Study On Multi-grade Qualifiers Adapting To Psychological Testing

Rating scales are common measuring implements in psychological testing. Rating scales are indispensable parts in the scales of psychological testing, life quality evaluation and social adaptability. Qualifiers smantics paly an important role in rating scales. Qualifiers smantics are important psychological indexes for us to evaluate things by grading natural language. If qualifiers smantics are classified too less grades, scales sensitivity will decrease significantly. If qualifiers smantics are classified too more grades, subjects cannot distinguish them well, which may influence the outcomes evaluating consistency. The grades of qualifiers smantics can influence measurement differentiation and evaluation. Therefore the grades of qualifiers smantics are becoming more and more important and drawing greater attention than ever before. Concise questionnaire to comprehend qualifiers smantics designed by us was employed in our experiment. Private soldiers have participated the work in order to explore the optimal rating numbers of qualifiers in psychological testing. This study has offered experimental reliability for improving our army psychological testing. On the other hand, the distributing-roles of evaluating-diversity for five-rating and seven-rating qualifiers are discussed. Their uses in the evaluation for psychological measurement error are also assessed. We have taken SCL-90 for example and made some related experiments. The measurement errors caused by evaluating-diversities of qualifiers are evaluated. This study has provided theoretical guidance for analyzing, controling and preventing psychological measurementerror in this field.There were mainly three parts in our study:First, we have analyzed multi-grade qualifiers adapting to psychological testing. We investigated the optimal rating numbers of qualifiers in psychological testing. This study offered theoretical guidance for choosing qualifiers in scales' workout. Concise questionnaire to comprehend qualifiers smantics designed by us was employed in our experiment. 180 private soldiers and 180 new entrants have participated the work. Subjects were requested to designate values for intervals and points. Fuzziness-grade was analyzed in different rating qualifiers. The results showed that, there was no significant differences between values designated for intervals and 95%, 99% Confidence Interval (CI). The sequences of qualifiers were in accordance with those of natural language. But the interval designating value between qualifiers was incompletely isometry, which was different from ours rules for designating values in practice. There were significant differences in fuzziness-grades for three and six rating to seven rating qualifiers. There were high fuzziness -grades in six and seven rating qualifiers. It is suggested that there were high fuzziness-grade in six and seven rating qualifiers. It was concluded that they should not adapt to psychological testing to a certain extent. The fuzziness -grades of entrants were not influenced by the grades of qulifiers, which were affected by the kinds of qualifiers and the position in phrases. The fuzziness -grades of frequencies were lower than those of degrees.The fuzziness-grades of the ends in phrases were also lower than that of the middle.Second, we have studied evaluating-diversity for two kinds of five-rating qualifiers. We investigated the distributing-role of evaluating-diversity for five-rating qualifiers. This study offered scientific calculating methods for their uses in the evalution for psychological measurement error. 165 private soldiers were requested to designate values for two groups five-rating qualifiers, much of them graduated from senior and junior high school. Thedistributing-character of evaluating-diversity was analyzed. We also made the compare inner each group and studied whether there had distinctions between senior and junior high school students. The results showed that, evaluating -diversities between groups assume positive skewness distribution. There are no significant differences between groups. Evaluating-diversities between words in each group have significant difference. There are no significant differences between senior school group and junior school group. It is suggested that evaluating-diversities of qualifiers assume positive skewness distribution. Evaluating-diversities between qualifiers have certain consistency. There are significant differences between evaluating-diversity interval in words. Educational level has no effects on evaluating-diversity interval.Third, we have studied evaluating-diversity for seven-rating qualifiers. We investigated the distributing-role of evaluating-diversity for seven-rating qualifiers. 165 private soldiers were requested to designate values for two groups seven-rating qualifiers, much of them graduated from senior and junior high school. We analyzed the distributing-character of evaluating-diversity and made the compare inner each group. We also studied whether there have distinction between senior and junior high school students. The results showed that, evaluating-diversities between groups assume positive skewness distribution. There are no significant differences between groups. Evaluating -diversities between words in each group have significant difference, most evidently between the first word or the seventh word and the other words. There are no significant differences between senior school group and junior school group. It is suggested that evaluating-diversities of qualifiers assume positive skewness distribution. Evaluating-diversities between qualifiers have certain consistency. There are significant differences between evaluating -diversity interval in words. Further research is now needed to explore the influence of educational level on evaluating-diversity interval.Forth, we have studied the difference of SCL-90 between previous scale scores and evaluating-diversities scores in college new entrants. We investigated the SCL-90 measurement error caused by qualifiers. 180 new...