjectives achieved through the RGT was reduced to 100 by means of the German Monolingual Dictionary “Duden”, edition “Words of semantic fields“, and by an expert rating. The four Rasch-homogenous scales provide sufficient stability, which helped to comply with the aim to design a merely behavior-related instrument that meets high methodical demands.

AdministrationAfter a general instruction, the test items are presented one after the other. The respondent enters his/her answers in a wedge-shaped diagram. This is done by moving a marker to the right (applies more) and to the left (applies less). After the answer has been chosen, the next item appears immedi-ately. No item can be corrected afterwards.


ScoringThe following four dimensions are assessed: ii Extroversionii (In)Compatibilityii Conscientiousnessii Sociability

The analogous answering method is dichotomized. However, two different dichotomizations are conducted: for the first two dimensions, a dichotomization at 75:25 was conducted, whereas for the dimensions 3 and 4 it made sense at 50:50. Raw scores for all scales are calculated.

ReliabilityThe reliability as an internal consistency is given due to the compliance with the Rasch model. Nevertheless, retest reli-abilities have been calculated: They are situated (for an in-tervall of three months) between r=.71 and r=.84..

ValidityThe validity of the 4 DPI is given, as a contextual relation between the demand of the items and the demand of a real-life situation is visible (context validity), a high correlation with other tets is given that assess the same abilities, and because there is no correlation with tests that assess other aspects (convergent and discriminant validity). Moreover, validity is given since the test complies with the theoretical ideas. This applies to the 4DPI because the different levels of difficulty of the various test sections can be explained by structural differences (construct validity).

NormsPersonal parameters and norms are indicated as percentile ranks for all subscales. The comparative values result from a sample of n=1004 adults of the ”Normal population“.

Testing timeAbout 15-20 minutes.

As an alternative to conventional rating scales, the questionnaire at hand uses the idea of an anal-ogy scale. It was aimed at counteracting socially desired answers or the preference of certain answering styles, which was proven by the item analysis.


Personality Structure InventoriesPersonality Structure Inventories

As a decision-oriented assessment tool the ques-tionnaire has been constructed modularly. This enables the user to tailor the assessment process to meet their specific demands and focus on a fair and reliable measurement of decision-relevant personality traits.

ApplicationMulti-dimensional, modular personality inventory for assess-ment of the Big Five factors: Emotional Stability, Extrover-sion, Openness, Conscientiousness and Agreeableness.

Theoretical backgroundBFSI is a multi-dimensional questionnaire for measuring the Big Five dimensions of Emotional Stability, Extroversion, Ppenness, Conscientiousness and Agreeableness. Each di-mension is measured by means of six subscales. Selection of these subscales was based on analysis of various Big Five questionnaires available in German and English and on stud-ies of the predictive validity of the Big Five and its sub-facets in educational and occupational psychology. The question-naire was developed using a combined top-down and bot-tom-up approach in several phases. During the development phase the process of item construction was increasingly influ-enced by current ideas on automatic item generation, which helped to ensure scaling fairness within and across the dif-ferent language versions. Evidence of the scaling fairness and dimensionality of the test has been obtained in various studies using the Partial Credit Model (Masters, 1982) and multi-group confirmatory factor analysis.

AdministrationAfter general instructions have been provided the test items are presented one by one. Using a four-point answer scale, respondents indicate the extent to which the presented ad-jective or statement applies to them. As soon as an answer has been entered the next item is presented. Once entered, answers cannot be corrected.


ScoringRaw scores and the corresponding person parameters are calculated for the all the subscales presented on the basis of the Partial Credit Model (Masters, 1982). If more than one subscale is selected for one of the Big Five factors, a person parameter is also calculated for that factor on the basis of the results of the confirmatory factor analysis. In addition, T-scores and percentages are calculated and reported for each test score. The results are displayed in tabular form and as a profile. The program also checks the consistency of the test scores within each of the five higher-level factors, using methods of psychometric single-case analysis.

ReliabilityBecause the Partial Credit Model (Masters, 1982) applies, the internal consistency of the 30 subscales is given both within and across the two language versions. The reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the individual subscales

variy between 0.70 and 0.90. The reliability coefficients of the higher-level Big Five factors vary between 0.80 and 0.97, depending on the subscale selected. These results hold for both the German and the English versions of BFSI.

ValidityThe content validity of the individual subscales is given on account of the theory-based item construction of the indi-vidual scales. In addition, the author provides evidence that respondents’ test behaviour can be entirely explained by the item characteristics and the individual differences in the la-tent personality traits that are the object of measurement. Further evidence of validity is provided by factor analysis studies that have investigated the questionnaire’s factor structure. The results of these studies confirm the question-naire’s theoretically postulated factor structure within each of the language versions and for both versions together. The available evidence of validity has been complemented by meta-analytical studies of the criterion validity of the Big Five and some selected studies of the criterion validity of the questionnaire described here. The results demonstrate that the personality traits measured by BFSI can contribute to prediction of success in work or training.

NormsNorms are available for N=1000 German-speaking indi-viduals aged between 14 and 79 and for N=520 English-speaking individuals aged between 14 and 70. Both norms are also available partitioned according to age, gender and educational level.

Testing timeThe administration time depends on the subscales selected. If all the subscales are selected the time required for the test is approximately 18 minutes.

Big-Five Structure InventoryBFsIM. Arendasy © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

NEW

Now available in Croatian, Hungarian, Russian and French!

NeW


Personality Structure Inventories

NeWThis test provides a reliable assessment of the three personality factors extroversion, emotional-ity, and adventurousness according to Eysenck. One of the remarkable features of this test is the highly stable structure of its factors throughout the vari-ous cultural backgrounds.

ApplicationThe EPP6 test is a multi-dimensional modular personality inventory for assessing the three dimensions of extraver-sion, emotionality, and adventurousness as described by Eysenck.

Theoretical backgroundThe EPP6 is a multi-dimensional questionnaire based on the personality theory of Eysenck. On account of the wide bandwidth of the Five Factor Model, Eysenck’s factors of extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism can be readily incorporated into the overall classification structure of this model. These universal factors enable a more individual perspective to be adopted. However, the dimensions have not become superfluous; the intention is that they should be underpinned by these factors. The three dimensions mentioned in the EPP6, namely extraversion, emotionality (neuroticism) and adventurousness (psychoticism) confirm this theory and summarise the scores obtained on the seven subscales. In addition, an honesty scale has been added to the questionnaire.

AdministrationAfter general instructions have been provided the test items are presented one by one. Respondents enter their answers on a three-point scale (“Yes”, “No”, “Can’t decide”). As soon as an answer has been entered the next item appears. It is not possible to correct preceding items.

Test formsThe long form S1 consists of 440 items (21 subscales); the short form S2 consists of 200 items (9 subscales).

ScoringRaw scores are given for all the subscales, the honesty scale and the number of “Can’t decide” responses. The raw scores on the three dimensions are calculated from the scales assigned to those dimensions.

ReliabilityFor Form S1 the reliability scores (internal consistency) range from r=0.56 (tough-mindedness) to r=0.85 (inferiority, unhappiness) for men and from r=0.41 (tough mindedness) to r=0.89 (unhappiness) for women. For Form S2 reliabilities range from r=0.68 (irresponsibility) to r=0.89 (unhappiness) for women and from r=0.74 (assertiveness) to r=0.85 (un-happiness) for men.

ValidityFactor analysis reveals a clear three-factor structure. The emotionality factor explains 27.2% of the variance, the adventure factor 17.9% and the extraversion factor 10.1% (cumulatively 55.1%). These findings were replicated by Ey-senck, Barrett, Wilson & Jackson (1992) and Costa & Mc-Crae (1995). In addition, Costa & McCrae (1995) provide some alternative factor solutions that are of particular inter-est with regard to the Five Factor theory. Furthermore, the factorial validity of the EEP6 has been shown to apply across different cultures and age groups; highs level of equivalence are found in the factor structures obtained from these differ-ent samples (Eysenck, Wilson & Jackson, 2000).

NormsThe norms are quoted in percentile ranks and T-scores for all the subscales and dimensions. The norm sample of the paper-and-pencil version of the EPP6 was used, consisting of N=1394 respondents. A norm sample of N=222 representative of the general Aus-trian population is also available.


Eysenck Personality Profiler V6 ePP6H. J. Eysenck, G. D. Wilson, C. J. Jackson © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Italian, Hungarian, Dutch and Arabic!

NeW


Special Personality TestsPersonality Structure Inventories

Comprehensive questionnaire test battery for the assessment of temperament and character, vali-dated by a multitude of genetic studies.

ApplicationThis test measures four temperament dimensions and three character dimensions (main dimensions) as well as 24 di-mensions of a lower order.

Theoretical backgroundTemperament is defined as the automatic emotional reac-tions to an experience. These are partly hereditary and they stay relatively stable during one’s entire life. Contrary to that, character refers to self-concepts, as well as to individ-ual differences in aims and values, which influence the free-dom of decision, the intentions, and the importance of one’s experiences. Socio-cultural learning influences people’s characters differently and constantly changes in the course of life. Each of these personality aspects is in interaction with the others, which guarantees adaptation to life’s experi-ences and which influences the susceptibility to emotional and behavior disorders. The most prominent characteristic of this questionnaire is the multitude of clinical and genetic studies, which validate the TCI’s results.

Administration240 questions that must be answered with „yes“ or „no“ are presented to the respondents. There is no obligation to an-swer; unanswered questions are presented again at the end. The seven scales of higher order can also be selected indi-vidually.Test forms:The computerized version of the TCI consists of the con-verted paper-and-pencil version and contains 240 items.

Test formsThe computerized version of the TCI consists of the con-verted paper-and-pencil version and contains 240 items.

ScoringThe scoring is effectuated for the seven dimensions of high-er order as well as for the 24 dimensions of lower order. The four temperament dimensions measured are novelty seek-ing, harm avoidance, reward dependence and persistence. The three character dimensions measured are self-directed-ness, cooperativeness and self-transcendence.

ReliabilityThe inner consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) varies between r=.54 (persistence) and r=.83 (novelty seeking) for the norm sample of healthy Germans.

ValidityA multitude of validity studies were conducted. They showed correlations between novelty seeking and bad behavior in the military (r=0.35) and type 2 alcoholism (r=0.38). A study by Svrakic et al. (1993) found that the existence of some kind of personality disorder was highly determined by low point scores in self-directedness and cooperativeness. The TCI manual reports about studies – some of them using a precur-sor model of the TCI – that examine the genetic stability and the variability of the character dimensions. For example com-plex studies of more than 1400 pairs of twins showed that the four temperament dimensions novelty seeking, harm avoid-ance, reward dependence and persistence are genetically ho-mogenous (Heath, Madden, Cloninger & Martin, 1994). There are also very comprehensive studies of the neurocognitive correlates of the temperament dimensions The TCI manual also reports studies of neuro-chemical and neuro-endocrino-logic correlates of the temperament dimensions.

NormsIn addition to the norms generated with the paper-and-pencil version - based on a German sample of N=509 healthy volun-teers - a norm sample of N=463 people is available. The latter norms were generated in the research laboratory of the Dr. G. Schuhfried GmbH with the computerized version of the test and the sample consists of 208 (44.9 %) men and 255 (55.1 %) women.

Testing timeWhen all scales are presented, about 30 minutes.

Temperament and Character InventoryTCIC. Cloninger, T. Przybeck, D. Svrakic, R. Wetzel © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Special Personality Tests

AGDIAAggression Assessment MethodE. Raab-Steiner © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationInventory for the differential assessment of aggressivity.

Theoretical backgroundThis procedure makes use of Rost & Schermer’s model (1987) for the differential assessment of performance anxi-ety, but in this case the model is applied to the construct of aggressivity. This approach has been used previously by Lefevre (1997) in assessing the phenomenon of stress.

Separate assessments are made in the four areas of Trig-gers, Manifestation, Coping and Stabilisation. In view of the complexity of the phenomenon of aggressivity this multi-faceted approach is significantly more appropriate than the simplified uni-dimensional form of assessment employed in most of the currently available inventories. When planning and implementing intervention measures it is particularly im-portant to have information available in all four areas.

AdministrationThe items are presented in combinations of four in a “forced choice” format like that used in, for example, the B-I-T (Ca-reer Interest Test) of Irle and Allehoff (1984). This format is intended to counteract any attempt to falsify the answers. .The subject is instructed to mark the statement which ap-plies least to him with a minus sign and the one which is most applicable with a plus sign. After a brief instruction phase an example is given to check that the instructions have been understood.Each statement is presented to the subject twice, with differ-ent alternative answers on each occasion. For the dominant aspects of Manifestation and Coping the strength of these traits is then assessed on an analogue scale.

The questionnaire consists of a total of 48 qualitative items and a varying number of quantitative ones. It is not possible to omit an item. The number of quantitative items presented depends on the results of the qualitative items.

Test formsOne test form is available; it is administered without a time limit.

ScoringThe raw scores for the different scales are calculated as the sum of their component items. The results protocol consists of a results table with the raw and standard scores of all the scales and the working time, as well as a test profile and a test protocol which records the subject’s responses.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the quanti-tative scales lies between α=0.70 and α=0.90. The internal consistency of the qualitative scales lies between α=0.56 and α=0.74.

ValidityBoth for people convicted of offences and for a normal sam-ple there are significant medium-strong correlations with scales of the FAF aggressivity questionnaire (Hampel & Selg, 1998).

NormsA representative norm sample (n=427) is available, covering an age range of 16 – 91 and separated by gender, age and education.

Testing timeThe time taken to administer the test varies between 20 and 30 minutes.

The AGDIA makes it possible to analyse and differ-entiate type and degree of aggressive behavior. Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





AVEM is a diagnostic tool which can be used to as-sess behaviour and experience in relation to work and occupational requirements and from the point of view of health considerations. It identifies the individual’s characteristic stress pattern.

ApplicationThe test is useful primarily for the early identification of health risks and appropriate preventive measures in the form of personal and situational intervention. Its main areas of ap-plication are in personnel development, occupational and organisational structuring, occupational rehabilitation, health guidance and clinical psychological counselling.

Theoretical backgroundThe AVEM is not intended simply to assess symptoms of stress in the form of physical and emotional ailments and complaints. Rather, it is concerned with the way in which people deal with stressful situations and the part they them-selves play in shaping the situations of challenge which they encounter. In adopting this approach the AVEM draws in particular on resource-oriented theories (see e.g. An-tonovsky, 1987).

Structure and contentSelf-assessments are obtained on 11 dimensions which have a theoretical foundation and have been confirmed by factor analysis: Subjective importance of work, Work-relat-ed ambition, Willingness to work until exhausted, Striving for perfection, Distancing ability, Tendency to resignation (in the face of failure), Proactive problem-solving, Inner calm and balance, Experience of success at work, Satisfaction with life, Experience of social support. The relationships between these dimensions are in addition expressed in four patterns of work-related behaviour and experience: G (health), S (taking it easy), A (risk of driving oneself too hard) and B (risk of resignation and depression).

AdministrationAfter the instruction phase, the items are presented in suc-cession on the screen. The respondent enters his answers on a five-point scale coded in both words and symbols, rang-ing from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. It is possible to correct each item once and to omit individual items. All unanswered items are presented again at the end of the test.

Test formsThere is a standard form with 66 items (6 for each dimen-sion) and the short form AVEM-44 with 44 items (4 for each dimension).

ScoringThe results comprise a results table with raw and standard scores for all 11 scales and an individual test profile. In ad-dition, the extent to which each individual’s profile resembles the four reference profiles (patterns) described above is deter-mined by calculating classification probabilities.

ReliabilityAll scales of the AVEM have a high level of internal consist-ency (Cronbach’s α lies between .79 and .87 for the standard form, and between .75 and .83 for the short form). As would be expected, the stability coefficients are somewhat lower, showing that the traits concerned can vary with changes in environment conditions and over time. The AVEM is thus both reliable and sensitive to change. This means that re-peated use of the test can identify work-related or interven-tion-related changes (at both scale and pattern level).

ValidityThe AVEM is a fully validated test. Its validity is evidenced by findings at several levels. Firstly, it has a clear factor and cluster structure which reflects the intention of the test and has been replicated with various samples. Secondly, co-herent correlations with characteristics measured by other scales have been confirmed for the individual scales. Third-ly, the relevance of the four behaviour and experience pat-terns to health has been convincingly demonstrated using a range of internal and external criteria.

NormsThere are two types of underlying norms: Firstly, there are the norms which relate to the scale scores. For both versions (standard and short form) these norms are given for cross-occupational samples, specific occupational groups, students/trainees and patients; a distinction is made between German and Austrian norm samples. The norms are based on the data of 31,979 individuals. Secondly, each respondent’s similarity (expressed in terms of classification probability) to the four reference patterns G, S, A and B can be calculated, and this can also be re-garded as a norm. This summarises the extent to which the individual’s style of behaviour and experience promotes or endangers health.

Testing timeApproximately 12 minutes for the standard form and 8 min-utes for the short form.

Work-related Behaviour and Experience PatternsAVeMU. Schaarschmidt, A. W. Fischer © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Hungarian!NeW





With the AVIS a valid test for the self-evaluation of aggressive behavior in road traffic is available. What is special about this test is that normal situa-tions and stressful ones are compared.

ApplicationThe test is used to assess the extent and frequency of ag-gressive behavior in traffic.

Theoretical backgroundThe test is based on the assessment of dimensions relevant to aggression that have been derived by a sound theoretical method and confirmed by factor analysis.

AdministrationThe standard form S1 of AVIS contains 130 test items. Sixty-five of these are presented in the first run with standardised instructions. The same 65 items are presented in a second run under stress conditions. The short form S2 consists of only a single run.In responding to the items the respondent can choose from eight answer categories (very rarely to very often). Answers can be entered using the response panel, mouse, keyboard or a touch screen. Each item may be corrected once only, and it is possible to skip individual items. All unanswered items are presented again at the end of the run, but there is no compulsion to answer. In the S1 form this is immedi-ately followed by the instructions for the stress condition; the items are then presented again.

Test formsTwo test forms are available:ii Standard form (S1): standard instructions and stress inst-ructionsii Short form (S2): standard instructions only

ScoringIn the S2 form and the first part of the S1 form of AVIS, the degree and frequency of aggressive driving behavior are measured. In addition, the standard form S1 measures the degree of difference between the first and second working of the test; this provides an indicator of the tendency to give socially desirable answers.The following variables are measured in both forms: Instru-mental aggression, anger, acting out, enjoyment of violence, negativism, social desirability and a total of all the scales ex-cluding social desirability (in the standard form, separately for normal and stress conditions). In the standard form S1 the differences between normal and stress conditions on each scale are also calculated.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency of the test was calculated as Cron-bach’s Alpha. For the normal condition the internal consist-ency (mean value of all scales) is r=0.96; for the stress con-dition it is r=0.97.

ValidityThere are many studies of the construct and criterion valid-ity of AVIS; for a summary see Herzberg (2001a). Construct validation is based on the analysis of inter-indi-vidual differences in the test results, studies of the conver-gent and discriminant validity of AVIS and common factor analyses with tests that have related and divergent validity - these include psychometric personality tests, interpreta-tive tests, driving-related tests and observer ratings. The construct validity of AVIS has been proven. The criteria used were the number of warnings and fines, the current total of points registered with the Central Index of Traffic Offenc-es in Flensburg and the number of points registered in the last three years, the total number of accidents, the number of accidents in which the subject had been at fault and the number of times the driving licence had been revoked. Be-cause of the distribution characteristics of the criteria and the associated problems of reliability (Klebelsberg, 1982), the analysis of the correlations between the AVIS scales and the criteria was carried out using structural equation models. Significant statistical correlations between AVIS and all the criteria were found.

NormsNorms are currently available only for the standard form S1. For all the variables overall norms from a sample of N=342 individuals are available, as well as age-specific and edu-cation-specific norms. For the short form S2 only the norms of the standard form are available at present. Work on the production of separate norms for the short form S2 is cur-rently in progress.


NeW

AVIsAggressive Driving BehaviorP. Yorck Herzberg, J. Guthke © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Italian, Czech, Dutch and Slovakian!

NeW





The Differential Stress Inventory makes it possible to analyse and differentiate stress behaviour and allocate to types of stress experience.

ApplicationThe Differential Stress Inventory makes it possible to meas-ure and differentiate between stress triggers, symptoms of stress, available coping strategies and risks of stress stabi-lisation. Both the extent and the cause of stress are identi-fied.

Theoretical backgroundThe idea of developing the Differential Stress Inventory arose from the need to create a tool which would identify the way in which an individual deals with stress and which would do justice to the multi-dimensionality of the construct. In view of the practical implications for counselling and therapy, a behaviour-theory model was considered to be the best basis for the construction of a stress questionnaire. The theoretical basis of the construction of the Differen-tial Stress Inventory was the concept of the diagnosis of achievement anxiety put forward by Rost and Schermer (1987). The similarity between anxiety and stress which has often been remarked upon in the literature does indeed make such an approach seem appropriate. The tool is made up of 9 dimensions which have been ob-tained by factor analysis and which measure different as-pects of the causes and symptoms of stress, coping strate-gies and stress stabilisation. It is also possible to assign subjects to one of five stress types, depending on how they experience and respond to stress: normal, overstressed, stress resistant, low stress – successful coping, high stress – successful coping.

AdministrationAfter instructions have been given the items are presented sequentially on the screen. The subject indicates his re-sponses on a four-point verbally-marked scale (from is al-most always true to is almost never true). It is not possible to omit items. The item immediately preceding the current one can be corrected once.

Test formsThere are two test forms (S1 – for employed persons/adults and S2 – for school-age students/young people). Each form contains 124 items relating to four aspects of stress: causes of stress, symptoms of stress, coping and stress stabilisation.

ScoringThe raw scores on the scales and the response times for each item are measured. Output is provided in the form of a results table with raw scores and percentiles for all the scales together with the individual test profile.

The following normed variables are covered: ii Causes of stress: everyday events; interaction with others; anxieties about life circumstances. ii Symptoms of stress: physical; emotional/cognitive. ii Coping: palliative; instrumental.ii Stress stabilisation: external; internal.

In addition, classification probabilities are calculated which identify the extent to which an individual’s profile resembles five different reference profiles.

ReliabilityAll scales of the DSI have a high degree of internal consist-ency (Cronbach’s Alpha between .70 and .94).

ValiditySince the scales of the DSI have been obtained by factor analysis, construct validity as understood in classical test theory can be regarded as given.

NormsNorms for S1 were obtained for a representative sample of n = 378 individuals (177 men, 201 women) in Austria in 2003 and 2004. Norms are also available differentiated by gender, edu-cational background and age.

The norms for S2 were drawn up from a sample of N=606 children and young people (232 boys, 374 girls) in Germany in 2007. The norms are also available differentiated by gen-der and age.


Differential Stress InventoryDsIS. Lefèvre, K. D. Kubinger © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Chinese, Czech and Italian!

NeW





The Differential Stress Inventory HR provides a de-tailed analysis of stress behaviour and categorizes individuals according to stress type. It is a version of the Differential Stress Inventory DSI containing items that have been specially adapted for use in the field of HR.

ApplicationThe Differential Stress Inventory makes it possible to meas-ure and differentiate between stress triggers, symp-toms of stress, available coping strategies and risks of stress stabi-lisation. Both the extent and the cause of stress are identi-fied.

Theoretical backgroundThe idea of developing the Differential Stress Inventory arose from the need to create a tool which would identify the way in which an individual deals with stress and which would do justice to the multi-dimensionality of the construct. In view of the practical implications for counselling and ther-apy, a behaviour-theory model was considered to be the best basis for the construction of a stress questionnaire. The theoretical basis of the construction of the Differential Stress Inventory was the concept of the diagnosis of achieve-ment anxiety put forward by Rost and Schermer (1987). The similarity between anxiety and stress which has often been remarked upon in the literature does indeed make such an approach seem appropriate. The tool is made up of 9 dimensions which have been ob-tained by factor analysis and which measure different as-pects of the causes and symptoms of stress, coping strate-gies and stress stabilisation. It is also possible to assign subjects to one of five stress types, depending on how they experience and respond to stress: normal, overstressed, stress resistant, low stress – successful coping, high stress – successful coping.

AdministrationAfter instructions have been given the items are presented sequentially on the screen. The subject indicates his re-sponses on a four-point verbally-marked scale (from is al-most always true to is almost never true). It is not possi-ble to omit items. The item immediately preceding the current one can be corrected once.

Test formsThere are two test forms (S1 – for employed persons/adults and S2 – for school-age students/young people). Each form contains 124 items relating to four aspects of stress: causes of stress, symptoms of stress, coping and stress stabilisa-tion.

ScoringThe raw scores on the scales and the response times for each item are measured. Output is provided in the form of a results table with raw scores and percentiles for all the scales together with the individual test profile. The following normed variables are covered:

ii Causes of stress: everyday events; interaction with others; anxieties about life circumstances. ii Symptoms of stress: physical; emotional/cognitive. ii Coping: palliative; instrumental.ii Stress stabilisation: external; internal.

In addition, classification probabilities are calculated which identify the extent to which an individual’s profile resembles five different reference profiles.

ReliabilityAll scales of the DSI have a high degree of internal consis-tency (Cronbach’s Alpha between .70 and .94).

ValiditySince the scales of the DSI have been obtained by factor analysis, construct validity as understood in classical test theory can be regarded as given.

NormsNorms for S1 were obtained for a representative sample of n = 378 individuals (177 men, 201 women) in Austria in 2003 and 2004. Norms are also available differentiated by gen-der, educational background and age.

The norms for S2 were drawn up from a sample of N=606 children and young people (232 boys, 374 girls) in Germany in 2007. The norms are also available differentiated by gen-der and age.


DsIHR Differential Stress Inventory HRS. Lefèvre, K. D. Kubinger © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

NEW

NEW: Now available in Russian!NeW





Use of the EBF to identify an individual’s current recovery-stress state enables appropriate inter-vention to be put in place. Its high reliability means that it can also be used to monitor the effective-ness of intervention measures.

ApplicationThe EBF measures an individual’s current level of recovery and stress – his or her “recovery-stress state”. It uses retro-spectively gathered information on the frequency of stress-ful situations and reactions to them and on recovery activi-ties within the last three days.

Theoretical backgroundThe stress-strain concept, on which the EBF is based, is closely linked with models developed in psychological stress research. Stress is viewed as a state of mental strain which may continue for some time after the source of the stress has been removed. The Recovery-Stress Questionnaire measures stress and its consequences. It can be used to draw conclusions about the level of strain on the individual. Since strain places demands on resources, and these re-sources may become exhausted as stress levels rise, the Recovery-Stress Questionnaire also covers recovery activi-ties. The recovery aspect is assessed in terms of the bal-ance between strain and recovery in the last three days.

AdministrationAfter the instruction phase, the items are presented in suc-cession on the screen. Respondents enter their answers on a seven-point scale (ranging from “never” to “always”). An answer may be corrected once only. All unanswered items are presented again at the end of the run, but there is no compulsion to answer them.

Test formsThe long form EBF-72/3 consists of 72 items. The two paral-lel short forms EBF-24A/3 and EBF-24B/3 each contain 24 items. These test forms are standardised self-assessment tests that use 12 subscales to measure the frequency of stress and recovery.

ScoringRaw scales are calculated for all subscales. The raw scores for the two variables Strain and Recovery are calculated from the relevant subscales. The scores are then compared with orientation scores for all subscales.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency of the scales of the long form lies between r=0.80 and r=0.97. Test-retest reliabilities after 24 hours are between r=0.79 and r=0.91.

ValidityThe intercorrelation structure was found to be largely sam-ple-independent. Correlations with respondents’ current state of mind, as measured by the adjective list, were in ac-cordance with the construct. In a study of medical students one day before, one day after and three weeks after a dif-ficult examination, the average recovery-strain balance as depicted by the standard form was in accordance with ex-pectations. The Recovery-Stress Questionnaire sensitively depicts the effects of stress management training and other measures and enables performance and health in stress situations to be forecast.

NormsThe recovery-strain state varies over time and as a result of specific stresses and recovery activities. Mean scores of 418 working men and women are available for the EBF-72/3. These should be interpreted as orientation scores rather than as norms and should always be considered against the specific situational background.

Testing timeApprox. 10 minutes for the standard form and 7 minutes for the two parallel short forms.

Recovery-Stress QuestionnaireeBFK. W. Kallus © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





The Leadership Ability Test makes a transparent self-evaluation of one’s own leadership behavior possible. This questionnaire is often regarded as indispensable aid for the new filling of leadership functions.

ApplicationThe Attitude to Leadership test has been developed as an instrument for determining a person’s ability to assume lead-ership responsibility.The Attitude to Leadership test allows the selection and tar-geted development of executives. The test, however, may also serve as an orientation guide to those who are considering striving for a senior position – in order to better realize their own development needs.

Theoretical backgroundThe conception of this test is based on the idea that man-agement success (also) depends on certain personal atti-tudes. There seem to be a number of structural features that are common to all leadership situations, and that require certain personal attitudes.Attitudes are complex structures, which are influenced by cognitive and affective components as well as the form of organization in an institution, its internal rules and regula-tions, and the influence of personal learning and life experi-ence. Last but not least, the concept of attitude has been cho-sen for describing personalities because the answers to the questions of the test unveil (the) attitudes of the respective person.

AdministrationAfter an instruction phase, questions are presented consec-utively on a screen. The subject answers with ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’, and is allowed to make one correction and to skip items. All items that are not answered are again presented at the end of the test, the subject, however, does not have to answer.


ScoringThe raw scores of all scales and the response time for each item are recorded. The score sheet contains a result table with raw and standard scores for all scales as well as working time, and, if required, a test profile and an item analysis protocol of the subject’s entries.

ReliabilityThe consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) of the test’s 10 scales are above 0.70.

ValidityHighly significant correlations have been found between the scales of the Attitude to Leadership test and the external criteria of career success (5 criteria) and leadership behav-ior (5 criteria).

NormsThe norming sample consists of 100 executives (71 depart-ment heads and 29 senior department heads and direc-tors). Five career features (gross income, salary increase, job position, and two salary criteria) that take into account a person’s education level, age, and years of work experi-ence serve as external criteria. A second group of external criteria consists in the description and assessment of the subjects’ leadership behavior by subordinates.

Testing time15-20 minutes.

Attitude to Leadership FeTW. Schmidt © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

OnlinetestNow available in Croatian!NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





This procedure clearly stands out against other personality questionnaires, firstly due to the strong situational context, secondly due to the character-istics in scoring (indication of reference profiles) and thirdly due to the self evaluation concerning the satisfaction/discontent with the evaluated reactions.

ApplicationA self-assessment test for identifying likely behaviour and experience in situations involving social communication, achievement or recreational activities.

Theoretical backgroundThe IPS test calls for self-assessments of likely behaviour and experience in situations that serve as prototypes of typi-cal demands encountered in everyday life. It covers three broad requirement areas involving social and communicative behaviour, achievement behaviour, and health and recrea-tional behaviour. The 80 items are grouped into a number of scales within each requirement area; these scales provide the basis for the creation of a separate for each area. In ad-dition to the self-assessments of behaviour and experience, information from 15 separate items and the 3 scales formed from them is used to assess the respondent’s satis-faction with his/her behaviour.

AdministrationAfter the instructions have been given the items are pre-sented in succession on the screen. The respondent enters his answers on a rating scale. All items must be answered.


ScoringThe scale scores are first calculated as stanine scores. The profile is then created; this is done separately for each of the three areas. Classification probabilities are calculated, indi-cating how closely the individual’s profile conforms to the reference profiles drawn up for each area. Finally, estimated scores and satisfaction scores can be compared.

ReliabilityIPS has good to adequate reliabilities in all scales and pro-files.

ValidityValidity is confirmed by results obtained with different sam-ples and at a number of levels. For both the scales and the profiles there are clear links, in line with the claim to validity, with the dimensions of other tests (FPI-R, AVEM), as well as close correlations with self-assessments and observer rat-ings in relevant types of situation. Overall there is convincing evidence of validity in the sense of construct validation.

NormsNorms of two types are available for the IPS. Firstly, norms for the scale scores are quoted in the usual way (differentiat-ed for a specifically selected calibration sample, general for a num-ber of additional samples). Secondly, the reference profiles provided for each requirement area can be viewed as norms. They serve as a benchmark for the assessment of the patterns of behaviour and experience that are revealed; this assessment focuses primarily on identifica-tion of any need for intervention.

Testing timeApprox. 12-20 minutes.

Inventory for Personality Assessment in SituationsIPs U. Schaarschmidt, A. W. Fischer © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Croatian, Russian and Hungarian!

NeW





This procedure clearly stands out against other personality questionnaires, firstly due to the strong situational context, secondly due to the character-istics in scoring (indication of reference profiles) and thirdly due to the self evaluation concerning the satisfaction/discontent with the evaluated reactions.

ApplicationThe IVPE is used to measure personality traits relevant in the context of a driving-related psychological assessment: readi-ness to take risks, sense of social responsibility, self-control and emotional stability. It includes an honesty scale for moni-toring any tendency to faking.

Theoretical backgroundThe inventory is a computerized personality test measur-ing personality traits that are relevant to traffic psychology: sense of social responsibility, self-control, emotional sta-bility and readiness to take risks. Social behavior in road traffic situations is viewed as being linked above all to the ability and motivation to conform to rules and norms. The measurement of sense of social responsibility is based on the three-component model of the attitude to social values of Stahlberg and Frey (1990). The General Theory of Crime of Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) provides the basis for the construction of the items on the self-control scale. Neuroti-cism, which is defined as the opposite of emotional stabil-ity, is measured by personality traits that Ostendorf (1990) has shown to be the best indicators of this latent personality dimension. The construct of sensation-seeking as a meas-ure of readiness to take risks is assessed by a scale based on the “thrill and adventure-seeking” dimension postulated by Zuckermann (1994). The choice of this subscale is justi-fied by its significance for safe driving behavior (cf. Jonah, 1997).

AdministrationThe respondent rates the degree to which particular state-ments about driving, leisure and work apply to him/herself. The response is entered via the Response Panel, mouse, computer keyboard or touch screen on an answer bar with a sliding marker. It is possible to correct the immediately preceding item.


ScoringThe scoring program recalculates the respondent’s ana-log answer to produce dichotomous scales. The analogue scale is divided in different ways for each scale. The follow-ing variables are measured: Emotional stability, Sense of responsibility, Self control and Adventurousness and need for excitement. The IVPE also includes the Honesty control scale. Results are provided for all the scales in the form of raw scores, T-scores and percentile ranks.

ReliabilityReliability in the sense of internal consistency is given on account of the validity of the Rasch model for the individual scales.

ValidityBecause of the validity of the Rasch model and the theory-based construction of the items (Herle, 2004), the construct validity of the individual scales can be assumed. Criterion validity was demonstrated in a study that com-pared individuals with and without a history of accidents (Herle, 2004). In addition, Sommer et al. (2004) showed that the results on the IVPE of accident-free drivers differed significantly from the results of competent individuals who were referred to a traffic psychological examination center under § 14 (2) FSG-GV (Austrian driving license law - health ordinance). Other validation studies from the field of traffic psychology confirm that the test has adequate validity.

NormsNorms for the IVPE are available for a representative sam-ple of N=489 people.

Testing timeApproximately 15 minutes (including the instruction and practice phase).

Inventory of Driving-related Personality Traits IVPeM. Herle, M. Sommer, M. Wenzl, M. Litzenberger © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Now available in Polish, Portuguese, Dutch and Romanian!

NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Onlinetest




The MMG combines aspects of the Thematic Ap-perception Test (TAT) with those of classic ques-tionnaires. Similar to the TAT, 18 pictures are presented which provide a well-balanced set of situations linked to performance, control, and social acceptance. These pictures are accompanied by statements that represent important motivational states.

ApplicationThe evaluation of motives relating to performance, control, af-filiation and motivation management.

Theoretical backgroundFactor analysis suggests a three-factor constellation: a fear factor (fear of failure, fear of losing control and fear of rejec-tion), a factor representing hopes for success and control and a third factor describing hopes for affiliation.

AdministrationAfter the instruction phase the items (picture and statements) are presented in succession on the screen. The respondent enters his response to each statement on a bipolar (yes/no) scale. It is not possible to omit any of the statements.


ScoringPictures 1-4 are not scored; they function merely as “warm-up” items and serve to increase acceptance of the test. Raw scales are calculated for all scales. The output of results consists of a results table which gives raw and standard scores for all scales; working time is also noted. The test profile and an item analysis protocol giving details of the respondent’s answers can also be viewed if required. The following six variables are calculated:

ii Hope for success (achievement),ii Fear of failure (achievement),ii Hope for control (control),ii Fear of loss of control (control),ii Hope for affiliation (affiliation),ii Fear of rejection (affiliation),

ReliabilityThe internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) of the scales lies between r=.78 and r=.90.

ValidityStudies have shown that individuals with achievement moti-vation perform better on a management training course and individuals with high control motivation benefit more from this kind of training.Wegge, Quaeck and Kleinbeck (1996) investigated the influ-ence of motives – measured by the MMG, the TAT and a questionnaire (AMS) – on subjects’ video game preferences. Subjects were shown three games which they could choose between; the selection consisted of a game involving fight-ing, an adventure game and a simulated motor cycle race. “Fear of failure” was a good predictor for the length of play-ing time. “Fear of losing control” and “fear of failure” were good predictors of the amount of time the subject spent with the games. Individuals with high “hope for affiliation” had by far the strongest preference for the adventure game. When asked about their general preferences with regard to video games, individuals with high “hope for affiliation” men-tioned the games’ colour and music, while individuals with high “hope for success” particularly enjoyed games in which they could determine the difficulty level themselves.

NormsComputer norms are available for a representative sample of for N=390 individuals aged between 16 and 81 who were tested in the research laboratory of the Schuhfried compa-ny. These norms are also available as subsamples sepa-rated according to age and gender.

Testing timeApprox. 8 - 10 minutes.

Multi-Motive GridMMGH. D. Schmalt, K. Sokolowski, T. Langens © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Croatian, Russian and Portuguese!

NeW





Scales for the Assessment of Subjective Occupational Stress and Dissatisfaction sBUsBG. Weyer, V. Hodapp, B. Kirkcaldy © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

This test makes a theoretically grounded and valid assessment of essential aspects of the stress experience and the dissatisfaction in a professional context possible.

ApplicationThis questionnaire is designed to measure stress and dis-satisfaction at work. It is advisable to use it in work- and health-psychological examinations.

Theoretical backgroundAn attempt has been made to measure stress in the work-place in the sense of the theory of Lazarus. What should be measured are not momentary emotional states (this method could only be applied in work situations), but chronic experi-ences of stress. The scales for measuring subjective stress in various areas of life attempt to describe (as accurately as possible) different environments in those aspects that are perceived as stressful.

AdministrationAfter the instructions, questions are presented consecu-tively on the screen. The test respondent answers “correct“ or “incorrect”. One single correction of an item as well as skipping items is allowed. All questions which have not been answered are presented again at the end of the test, but there is no compulsion to answer.

Test formsA short form of 55 items is available.

ScoringThe raw scores for each scale and the response time for each item are recorded. The print comprises a result table with raw and standard scores for all scales and the working time as well as an optional test profile and an item analysis protocol of respondent entries.

ReliabilityThe reliabilities (inner consistency) of the scales range from .77 to .90.

ValidityThe various examinations carried out to check the validity of the SBUSB have all yielded good results.

NormsNorms are based on a sample of 1592 persons. Aside of this norm a representative norm sample is available for N=198 persons aged 18 to 65 years.Moreover norms for the following vocational groups are available:Occupational group – psychosocial and medical professions (N=414)Occupational group – administration and clerical work (N=419). Additionally, age-specific norms of respondents under 29 and over 30 are available here.Occupational group – police (N=572)Occupational group – freelancers and artists (N=187)

Testing time5-10 minutes



All efforts to reach demanding levels of perform-ance criteria notwithstanding, it must not be for-gotten that success in sales or the service industry lies in providing a service for other people. This test is very suited to examine this issue, not least because of its extensive calibration sample.

ApplicationAssessment of aptitude and inclination for activities related to customer orientation.

Theoretical backgroundThe aim of the development of this test was the creation of a diagnostic tool for the assessment of people’s aptitude and inclination for work in the area of customer orientation by recording their attitudes and fields of interest in that area. Well-proven concepts were built, based on self-evaluations of the respondents. According to Stratemann (1991) and Kumpf (1990) the situation of the person working in service and sales can be modeled as an activity, or according to Zi-molong & Sonnenberg (1986) as communication. From an aptitude-diagnostic viewpoint constructs arose that were de-fined according to classic test theory and checked according to certain quality criteria.The scales assess motivational as well as competence-oriented concepts as relatively stable personality traits ob-served over a period of time. The test consists of 94 items, which can be linked to 8 scales. The scales extraversion, empathy, self-monitoring and frustration tolerance meas-ure capacities, which have to be considered prerequisites for customer-oriented behavior. The remaining four scales measure primarily the motivational factors: striving for social acceptance, performance motivation, motivation for providing assistance, and dominance.

AdministrationAfter the instruction the questions are presented one after the other on the monitor. The respondent answers on a four-level continuum from ”Applies to a great extent“ to ”Does not apply at all“. One correction per item is allowed. Skipping items is not possible.

Test formsA short form of 55 items is available.

ScoringThe raw scores of all scales and the response time for each item are recorded. The printout contains a result table with the raw and standard scores for all scales and the working time, and optionally a test profile and an item analysis proto-col of the respondent’s entries.

ReliabilityThe consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the 8 scales vary between r=.50 and r=.79.

ValidityResults for the prognostic and construct validity are cur-rently being examined, as well as the specific role of indi-vidual constructs in the prognosis of aptitude and suitability for certain professional functions, e.g. through configural models. In a sample of 370 bank employees in asset man-agement consulting services, significant correlations were found between the scales of SKASUK and those of MMG (Multi-Motive-Grid).

NormsNorms of a representative norm sample of the general popu-lation in the size of N=306 are available. These data were collected in the research laboratory of the Dr. G. Schuhfried Ges.m.b.H. in the year 2003.A standardization has also been carried out with various mis-cellaneous samples from consulting projects.Data of 1654 people between the age of 17 and 35 are avail-able.


Customer Service and Orientation ScalessKAsUKH. G. Sonnenberg © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Croatian, Arabic, Russian and Portuguese!

NeW


Objective Personality Tests

AHAAttitude towards WorkK. D. Kubinger, J. Ebenhöh © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Croatian and Russian!NeWObjective personality test to assess impulsiveness/reflexivity as well as aspiration level, performance motivation and frustration tolerance.

ApplicationThe subtests of Attitude to Work together comprise an ob-jective test battery that assesses various personality dimen-sions through the presentation of simple tasks.

Theoretical backgroundThe test battery Attitudes to Work provides objective tests (as defined by R.B. Cattell) for investigating both the cog-nitive style Impulsiveness/Reflexivity and the motivational constructs of Aspiration level, Performance motivation and Frustration tolerance. The assessment of performance moti-vation is based on the approach of McClelland and Atkinson.

AdministrationThe first subtest “Comparing surfaces“ assesses impulsive-ness/reflexivity. The respondent may chose from three pos-sible answers (right/left/cannot decide) in deciding which of two simultaneously presented areas is larger. The second subtest “Coding symbols“ measures respondent’s aspiration level and frustration tolerance. Respondents are required to assign symbols to abstract shapes in accordance with a specified key, and are then asked to predict their perform-ance on the next task. In addition, feedback is given. The third subtest “Differentiating figures“ measures performance motivation. Respondents are asked to indicate which figure in a row of symbols does not belong.


ScoringThree test scores are calculated in the subtest “Comparing surfaces“: Exactitude, Decisiveness and Impulsiveness/Re-flexivity. The subtest “Coding symbols“ yields test scores for Performance level, Aspiration level, Frustration tolerance, Time of maximum performance and Target discrepancy. The final subtest “Differentiating figures“ yields the test score Performance motivation.

ReliabilityIn the view of the authors, calculation of the standard meas-urement error for the AHA is inappropriate.

ValidityOn account of the theoretically based derivation of the test scores, content validity can be assumed. Ebenhöh (1994), Kubinger (1995) and Frebort (2003) showed that individual

test scores differentiated significantly between successful and less successful co-workers or trainees. As predicted by the theory, different test scores were found to be advanta-geous in the three studies. In addition, Kubinger & Hofmann (1998) showed in a factor-analytical study that Impulsive-ness/Reflexivity correlates with extroversion, while Frustra-tion tolerance correlates with conscientiousness. Perform-ance motivation, on the other hand, appears to be a separate factor and is not covered by the “Big Five“. Wagner-Menghin (2003) reports the results of a study on the identification of three motivational types.

NormsA representative norm sample N=429 is available. An eval-uation sample N=314 is also available; this is comprised mainly of students and factory employees and is thus not representative. In addition, there is a sample of applicants for jobs with the NOKIA company (N=498). Percentile ranks and T-scores are reported, except for “Time of maximum performance”.

Resistance to falsificationEvidence of resistance to falsification has been provided by a number of studies (e.g. Kubinger, 1995; Hofman & Kubin-ger, 2001; Benesch, 2003; Greifes, 2003).

Testing timeBetween 35 and 60 minutes (including instruction and prac-tice phase).





BACO is an objective, faking-resistant personality test for measuring various forms of resilience.

ApplicationThe subtests of the Resilience Assessment Test together comprise an objective test battery for measuring aspects of resilience.

Theoretical backgroundBACO is an objective test sensu R.B. Cattell that assesses the success of an individual’s strategies for dealing with po-tential stressors. It measures the extent to which an individ-ual is able to withstand stress – i.e. the degree to which his resilience, performance and mental state remain unaffected in a stressful situation.

AdministrationThe first subtest “Time pressure” measures resilience under pressure of time. The respondent is required to work a cod-ing task for which the time allowed becomes progressively shorter. The second subtest “Presence of others” measures resilience in the presence of other people. Stylized faces are shown on-screen as the respondent performs calculations. The third subtest “Conflict of tasks” measures resilience in situations in which different tasks make simultaneous de-mands on the respondent’s attention: a main and a second-ary task are to be worked in a simulated office environment. The fourth subtest “Hindrance to planned action” measures resilience in the context of unexpected changes. The task involves finding one’s way through a changing maze. The fifth subtest, “Inadequate feedback”, measures resilience when negative feedback is given in a simulated job applica-tion situation. The sixth subtest, “Unfavorable working con-ditions”, uses a simulated office situation to measure resil-ience to unfavourable working conditions.


ScoringForty test variables are calculated, of which 26 are normed. The test variables that are calculated describe the individ-ual’s test performance and provide information on the as-pects of resilience measured in BACO.

ReliabilitySplit-half reliabilities between 0.34 and 0.91 were obtained for the variables of the individual subtests.

ValidityMany of the test variables have content validity that arises from the test concept. With regard to correspondence va-lidity, Kieweg (2004) found that the resilience measured by BACO could not in principle be measured by self-assess-ment methods. Also available are the results of studies of psychophysiolog-ical effectiveness, factorial validity and prognostic validity in alcohol patients, together with the findings of a resilience diary study.

NormsNorms are available for a sample of N=511. For individual subtests norms are also available for university of applied science students (N=187) and social workers (N=190).

Testing timeBetween 40 and 100 minutes (including instruction and practice phase) for the administration of all subtests.

Resilience AssessmentBACOT. M. Ortner, K. D. Kubinger, A. Schrott, R. Radinger, M. Litzenberger © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

NEW





HKsDHyperkinetic Syndrome Assessment MethodJ. Häusler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

HKSD allows for the differential measuring of factors of work style with pre-school and primary school pupils.

ApplicationThe HKSD is a homogenous and objective Rasch personality test which measures the working style of pre-school and el-ementary school children, using material appropriate to this age group. As the test proceeds, systematic changes are made to the complexity and level of difficulty of the test items, and to the degree of motivation and feedback provided, and the child’s reaction in terms of performance capacity and working style is monitored. As well as measuring the child’s ability on the intelligence dimension of speed of percep-tion, dimensions of working style – reflectivity, adaptation to dif-ficulty, motivatability, and adaptation to feedback – are also measured, enabling a differential analysis of the causes of problems in school performance. In addition – and in con-trast to commonly used external assessment questionnaires – the test enables a psychometrically objective screening for work-style related aspects of hyperkinetic syndrome to be carried out. Suitable for children aged 5 and over.

Theoretical backgroundDescription of the pathogenesis of the hyperkinetic syn-drome is based on the vulnerability model. This assumes that there is a genetic predisposition to neuropsychological vulner-ability which, in the absence of adequate cognitive compensation (Barkley, 1998), leads to the appearance of the syndrome. The HKSD, with its Rasch homogenous, child-oriented content, tests cognitive competencies which can successfully be used to compensate for hyperkinetic predisposition. This provides an objective tool for diag-nosing those aspects of hyperkinetic syndrome which are relevant to school performance and other achieve-ment-oriented situations.

AdministrationAfter the general instructions and two practice examples have been worked through, five subtests are administered. Each subtest consists of between 6 and 15 items, depend-ing on the form of the test being used. There is no time limit for completion of the tests, but the time taken is noted and incorporated in the evaluation. It is not possible to return to or to correct items which have already been worked on.

Test formsFour forms of the test are available, including a parallel form, a shortened form and an eas-ier form which is more discrimi-nating among low achievers.

ScoringThe test yields an efficiency score as a work-style free measure of the performance dimen-sion speed of percep-tion, and a reflectivity score as a skill-free measure of work-ing style. The test also assesses motivatability, adaptation to task difficulty and adaptation to feed-back.

ReliabilityFor the performance aspect, sufficient reliability in the sense of internal consistency can be regarded as given on account of the validity of the Rasch model. The internal consisten-cies of the individual scores range from r=.71 to r=.93.

ValidityIn relation to the teachers’ assessment “Behavior in school” (n=107), the HKSD has a va-lidity of 0.811. In a study car-ried out in 2005 at the Universitätsklinik für Kinder- und Jugendheilkunde des AKH Wien (Universty child and adlo-lescent hospital at the Vienna general hospital) correlations between variables of the HKSD and subtests of the KITAP (Zimmermann, Gondan & Fimm, 2004) of up to r=0.80 were reported. Further studies to determine the criterion validity in relation to completed ICD-10 diagnoses are currently be-ing carried out.

NormsNorms are available for an evaluation sample (n=178) from a normal population. The norms are given both for the total sam-ple and for three separate age groups. The data were collect-ed in 2004 at elementary schools in the city of Vienna (Austria) and in connection with children’s holiday activities organised by the city of Vienna.

Testing timeAbout 15 minutes (10 minutes for the short form).





Objective and personality test for behaviorally as-sessing achievement motivation under differing basic conditions.

ApplicationThe Objective Achievement Motivation Test (OLMT) is a computerized test for the behavioural assessment of achievement motivation. It provides information about the effort applied when working on tasks under various signifi-cant constraints.

Theoretical backgroundThis test has been developed to take account of the findings of achievement motivation research (relating, for example, to the importance of motivating conditions such as setting specific goals for the respondent, making the outcome of the test dependent solely on the respondent, giving perform-ance feedback). Each of the three subtests is built around a particular incentive or stimulus that has been shown to be relevant in motivating respondents’ performance: incentives arising from the task itself, from setting one’s own goals, and from competition.

Administration The respondent is required to follow as long a route as pos-sible around the screen by pressing two buttons in order to move left or right; each press of a button causes him to advance by one field. Each “run” lasts for 10 seconds. The test records how many fields the respondent covers in the 10 seconds.


ScoringThe scoring is computerized and yields values for the effort put into completing the test, for changes in the respondent’s performance in the face of personal goals and of competi-tion, and for difficulty level. If performance is implausibly poor on individual runs the computer can make a correc-tion for invalid reactions. Information is also provided on performance over the course of the test and on the error percentage.

ReliabilityInternal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) is over .90 for per-formance scores and between .80 and .90 for difficulty level.

ValidityFor task-related effort in particular clear indications of valid-ity were found in that there were positive correlations with very different indicators of performance (final grades in the secondary school leaving examination, educational level, in-telligence test performance and various attention evaluation tests).

NormsAge-specific norms are available for a sample of N=630 in-dividuals.


Objective Achievement Motivation-TestOLMTL. Schmidt-Atzert with the assistance of M. Sommer, M. Bühner, A. Jurecka © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Now available in Chinese and Russian!NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





Risk Choice RIsIKOG. Guttmann, H. Bauer © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

On the basis of its features as an objective person-ality test the risk choice behavior is considerably more tamper-resistant than a questionnaire test.

ApplicationAssessment of general readiness to take risks.

Theoretical backgroundBased on the Risk Choice model of Atkinson (1957) and psy-chological research into the selection of levels of challenge, the test measures an individual’s overall readiness to incur risk by assessing his or her achievement motivation.

AdministrationA green ball moves about the screen, undergoing unpredict-able changes in direction. The respondent is instructed to use the control lever on the response panel to draw a circle which encloses the green ball and to keep the ball “trapped” inside the circle. As long as the ball remains within the cir-cle the respondent scores points. The aim is to achieve as high a score as possible. The maximum obtainable score depends on the radius of the circle; the respondent selects this himself before each run. The test is made up of four test phases, with each phase consisting of five runs. The test is carried out under dif-ferent conditions in the four phases. In the first phase the green dot moves slowly, in the second phase it is fast, in the third phase control of the circle is ro-tated anti-clockwise by 90°, and in the fourth phase the conditions of the first three phases occur apparently at random.


ScoringThe main variables scored are readiness to take risks, total number of points, efficiency, and standard deviation of the radius. The additional variables measured are ideal radius, radius in test 4, and average points in test 4. The supple-mentary variable adjustment of circle radius is also avail-able. Test results are given in the form of raw scores and percen-tile rankings.

ReliabilityBecause of the method of scoring it is not feasible to calcu-late the internal consistency. The performance aspect of the RISIKO yields a retest reliability over a period of 6 weeks of 0.70.

ValidityInitial analysis of correlation statistics indicates that the RISIKO has both convergent and discriminant validity. In ad-dition the test has good criterion validity for the identifica-tion of the extreme group of drivers who have committed alcohol-related offences. Testing carried out with a sample of 214 drivers who had committed alcohol-related offences and twinned subjects from the norm sample resulted in a validity of 0.658 and a correct classification rate of 77 %.

NormsThe norm sample consists of N=451 individuals (219 men, 232 women; age range 16-91). The data were collected in 2004 in the research laboratory of the Dr. G. Schuhfried GmbH.

Testing timeApproximately 20 minutes.

Now available in Chinese, Russian and Turkish!

NeW





Test battery to assess the willingness to take risks with items using the latest multimedia technology.

ApplicationAssessment of the individual willingness to take risks.

Theoretical backgroundIn literature the term “risk“ is not used in a uniform way at all. What all the definitions have in common is the moment of risk as well as the possibility of damage. On the one hand, this test follows the concept of Sensation Seeking by Zuckerman (1979), and on the other it takes into account the basis of decision and usage-related theories of risk-taking behavior (Yates, 1992). Apart from that, the operationalization of the construct was also influenced by heuristic considerations.

AdministrationIn the subtest Life goals, the respondent has to assign cer-tain values to seven categories of a scale with respect to the personal importance of these values for him/her. The second subtest Decisions requires the respondents to enter a figure between 0 and 100 as a means to respond to the question of how likely it is that they would do the described action. In the third subtest Games of chance, the respondents are confronted with different winning and losing situations. They can maximize their winnings or minimize a possible loss by acting appropriately. In the next subtest, the Blue ball, the respondent has to steer a ball that moves from one side of the screen to the other. The ball must not touch either side. By determining the ball’s change of direction, the respond-ents can either minimize the risk to lose points or, if they de-lay the change of direction, maximize their score, provided the ball does not touch the sides. In the next subtest, the respondents have the possibility to participate in a game of dice where they can put money on a selectable number of points. The possible profit is reciprocal to the chance of winning. The last subtest, Roulette, contains a simplified version of roulette. The respondents can decide how much money to put on single numbers or the colors red and black.


ScoringScale-specific test values are recorded for the different as-pects of risk and risky behavior: “Need for physical stimuli“, “Need for financial security“, “Need for social security“, ”Willingness to take risks in decisive situations“, ”Risk be-havior in winning situations“, ”Risk behavior in losing situa-tions“, ”Blue ball“, ”Need for thrill“, and ”Willingnes to take financial risks“.

ReliabilityThe internal consistencies are situated between 0.72 and 0.89.

ValidityAn extreme-group validation of the WRBTR was realized with N=119 respondents. In addition, the relation to other relevant measurement instruments (extraversion tests, sensation seeking and other scales that measure the will-ingness to take risks) was determined in the course of the examination of the convergent/ discriminant validity. The result of this study underlines the convergent and discrimi-nant validities of this test, as well as the criterion validity of individual test values.

NormsNorms of a norm sample of the “normal population“ consist-ing of N=163 is available, es well as subsamples accord-ing to gender, age and education level. These data were collected in theresearch laboratoy of the Dr. G. Schuhfried.Ges.m.b.H. in the year 2003. An increase in collected nor-mative data is under way.


Vienna Risk-Taking Test – revised versionWRBTRA. Hergovich, B. Bognar © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Now available in Bulgarian and Swedish!NeW

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road





WRBTVA. Hergovich, B. Bognar, M. Arendasy, M. Sommer © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Vienna Risk-Taking Test Traffic

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Objective personality test, resistant to falsifica-tion, for assessing the individual willingness to take risk in traffic situations, using items with the latest multimedia technology.

ApplicationMeasurement of the subjectively accepted level of risk in traffic situations in accordance with the theory of risk home-ostasis.

Theoretical backgroundThis test assesses risk-taking behavior in potentially dan-gerous driving situations. In the literature the term “risk” is not used in a way that is by any means uniform. Howev-er, defining elements that all the different definitions have in common are the potential danger and the possibility of harm (Schuster, 2000). The theoretical model on which the WRBTV is based is Wilde’s theory of risk homeostasis (Wil-de 1978, 1994). The dimension measured is the subjectively accepted level of risk.

AdministrationRespondents are given full instructions on how to work the test. They are informed that they will view 24 driving situa-tions, which will be described in words before they are shown on-screen. Each driving situation is then shown twice. On the first occasion respondents simply observe the situation. On the second occasion the respondent is required to press a key to indicate the distance from the potential hazard at which the driving manoeuvre that has just been described becomes critical or dangerous – i.e. the point at which the respondent would no longer perform the manoeuvre. The first of the 24 driving situations serves as a practice item.


ScoringThe variable “willingness to take risks in traffic situations“ measures behavior in potentially hazardous driving situa-tions.

ReliabilityBecause of the applicability of the Latency Model (Schei-blechner, 1978, 1979, 1985) for the latency times in the driv-ing situations, internal consistency is given. Reliability as measured by Cronbach’s α is 0.92.

ValidityThree independent studies have with the help of the Latency Model (Scheiblechner, 1978, 1979, 1985) demonstrated the test’s construct validity with reference to the risk homeostasis theory of Wilde (1978, 1994). All the studies showed that the WRBTV measures the unidimensional personality construct “subjectively accepted level of risk”. In addition, studies of convergent and divergent validity show significant correlations between the variable “willingness to take risks in traffic situa-tions” and various tests measuring sensation-seeking and sense of responsibility. Correlations with unrelated per-sonality traits and tests measuring mental speed and general intelligence do not differ significantly from zero.Evidence for the criterion validity of the test was provided by a study carried out by Sommer, Arendasy, Schuhfried & Litzenberger (2005) which showed that a test battery that in-cluded WRBTV was able to correctly classify around 89 % of drivers who had either had no accidents or a number of ac-cidents (R=0.837; adj. R² = 0.636). The relative relevance of the WRBTV was 10.81%, which corresponds to a correlation coefficient of 0.197. In addition, Vogelsinger (2005) reports correlations of 0.32 and 0.23 between an individual’s fastest speed on the motorway or average motorway speed and the variable “willingness to take risks in traffic situations”.

NormsNorms are available for a representative sample (N=895) with an age range of 16 – 91; subsamples are also available partitioned according to gender, age and education.


Now available in Swedish!NeW


Attitude and Interest Tests

General Interest Structure Test – revised version

The AISTR is frequently used in career or academic counseling, because the results are easy to inter-pret and concrete careers are suggested for differ-ent education levels.

ApplicationThe AISTR is a differential test for identifying educational or career interests, for use from the age of 14 onwards. It is therefore used primarily in educational and occupational counselling.

Theoretical backgroundAccording to Holland (1985) there are six fundamental per-sonality orientations in our cultural milieu. Holland also postulates that each person searches for the environment that corresponds to his personality type and hence to his interests. If he succeeds, there is complete person/environ-ment congruence. The AISTR measures this congruence between an individual and his or her environment. The test consists of 60 items, which measure the following six in-terest dimensions: practical and technical, intellectual and investigative, artistic and linguistic, social, entrepreneurial, and organizational and administrational interests. The con-cept of congruence means that the test can be used to as-sign people to occupations on the basis of their different psychological characteristics.

AdministrationAfter the instruction phase, the items are presented in suc-cession on the screen. The respondent enters his answers on a five-point rating scale. It is possible to correct each item once and to omit individual items. All unanswered items are presented again at the end of the test, and respondents can choose whether to answer them or not.

Test formsThere is one test form with 60 items; it has been adapted for a number of different countries and languages.

ScoringThe raw scores for all scales and the response times for each item are calculated.

The following are provided:

ReliabilityStudies using the norm sample yielded internal consisten-cies (Cronbach’s α) for the interest scales of between r=0.79 and r=0.87. Test-retest reliabilities for the individual scales are between r=0.83 and r=0.96 for a test-retest interval of two days and between r=0.60 and r=0.75 for an interval of two years. Test-retest reliabilities are also available for in-tervals of three months, four months and one year.

ValidityExtensive studies of the validity of the AISTR have been carried out and have shown among other things that the test has factorial validity, convergent validity and criterion validity.

NormsThe norms were obtained from a calibration sample of 2,496 young people aged between 14 and 21 drawn from the most important schools and training centres in Austria.

Testing timeApprox. 10 – 15 minutes (including instruction and practice phase).

AIsTRC. Bergmann , F. Eder © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

a report for the test administrator withii raw and standard scores on the six interest dimensions (with profile)ii Holland code (the three most prominent interest dimen-sions) and a list of occupations that are congruent with the Holland code (Z-S index)ii differentiation score for the six interest dimensionsii a hexagonal diagram of the interest dimensions

1.

a report for the respondent withii interest profileii Holland code and a list of occupations that are congru-ent with the Holland code (Z-S index) ii differentiation score for the six interest dimensions

2.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Now available in Croatian, Slovakian, Dutch, Portuguese, Serbian, Turkish and Slovenian!

NeW


Attitude and Interest Tests

Now available in French and Hungarian!NeWMOI is a multi-method test battery that combines explicit questionnaires with implicit objective inter-est tests. It can therefore usefully be used with - among others - clients who have as yet no clear idea of their vocational interests.

ApplicationAssessment of vocational interests based on the vocational interests theory of Holland (1997), for use with respondents aged 14 and over.

Theoretical backgroundJ.L. Holland (1997) distinguishes between Realistic, Investi-gative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising and Conventional inter-ests. Drawing on this theory, which is widely utilised in both theory and practice (Proyer, 2007a; Rayman & Atanasoff, 1999), MOI operationalises the six interest dimensions in various different ways.The test battery includes a verbal questionnaire, a non-ver-bal questionnaire, objective personality tests and a scale measuring vocational identify. The main purpose of these objective personality tests is to derive information on voca-tional interestsfrom observation of the testee’s behaviour in standardized working task situations (for details: Ortner et al., 2006; Proyer & Häusler, 2007). This kind of information is particularily useful if the respondent chooses not to reveal in his or her vocational interests or exhibits a low level of differentiation and weak vocational identity. However, high levels of vocational identify and of differentiation in the in-terest profile render the provision of this kind of additional information in the counselling situation unnecessary.

AdministrationMOI consists of a verbal and non-verbal interest question-naire, three objective personality tests (“Distractibility”, “Al-location”, “Tachistoscope”) and a scale measuring vocational identity.

Test formsThere are two test forms which can be used as pre-defined combinations of the subtests. The short form (S2) contains only the two subtests that measure vocational interests ex-plicitly; the long form (S1) includes in addition the subtests for implicit measurement.The composition of the test battery can, however, also be altered manually.

ScoringFor all the subtests specific scores for the six interest di-mensions are calculated. Across all the subtests administered, normed total scores are reported for the explicitly measured and implicitly meas-ured interests. The data can be interpreted with reference either to a total norm or to intra-individual differences in in-terests.

ReliabilityDepending on the scales used, the reliability coefficients of the questionnaire scales vary between 0.70 and 0.89. The reliability coefficients of the objective personality tests range from 0.64 to 0.92.

ValidityHigher correlations were found between the verbal and non-verbal questionnaire scales and corresponding scales taken from the General Interest Structure Test. The correlation between the self-report measures and the objective person-ality tests were lower as has been expected on the basis of the current research literature (cf. Ortner et al., 2006). Ad-ditionally, the correlations between the different MOI scales and measures of intelligence were in line with those usu-ally reported in the literature. Taken together, these results support the construct validity of this measure. Furthermore, MOI subtests were found to be capable of identifying indi-viduals studying different disciplines (restriction: R not rep-resented).

NormsA norm sample of N=452 is available; the data was collected at different centres in Austria and Switzerland.

Testing timeTest form S1: 40-60 minutesTest form S2: 15-20 minutes

Multi-method Objective Interests Test Battery MOIR. T. Proyer, J. Häusler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

NEW


Clinical Tests


Clinical Tests

Identification of Alcohol RiskATV

The test ATV is the only questionnaire for sale that assesses the alcohol risk level in a Rasch-homoge-nous short form.

B. Biehl © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

ApplicationAssessment of attitudes that may lead to alcohol abuse.

Theoretical backgroundThe present test was derived by Böcher (1965) from the American “Manson Evaluation”. It contains 39 statements, the majority of which are translated from the Manson ques-tionnaire. The test is not designed primarily to assess mani-fest alcoholism; it focuses instead on inappropriate attitudes that may lead to increased alcohol consumption.

AdministrationAfter the instruction phase, the items are presented in suc-cession on the screen. The respondent answers each item by selecting “true” or “false”. It is possible to correct each item once and to omit individual items. All unanswered items are presented again at the end of the test, and respondents can choose whether to answer them or not.

Test formsThere is a long form with 39 items and a Rasch-homogenous short form with 29 items.

ScoringThe variables Alcohol risk and Dissimulation are scored. The results are shown in a table giving raw and standard scores for both variables, working time and an optional item analysis protocol.

ReliabilityThe internal consistency of the test was calculated as Cron-bach’s Alpha. The reliabilities of the two variables Alcohol risk and Dissimulation vary between r=0.73 and r=0.79 for the long form and between r=0.72 and r=.076 for the short form. The consistency of measurement of the individual vari-ables is adequately high. The ATV can thus be regarded as a sufficiently precise diagnostic instrument.In both the long and the short form the variables Alcohol risk and Dissimulation correlate very strongly with each other; that is, in both forms the two variables measure the same trait (Alcohol risk: r=0.97; p=0.000; N=100/Honesty: r=0.99; p=0.000; N=98).

ValidityThe test was administered to 345 individuals, split into two groups (Biehl, 1972). One group (N=180) consisted of driv-ers who had been apprehended on one or more occasions for drink-driving and referred by the authorities for traffic psychological assessment. These individuals cannot be re-garded as alcoholics in the clinical sense. The other group (N=165) consisted of drivers who had not committed any drink-driving offences.The variable Alcohol risk distinguishes between the two groups at a significant level. There is no significant differ-ence between the two groups on the Dissimulation scale; that is, the tendency to lie is the same in both groups.

NormsThe variables Alcohol risk and Dissimulation were normed.The norm sample (N=310) is made up of 141 (46%) men and 169 (54%) women. The sample is subdivided into two sub-samples on the basis of gender for S1 (long form) and S2 (short form).

Testing timeBetween 5 and 10 minutes (including instruction phase), de-pending on test form.

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Clinical Tests


Clinical Tests

Objective assessment of the suicide potential ex-cluding possible patient-therapist interactions.

ApplicationThe FBS test is used for evaluating the suicidal/depressive aspects of a subject’s personality and is applicable for ado-lescents aged 17 and older and adults primarily in clinical psychology.

Theoretical backgroundThis test is used as an aid to evaluate the “conscious suicid-al field”, which, according to the author, includes suicide, at-tempted suicide and suicidal tendencies (suicidal thoughts, suicidal intentions, comments about committing suicide and the fear of committing suicide). In addition to suicide risk, this test also measures behaviors which the test author clas-sifies as being within the “unconscious suicide field” (e.g. alcohol or drug abuse, asocial behavior). A sample of over 2,700 subjects was used to construct the final test form of the FBS. After analyzing their suicidal behavior, four groups were formed which differed from each other in terms of ex-pression of suicidal tendencies (suicidal thoughts, suicidal intentions, comments about committing suicide, the fear of committing suicide), as well in terms of actual suicide at-tempts. The evaluation of the subject’s suicidal/depressive condition and the assessment of his/her suicide risk were carried out using the groups’ scores as a basis.

AdministrationAfter the instruction phase, 52 items are presented on the screen in succession. The subject enters his/her answers on a bipolar scale (true/false). It is possible for the subject to correct his/her answers once and to skip over items. The items that were skipped over will be presented once again at the end of the test; however, the subject is not required to answer the item.

Test formsThere is one test form consisting of 52 items.

ScoringThe test measures a total score (raw score) and the working time for each item. Depending on the amount of the total score, the subject is then placed into one of five categories: “normal”, “less than normal”, “minimal suicide risk”, “strong suicide risk” and “especially strong suicide risk”.

ReliabilityRelevant information in the literature is lacking. Experiments with a sample of psychiatric patients showed a split-half co-efficient of rtt=.89 for the variable “total score”. Schmidtke and Schaller (1975) studied retest reliability in samples of adolescents, establishing a stability coefficient of between rtt = .81 and rtt = .85.

ValidityStudies show primarily significant correlations with several scales in the Giessen test (“negatively vs. positively expe-rienced social resonance” r=-.39, “hypomania vs. depres-sive irritation” r=.55) and the attitude questionnaire of the “Generalized Other” (“experiences of rejection and disdain from others” r=-.50, “positive vs. negative attitude towards the social environment” r=-.41, “reduction of performance”: r=-.41, “dominance and willingness to lead”: r=-.34).

NormsThe subjects’ total scores are placed in one of five catego-ries. In the computer version a comparative sample of 266 psychiatric patients serves as the basis for this assessment.


FBsSuicide Risk Evaluation QuestionnaireJ. Stork © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Clinical Tests


Clinical Tests

Rasch-homogenous questionnaire that assesses the effects, the functions and the subjectively felt symptoms of alcohol consumption and estimates the risk of alcohol abuse.

ApplicationThe questionnaire assesses the positively felt mental effect and social function of alcohol. This questionnaire is applica-ble to all respondents who have experiences with alcohol. It gives indications on respondents at risk in a preliminary stage of dependency, and recognizes alcoholism by the ex-tent of the positively felt effects of alcohol. In addition, the FFT supplies reliable information on counseling and therapy in individual cases, with little effort.

Theoretical backgroundThe FFT is based on results of social-cognitive and learning-theoretical alcoholism research, which has to some extent also entered the concepts of recidivism independency. What is specially emphasized is the individual amplifier value of alcohol in case of a lack of alternative strategies. Items from 17 different function areas of alcohol can be categorized in 5 scales scaled according to the Rasch model to assess 1. “Excitatory effect of alcohol”, 2. “Psychopharmacological effect of alcohol”, 3. “Sociodynamic function of drinking”, 4. “Exploiting a social context” and 5. “symptoms of mental and physical dependency”.The FFT is one of the few questionnaires that are homog-enous in the sense of the Rasch model. During the construc-tion the use of questions that can cause denial tendencies in alcoholics (e.g. questions about the amount of alcohol) was avoided deliberately.

AdministrationThe items of the FFT are presented in sequence on the monitor. The subject always has to choose one out of four alternative answers on a fixed rating scale.

Test formsThere are two long forms with 93 items (present and past) and a standard short form (present without scale 5) with 64 items. There is a possibility to select individual scales in the test manager window.

ScoringThe following variables are presented: “Excitatory effect of alcohol”, “psychopharmacological effect of alcohol”, “socio-dynamic function of drinking”, “exploiting a social context”, “symptoms of mental and physical dependency”. Addition-ally a discriminant score is calculated, which estimates a value for the risk of alcohol abuse. An item analysis protocol can be issued that presents the answers to the individual statements.

ReliabilityThe reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alpha) for the 5 scales lie be-tween r=.87 and r=.96 Measurement precision is given due to the validity of the Rasch model for all 5 scales. Due to the proven unidimensionality of the test, calculatory fair-ness can be deemed as given. This means that the various groups of people are not systematically put at a disadvan-tage or favored concerning individual items.

ValidityEven without taking into account scale 5, the FFT separates normal drinkers from respondents dependent on alcohol with the utmost certainty. Apart from that profile differences are proved depending on gender, age, type of dependency and the degree of chronification.

NormsThe standardization of test forms S1-S3 refers to scores of N=244 alcohol dependent abstinent patients from 12 different in-patient and outpatient treatment centers and N=95 subjects with normal alcohol consumption from the research laboratory of the company Dr G Schuhfried. In ad-dition, norms of N=98 people who were apprehended for bad driving behavior and collected during driving diagnos-tics of INFAR are available. Furthermore a norm sample of N=284 persons, collected in the research laboratory of Dr. G. Schuhfried in the year 2003, is available for test form S3.

Testing timeAbout 15-20 minutes.

Questionnaire Concerning Functional DrivingFFTE. Belitz-Weihmann, P. Metzler © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Clinical Tests


Clinical Tests

Objective and transparent assessment of relevant aspects of pain behavior excluding influencing therapist-patient interactions.

Application:The Questionnaire on Reaction to Pain is a multi-dimension-al instrument for evaluating the behavior of persons experi-encing pain. This test was developed for diagnosing patients with chronic pain. The results can provide help for the as-sessment of indications for psychological pain therapy as well as for a treatment plan. Due to its economical handling, the test is also suited for monitoring therapeutic progress.

Theoretical backgroundTreatment programs are available for patients with chronic pain within the context of approaches in behavioral medi-cine. In practice, indications assessment, especially in mul-ti-professional teams, is often a problem. With four factor-based scales, the FSV test records subskills in dealing with pain, which correspond to building blocks for approaches to treating pain.The scalesii avoidanceii activity andii social support

are based on the theory of effective learning processes in pain, which holds that the experience of pain is intensified by negative reinforcement (putting an end to an averse con-dition by withdrawing) and is eased by positive reinforce-ment (turning to important persons who share a close rela-tionship with the patient) and eventually can be reduced by confrontation.The scale:ii cognitive control

refers to relaxation skills, ability to use the imagination and self-instruction as determined by experiments.

AdministrationFollowing general instructions on how to complete the test, the subjects are given specific test instructions with an ex-ample item. The items (ideas) are then presented one after the other. The subject enters his/her answers according to a five-point rating scale ranging from “does not apply” to “ap-plies to a great extent”.


ScoringThe sum values for the four scales are calculated. Thanks to the test profile (diagrammatic depiction of the scale results as compared to the norm values), the results are visible at a glance. In addition an item analysis protocol can be printed out which lists all of the items – classified according to scale – with the corresponding answer.

ReliabilityThe alpha coefficients (internal consistency according to Cronbach) were calculated for the four subtests. Depend-ing on the scale and sample, they lie between rtt=.68 and rtt=.84.

ValiditySeveral studies show statistically significant correlations with pain adjective scales. In addition, relationships to ir-rational attitudes, to self-communication and to situative physical and emotional reaction tendencies were also es-tablished.

Norms/ Comparative SamplesNorm values are presented separately for:ii rheumatism patients, N=325ii headache patients, N=124

Until the norms of the computer version of this test are avail-able, the norms for the paper-pencil test form will be used.

Testing time3-5 minutes

Questionnaire on Reaction to Pain FsVU. Klages © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Clinical Tests


The MSS enables a client to make a reliable assess-ment of the quality and intensity of his/her pain.

Multi-Dimensional Pain ScaleMss

ApplicationThe multi-dimensional pain scale is a test for qualitative and quantitative pain measurement.

Theoretical backgroundOutside opinions stated by an examining physician, for exam-ple, are prone to a high degree of subjectivity of the person giving the opinion. In progress examinations (often run by dif-ferent examiners), verbal communication between a medical expert and a patient has proven to be inaccurate and not very reliable. The authors therefore intend to present a standardized instru-ment to measure pain. The questionnaire was constructed as a self-assessment scale with a five-step rating scheme –orig-inally meant to objectively assess analgetic effects. The test was started out with a search for a selection of adjectives to describe states of pain according to rational criteria. Experts then eliminated those adjectives which are too unspecific or colloquial, or rather unusual to describe the way pain is ex-perienced. The remaining list comprised 45 terms, and was reduced to 29 words based on the data of an analysis sample in line with statistical item selection procedures.

AdministrationAfter the instruction section, the items are presented con-secutively on screen. In case the subject skips items, all unanswered items will be presented on screen once again with the instruction to really give an answer, if possible. It is, however, still possible to skip items even at this stage.

Test formsThere is one single test form with 31 items.

ScoringScale raw scores are issued for pain intensity:ii rhythmical painsii shooting painsii sudden painsii pains in generalii spread-out painsii annoying painsii persistent painsii electric painsii chemical painsii thermal pains

The working time is also recorded. In the “Item analysis pro-tocol”, every item is listed according to scale along with the corredsponding answer given by the subject.

ReliabilityExaminations on internal consistency and on re-test reli-ability of the scales based on various comparative samples resulted in coefficients between .83 to .93.

ValidityAs a rule it is relatively difficult to provide proofs of validity for subjective experiences of pain, due to the lack of an objective outer criterion and the impossibility of an outside opinion. Still, we can assume content-logical validity, as the MSS registers exactly the area of validity which is meaningful to describe subjective pain in a qualitative way. Besides, some medical studies (e.g. with analgetics), along with invasive interven-tions go in the same direction. From a factor-analytical point of view, we can assume a satisfactory degree of scale inde-pendence. (A detailed evaluation of the procedure is available in the MSS manual provided by Lehrl et. al., 1980).

NormsNorming as is usually practiced with questions on subjective (current) experiences of pain does not seem to make much sense to the authors of the test. The results of nine different patient samples (means, distribution, and such) are stated in the manual for MSS-R by Lehrel et al. 1980, which you will find enclosed with the computer form of the test.


S. Lehrl, R. Cziske, L. Blaha © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road


Clinical Tests


TQTest Generator for Questionnaire Tests

Test Creation Programs

© sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Onlinetest

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Test creation The Test Generator provides two test models for creating questionnaire tests:

a. Power testsThis test category has the following characteristics:ii Every test item has a correct solution which the respondent has to find.ii Items can also be omitted (i.e. the respondent can switch to the next item without entering a response for the current one). The button „Next“ has to be clicked to call up the next item.ii Items which have already been answered can be called up again any number of times (possibly within a specified time limit) in order to complete or correct them.ii If a time limit is specified and the test does not contain more than 46 items, it is also possible to switch to any test item desired after the last test item is answered.ii The header always shows the items which were not yet answered.ii The subject can select the answer in a multiple-choice procedure or enter it as a number via a (virtual) numerical keypad. You can determine the desired response model during test creation.

b. Personality testsThis test category has the following characteristics:ii There are generally no correct or incorrect answers.ii All items have to be answered. It is not possible to switch to the next item unless a respondent has answered the current item. This ensures a reliable evaluation.ii The program automatically switches to the next item after the respondent has entered an answer.ii The previous item can only be corrected once.ii The only answer model available is multiple-choice.

ScoringThe number of test variables and their names for scoring can be defined freely by the user. Variables are calculated by counting out items that have been assigned via a scor-ing key or via sum or mean calculations from other test variables. In personality tests every answer given by the respondent can also be assigned to several test variables. The test results can be issued in the form of result tables, profiles and test protocols (answer, evaluation and working time).

This complex but easy to use program assists you in the creation of your own questionnaire tests. Neither the knowledge of a programming language nor of technological details is necessary. This program enables you to adjust the Vienna Test System easily and effectively to your own requirements.


Test Creation Programs

TT Test Generator for Tachistoscopic Tests © sCHUHFRIeD GmbH

Neuro & clinical

Transport: Rail

Transport: Aviation

Personnel

Education

Sport

Transport: Road

Test creationIn tachistoscopic tests, pictures or series of pictures are dis-played for a relatively short time. The subject can be asked questions regarding an individual picture or a series of pic-tures.The picture presentation time can be set to anywhere between 100 milliseconds and 99,95 seconds in increments of 50 mil-liseconds.For technical reasons, the actual presentation time can only be a multiple of the refresh rate. It is thus subject to a certain de-gree of inaccuracy (about 8...16 milliseconds, depending on re-fresh rate). In order to minimize the percentage of inaccuracy, the lowest possible refresh rate is limited to 100 milliseconds.If no question is asked between two picture presentations, the interval between 1 and 99,95 seconds can be set in 50-mil-lisecond increments.

The following parameters have been defined for every item:ii Image file for the tachistoscopic pictureii Duration of picture displayii Interval durationii Item text (contains the question and response alternatives)ii Correct answer or correct answer range

ScoringDuring scoring the program calculates the number of cor-rectly and incorrectly answered questions. The sum, mean and standard deviation of the answer times are also calcu-lated. The test results can be issued in the form of result tables, profiles and test protocols (answer, evaluation and working time).

This complex but easy to use program assists you in the creation of your own questionnaire tests. Neither the knowledge of a programming language nor of technological details is necessary. This pro-gram enables you to adjust the Vienna Test System easily and effectively to your own requirements.


sYsTeM ReQUIReMeNTs

as at: october 2010


system requirements

COMPUTeR ii PC or laptop with Pentium CPU (or compatible, e.g. Athlon), at least 1 Ghzii At least 256 megabytes (MB) of RAM ii Display adapter with 24 or 32-bit color depth (16 million colors) ii USB headset. Please contact us for advice regarding suit-able equipment.ii DVD drive, hard disk, mouse, keyboardii USB ports for license dongle and peripheral hardware (in case all USB ports on the PC are used up a USB hub with external power supply is required)ii Serial or parallel interfaces (only if older VTS hardware is used)ii Network connection (e.g. for the installation of a Vienna Test System Network)ii Windows 2000, XP, Vista, 7 or Windows Server 2003, 2008, 2008/R2 (x32 or x64)

Please ensure that no programs which can interfere with the test presentation (e.g. by heavy CPU usage or on-screen presentations) are installed on the computer!

MONITOR15” to 19” CRT or LCD color monitor

A refresh frequency of at least 75 Hz has to be set for CRT monitors.With flat panel LCD monitors the following has to be con-sidered:ii We recommend using flat panel LCD monitors with a reso-lution of at least 1280x960 pixels.ii For technical reasons a light pen can not be used with a flat panel LCD monitor. A device with a built in touch screen can be used instead. Please contact us for advice regar-ding suitable equipment.

PRINTeRLaser or inkjet printer, black and white or color

sAFeTY DeVICesIf the Vienna Test System is used in health care facilities the use of the following devices may be mandatory:ii Isolating transformer for medical equipment according to EN 60601ii Galvanic (medical) network isolation according to EN 60601 (if the computer is connected to a data network)

Please inquire with your company’s safety representa-tive.

Products of the SCHUHFRIED Company are developed and in accordance with the requirements of the European Un-ion guideline 93/42/EWG. The CE mark proves that safety-relevant regulations, EMC Standards for Medical Devices (EN 60601), Biocompatibility Evaluation of Medical Devices (EN30993), product specific regulations and the underlying quality management system are adhered to.

Please contact us before acquiring new equipment so that we may give you the best possible advice.

The following tests require additional or special system components:PPii A serial interface to connect the peripheral device Periphe-ral Perception

PASATii Microphone and headphones. A USB headset is recom-mended. Please contact us for advice regarding suitable equipment.ii Windows NT4 can not be used.

PVSATii Microphone. A USB headset is recommended. Please con-tact us for advice about suitable equipment.ii Windows NT4 can not be used.

COG, DAUF, DT, DTAIR, HKSD, RA,RT, SIGNAL, STROOP, VIGILii In order to ensure a percentile rank exact validity of the presented confidence intervals the monitor used should be calibrated with an optical sensor (requires USB response panel).

INSBATii In order to ensure a percentile rank exact validity of the presented confidence intervals for the subtests inspection time and decision quality and speed, the monitor used should be calibrated with an optical sensor (requires USB response panel).

DTKIii In order to ensure a percentile rank exact validity of the presented confidence intervals the monitor used should be calibrated with an optical sensor, (requires USB response panel).ii For an accurate and comparable test result only USB audio equipment approved by us must be used. Please contact us for advice regarding suitable devices.ii Windows NT4 can not be used.

WAFA, WAFF, WAFG, WAFS, WAFVii In order to ensure a percentile rank exact validity of the presented confidence intervals the monitor used should be calibrated with an optical sensor, (requires USB response panel).ii For an accurate and comparable test result for test forms or subtests which output acoustic signals only USB audio equipment approved by us must be used. Please contact us for advice regarding suitable devices.ii Windows NT4 can not be used.

ATAVT, TAVTMB, TTii A powerful enough display adapter / CPU to display an image within 10 milliseconds (ms). The test software automatically verifies the system performance and reports a corresponding message in case the specification is not met by the computer. The installation of the demo version is sufficient in order to test the hardware before the purchase.ii Windows NT4 can not be used.

Vienna Test System

The following specifications refer to a typical Test System configuration. Some tests require additional or better system components.


FIND IT FAsT


All tests from A-Z

Find it fast

2D ......................................ii362HAND .............................ii533D ......................................ii374DPI ..................................ii85A3DW ...............................ii38AGDIA ...............................ii89AHA ...................................ii101AISTR................................ii108ALS ....................................ii54AMT ..................................ii39ANF ...................................ii40 APM ..................................ii41ATAVT ...............................ii55ATV....................................ii110AVEM ...............................ii90AVIS ..................................ii91B19 ....................................ii56BACO ................................ii102BFSI ..................................ii86COG ...................................ii57CORSI ...............................ii58CPM ..................................ii42DAKT ................................ii59DAUF ................................ii60DSI .....................................ii92DSIHR ...............................ii93DT ......................................ii61DTKI ..................................ii62EBF ...................................ii94ELST..................................ii63EPP6 .................................ii87F1 .......................................ii64FBS ..................................ii111FET ....................................ii95FFT ....................................ii112FLIM .................................ii65

FOLO.................................ii43FSV ...................................ii113FVW ..................................ii66GESTA ..............................ii67HCTA .................................ii44HKSD ................................ii103IBF .....................................ii32INSBAT .............................ii33INSSV ...............................ii35IPS .....................................ii96IVPE ..................................ii97LVT ....................................ii68MDT ..................................ii69MIP....................................ii45MLS ...................................ii70MMG .................................ii98MOI ...................................ii109MR .....................................ii46MSS...................................ii114MTA ..................................ii71NTA ...................................ii47NVLT .................................ii72OLMT ................................ii104PERSEV ...........................ii73PP ......................................ii74PST ...................................ii48RA .....................................ii75RIS ....................................ii49RISIKO ..............................ii105RT ......................................ii76SBUSB ..............................ii99SIGNAL ............................ii77SIMKAP ...........................ii78SKASUK ...........................ii100SMK ..................................ii79SPM ..................................ii50

SPMPLS ..........................ii51STROOP...........................ii80TCI .....................................ii88TQ ......................................ii115TT .......................................ii116VIGIL .................................ii81VISGED ............................ii52WAF ..................................ii82WRBTR ............................ii106WRBTV ............................ii107ZBA ...................................ii84

Find it fast


Intelligence test batteries

IBF ii32

INSBAT ii33

INSSV ii35

Special ability tests Attention ALS ii54COG ii57DAKT ii59DAUF ii60SIGNAL ii77VIGIL ii81WAFA ii82WAFF ii82WAFG ii82WAFR ii82WAFS ii82WAFV ii82WAFW ii82

Memory CORSI ii58FVW ii66NVLT ii72VISGED ii52

Motor skills 2HAND ii53B19 ii56MLS ii70SMK ii79

Numerical abilities ANF ii40

MIP ii45

NTA ii47Visualization 2D ii36

3D ii37

A3DW ii38

MR ii46

PST ii48

Category Principal dimensions Test Page

All tests by dimensionsFind it fast


Reaction behavior DT ii61

DTKI ii62

MDT ii69

RA ii75

RT ii76Logical reasoning AMT ii39

APM ii41CPM ii42FOLO ii43RIS ii49SPM ii50SPMPLS ii51

Miscella-neous

Activation FLIM ii65Critical thinking HCTA ii44Knowledge of English ELST ii63Field independence GESTA ii67Hyperkinetic syndrome HKSD ii103Interference tendency STROOP ii80Multi-tasking SIMKAP ii78Orientation LVT ii68Peripheral perception PP ii74Perseveration tendency PERSEV ii73Technical comprehension MTA ii71Obtaining an overview ATAVT ii55Anticipation of time and movement ZBA ii84

Personality structure inventories

BFSI ii86EPP6 ii87IPS ii96TCI ii88

Special personality tests Aggression AGDIA ii89AVIS ii91

Resilience & coping with stress AVEM ii90BACO ii102DSI ii92DSIHR ii93EBF ii94SBUSB ii99

All tests by dimensions


Find it fast



Leadership FET ii95Customer orientation SKASUK ii100Motivation AHA ii101

MMG ii98OLMT ii104

Readiness to take risks RISIKO ii105WRBTR ii106WRBTV ii107

Driving-related characteristics IVPE ii97

Attitude & interest tests AISTR ii108MOI ii109

Clinical tests Alcohol misuse ATV ii110

FFT ii112Pain-related states & behavior FSV ii113

MSS ii114Suicide risk FBS ii111

All tests by dimensionsFind it fast


Arab

ic (A

RA)

Bulg

aria

n (B

UL)

Chin

ese

trad

ition

al (C

HT)

Chin

ese

sim

plifi

ed (C

HS)

Croa

tian

(CRO

)Cz

ech

(CSY

)Du

tch

(NLD

)En

glis

h (E

NU,

EN

G)Fi

nnis

h (F

IN)

Fren

ch (F

RA)

Germ

an (D

EU)

Gree

k (E

LL)

Hind

i (HI

N)

Hung

aria

n (H

UN)

Italia

n (IT

A)Po

lish

(PLK

)Po

rtug

uese

(PTG

)Ro

man

ian

(ROM

)Ru

ssia

n (R

US)

Serb

ian

(SER

)Sl

ovak

ian

(SKY

)Sl

oven

ian

(SLO

)Sp

anis

h (E

SP)

Swed

ish

(SVE

)Tu

rkis

h (T

RK)

WINWTS2D2HAND3D4DPIA3DWAGDIAAHAAISTRALSAMTANFAPMATAVTATVAVEMAVISB19BACOBFSICOGCORSICPMDAKTDAUFDSIDSIHRDTDTKIEBFELSTEPP6F1FBSFETFFTFLIMFOLOFSVFVWGESTAHCTAHKSDIBFINSBATINSSVIPSIVPE

= basic softwareii36ii53ii37ii85ii38ii89ii101ii108ii54ii39ii40 ii41ii55ii110ii90ii91ii56ii102ii86ii57ii58ii42ii59ii60ii92ii93ii61ii62ii94ii63ii87ii64ii111ii95ii112ii65ii43ii113ii66ii67ii44ii103ii32ii33ii35ii96ii97

All tests by languagesFind it fast


All tests by languages

Arab

ic (A

RA)

Bulg

aria

n (B

UL)

Chin

ese

trad

ition

al (C

HT)

Chin

ese

sim

plifi

ed (C

HS)

Croa

tian

(CRO

)Cz

ech

(CSY

)Du

tch

(NLD

)En

glis

h (E

NU,

EN

G)Fi

nnis

h (F

IN)

Fren

ch (F

RA)

Germ

an (D

EU)

Gree

k (E

LL)

Hind

i (HI

N)

Hung

aria

n (H

UN)

Italia

n (IT

A)Po

lish

(PLK

)Po

rtug

uese

(PTG

)Ro

man

ian

(ROM

)Ru

ssia

n (R

US)

Serb

ian

(SER

)Sl

ovak

ian

(SKY

)Sl

oven

ian

(SLO

)Sp

anis

h (E

SP)

Swed

ish

(SVE

)Tu

rkis

h (T

RK)

Find it fast

If you are missing a test in a certain language, please contact us or one of ourdistributors. We translate tests constantly to various languages.

LVTMDTMIPMLSMMGMOIMRMSSMTANTANVLTOLMTPERSEVPPPSTRARISRISIKORTSBUSBSIGNALSIMKAPSKASUKSMKSPMSPMPLSSTROOPTCITQTTVIGILVISGEDWAFAWAFFWAFGWAFRWAFSWAFVWAFWWRBTRWRBTVZBA

ii68ii69ii45ii70ii98ii109ii46ii114ii71ii47ii72ii104ii73ii74ii48ii75ii49ii105ii76ii99ii77ii78ii100ii79ii50ii51ii80ii88ii115ii116ii81ii52ii82ii82ii82ii82ii82ii82ii82ii106ii107ii84


All tests by areas of use

2D

2HAND

3D

4DPI

A3DW

AGDIA

AHA

AISTR

ALS

AMT

ANF

APM

ATAVT

ATV

AVEM

AVIS

B19

BACO

BFSI

COG

CORSI

CPM

DAKT

DAUF

DSI

DSIHR

DT

DTKI

EBF

ELST

EPP6

F1

FBS

FET

Clin

ical

and

hea

lth p

sych

olog

y

Neu

rops

ycho

logy

Pers

onne

l psy

chol

ogy

Traf

fic p

sych

olog

y

Avia

tion

psyc

holo

gy

Spor

t psy

chol

ogy

Educ

atio

nal p

sych

olog

y

Clin

ical

and

hea

lth p

sych

olog

y

Neu

rops

ycho

logy

Pers

onne

l psy

chol

ogy

Traf

fic p

sych

olog

y

Avia

tion

psyc

holo

gy

Spor

t psy

chol

ogy

Educ

atio

nal p

sych

olog

y

FFTFLIMFOLOFSVFVWGESTAHCTAHKSDIBFINSBATINSSVIPSIVPELVTMDTMIPMLSMMGMOIMRMSSMTANTANVLTOLMTPERSEVPPPSTRARISRISIKORTSBUSBSIGNAL

Find it fast

ii36

ii53

ii37

ii85

ii38

ii89

ii101

ii108

ii54

ii39

ii40

ii41

ii55

ii110

ii90

ii91

ii56

ii102

ii86

ii57

ii58

ii42

ii59

ii60

ii92

ii93

ii61

ii62

ii94

ii63

ii87

ii64

ii111

ii95

ii112

ii65

ii43

ii113

ii66

ii67

ii44

ii103

ii32

ii33

ii35

ii96

ii97

ii68

ii69

ii45

ii70

ii98

ii109

ii46

ii114

ii71

ii47

ii72

ii104

ii73

ii74

ii48

ii75

ii49

ii105

ii76

ii99

ii77


All tests by areas of use

SIMKAPSKASUKSMKSPMSPMPLSSTROOPTCIVIGILVISGEDWAFAWAFFWAFGWAFRWAFSWAFVWAFWWRBTRWRBTVZBA

Clin

ical

and

hea

lth p

sych

olog

y

Neu

rops

ycho

logy

Pers

onne

l psy

chol

ogy

Traf

fic p

sych

olog

y

Avia

tion

psyc

holo

gy

Spor

t psy

chol

ogy

Educ

atio

nal p

sych

olog

y

Find it fast

ii78

ii100

ii79

ii50

ii51

ii80

ii88

ii81

ii52

ii82

ii82

ii82

ii82

ii82

ii82

ii82

ii106

ii107

ii84

CogniPlus, which is available in a wide range of languages, is used to train cogni-tive functions. Efficient. Multimedia. Mo-tivating.

7 reasons to choose CogniPlus

1. Developed by prominent scientists 2. Based on a defi cit-oriented intervention approach 3. Embedded in a context of scientifi c theory 4. Realistic and motivating design 5. Adapts automatically to the client‘s ability6. Training at all ability levels7. Recommended by respected institutions

You too can profi t from a state-of-the-art pro-gram that covers all the areas of cognitive train-ing and comes with user-friendly management software.

BIOFEEDBACK 2000x-pert is the innova-tive wireless biofeedback system from SCHUHFRIED. It can be used for relaxa-tion, rehabilitation and assessment. Buy only the modules that you need.

The key features of BIOFEEDBACK 2000x-pert

User-friendly, easy-to-operate software Modular design of software and hardware Transfer of readings via wireless technology

(Bluetooth®) by means of small, lightweight modules worn directly on the body Complete freedom of movement during

measurement Highly sensitive sensors with high stability

against artefacts

Other quality products from SCHUHFRIED

Order your free copy now!COGNIPLUS Catalog


Order your free copy now!BIOFEEDBACK 2000x-pert Catalog


Quality by competence since 1947

Get in touch!

About this document: SCHUHFRIED GmbH

Hyrtlstrasse 45

2340 Moedling

Austria

E-mail: [email protected]

Internet: www.schuhfried.at

Tel: +43 2236 42315

Fax: +43 2236 46597

Media owner and editor: SCHUHFRIED GmbH

Place of publication: Mödling

Publisher: Paul Gerin Druckerei, Wolkersdorf

Editor-in-chief: Doreen Kallweit Responsible in law: Gerald Schuhfried

Graphics: Johanna Kurz, Vienna, www.johannakurz.com Photos: SCHUHFRIED GmbH, fotolia, istock, pixelio: p. 8

Konstantin Gastmann and p. 26 Thomas S.

Copyright © SCHUHFRIED GmbH, Moedling.

All rights reserved.

[email protected]

Telephone+43 2236 42315

Free callbackFree Call via www.schuhfried.com

Fax+43 2236 46597

Websitewww.schuhfried.com

AddressSCHUHFRIED GmbHHyrtlstrasse 452340 Moedling Austria

[email protected]

Telephone+ 43 2236 42315-60

For queries and catalog ordersMon. - Thurs.: 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Fri.: 8 a.m. - 2 p.m. (GMT + 1h)

Current dates and retrospective review at www.schuhfried.com

Seminars, workshops and webinars

Help DeskQueries on installation and operation for our customersMon. - Thurs.: 8.30 a.m. – 4.30 p.m. (GMT + 1h)Fri.: 8.30 a.m. – 1.30 p.m. (GMT + 1h)

Psychological assessment

Cognitive training

Multimedia system

For the sake of readability the masculine form has been used throughout to designate both genders.

Cognitive training Multimedia system

Your own personal online demonstration of the Vienna Test SystemFast, efficient, personal. Upon request a member of the SCHUHFRIED team will – in the same way as in a webinar – take you through the Vienna Test System online and answer your questions on computerized psychologi-cal assessment. You don’t need anything for this personal consultation except a telephone, a computer with internet access and a little time.

[email protected]

Telephone+ 43 2236 42315

Quality by competence since 1947 www.schuhfried.com

2011

Psychological assessmentVIENNA TEST SYSTEM

Order our newsletter at

www.schuhfried.com @For an immediate free callback go to www.schuhfried.com

Trust the no. 1 company!SCHUHFRIED is world market leader in computerized psychological assessment.

SCHUHFRIED GmbH Hyrtlstrasse 452340 MoedlingAustriaTel: +43 2236 42315Fax: +43 2236 46597E-mail [email protected]

VIEN

NA

TEST

SYS

TEM

Psy

chol

ogic

al a

sses

smen

t20

11

Psychological assessment Cognitive training Multimedia systemVIENNA TEST SYSTEM

Vienna Test System 2011 en Catalog SCHUHFRIED

Documents

Transcript of Vienna Test System 2011 en Catalog SCHUHFRIED