Book contents
- Research Methods in Mental Health
- Reviews
- Research Methods in Mental Health
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Section 1 Principles of Research
- Section 2 Tools and Methodologies
- Chapter 6 Using Clinical Data
- Chapter 7 Clinical Trials
- Chapter 8 Principles of Psychological Assessment
- Chapter 9 Qualitative Research
- Chapter 10 Epidemiology and Population Level Research
- Chapter 11 Digital Innovation in Mental Health
- Section 3 Contemporary Applications
- Index
- References
Chapter 8 - Principles of Psychological Assessment
from Section 2 - Tools and Methodologies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 October 2025
Book contents
- Research Methods in Mental Health
- Reviews
- Research Methods in Mental Health
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Section 1 Principles of Research
- Section 2 Tools and Methodologies
- Chapter 6 Using Clinical Data
- Chapter 7 Clinical Trials
- Chapter 8 Principles of Psychological Assessment
- Chapter 9 Qualitative Research
- Chapter 10 Epidemiology and Population Level Research
- Chapter 11 Digital Innovation in Mental Health
- Section 3 Contemporary Applications
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter provides an overview of quantitative approaches to psychological assessment, focusing on measurement instruments used in mental health research. It traces the origins of psychological measurement, outlines its limitations, and explains essential psychometric properties—reliability, validity, and standardisation—needed for selecting high-quality tools. The discussion includes advances in psychometric theory, such as measurement invariance, and their implications for fair and responsible assessment. Practical considerations for test selection, interpretation, and application are highlighted, emphasizing the importance of culturally sensitive and scientifically robust methods. The chapter concludes with reflections on the future of psychological assessment in research and practice.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Research Methods in Mental HealthA Comprehensive Guide, pp. 111 - 134Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Michell, J. Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. Br J Psychol 1997; 88[3]: 358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michell, J. Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. Br J Psychol 1997; 88[3]: 360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tafreshi, D, Slaney, KL, Neufeld, SD. Quantification in psychology: critical analysis of an unreflective practice. J Theor Philos Psychol 2016; 36[4]: 233–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michell, J. Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. Br J Psychol 1997; 88[3]: 355–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaney, KL. Validating psychological constructs: historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meehl, PE. Clinical versus statistical prediction: a theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. University of Minnesota Press, 1954.Google Scholar
Grove, WM, Zald, DH, Lebow, BS, Snitz, BE, Nelson, C. Clinical versus mechanical prediction: a meta-analysis. Psychol Assess 2000; 12[1]: 19–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cronbach, LJ, Meehl, PE. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol Bull 1955; 52[4]: 281–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ayearst, LE, Bagby, RM. Evaluating the psychometric properties of psychological measures. In: Handbook of assessment and treatment planning for psychological disorders. 3rd ed [eds Antony, MM, Barlow, DH ]: Ch. 2. The Guilford Press, 2020.Google Scholar
Sijtsma, K. On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s Alpha. Psychometrika 2009; 74[1]: 107–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shrout, PE, Fleiss, JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86[2]: 420–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barker, C, Pistrang, N, Elliott, R. Research methods in clinical psychology: an introduction for students and practitioners. 2nd ed. Wiley, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breakwell, GM, Smith, JA, Wright, DB, eds. Research methods in psychology. 4th ed. Sage, 2012.Google Scholar
Haynes, SN, Smith, G, Hunsley, J. Scientific foundations of clinical assessment. Routledge, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, TD, Campbell, DT. Quasi-experimentation: design & analysis issues for field settings. Houghton Mifflin, 1979.Google Scholar
Flake, JK, Fried, EI. Measurement schmeasurement: questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Adv Methods Pract Psychol Sci 2020; 3[4]: 456–65.Google Scholar
Slaney, KL. Validating psychological constructs: historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. P51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messick, S. Validity. In Educational measurement. 3rd ed [ed Linn, RL]: Ch. 2. American Council on Education, 1989.Google Scholar
Messick, S. Test validity: a matter of consequence. Soc Indic Res 1998; 45[1]: 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. American Educational Research Association, 2014. www.testingstandards.net/uploads/7/6/6/4/76643089/standards_2014edition.pdfGoogle Scholar
Borsboom, D, Mellenbergh, GJ, van Heerden, J. The concept of validity. Psychol Rev 2004; 111[4]: 1061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroenke, K, Spitzer, RL, Williams, JBW. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001; 16[9]: 606–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM–V. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association, 2013.Google Scholar
Lawshe, CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol 1975; 28[4]: 563–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polit, DF, Beck, CT, Owen, SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2007; 30[4]: 459–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leung, K, Trevena, L, Waters, D. Content validation of the evidence-based nursing practice assessment tool. Nurse Res 2018; 26[1]: 33–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lynn, MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res 1986; 35[6]: 382–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunsley, J, Allan, T. Psychometrics and psychological assessment. In The cambridge handbook of clinical assessment and diagnosis [eds Sellbom, M, JA Suhr]: Ch. 2. Cambridge University Press, 2020.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques. Psychol Bull 1954; 51[2, Pt.2]: 15.Google Scholar
Borsboom, D. The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika 2006; 71[3]: 425–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, DT, Fiske, DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull 1959; 56[2]: 81–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noar, SM. The role of structural equation modeling in scale development. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 2003; 10[4]: 622–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association, APA Task Force on Psychological Assessment and Evaluation Guidelines. APA guidelines for psychological assessment and evaluation. American Psychological Association, 2020. https://www.apa.org/about/policy/guidelines-psychological-assessment-evaluation.pdf.Google Scholar
Coaley, K. An introduction to psychological assessment & psychometrics. 2nd ed. Sage, 2014.Google Scholar
Butcher, JN, Dahlstrom, WG, Graham, JR, Tellegen, A, Kaemmer, B. Manual for the restandardised Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: MMPI-2. An administrative and interpretive guide.University of Minnesota Press, 1989.Google Scholar
Amoretti, MC, Lalumera, E, Serpico, D. The DSM-5 introduction of the Social [Pragmatic] Communication Disorder as a new mental disorder: a philosophical review. Hist Philos Life Sci 2021; 43[4]: 108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cronbach, LJ, ed. The dependability of behavioral measurements: theory of generalisability for scores and profiles. John Wiley, 1972.Google Scholar
Monteiro, S, Sullivan, GM, Chan, TM. Generalisability theory made simple[r]: an introductory primer to G-studies. J Grad Med Educ 2019; 11[4]: 365–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medvedev, ON, Berk, M, Dean, OM, et al. A novel way to quantify schizophrenia symptoms in clinical trials. Eur J Clin Invest 2021; 51[3]: e13398.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lord, FM, Novick, MR. Statistical theories of mental test scores. Addison-Wesley, 1968.Google Scholar
Rasch, G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. University of Chicago Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Rust, J, Kosinski, M, Stillwell, D. Modern psychometrics: the science of psychological assessment. 4th ed. Routledge, 2021.Google Scholar
Embretson, SE, Hershberger, SL, eds. The new rules of measurement: what every psychologist and educator should know. Psychology Press, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, SN, Keawe’aimoku Kaholokula, J, Tanaka-Matsumi, J. Psychometric foundations of psychological assessment with diverse cultures: what are the concepts, methods, and evidence? In Cultural competence in applied psychology: an evaluation of current status and future directions [eds Frisby, CL, WT O’Donohue]: Ch. 18. Springer International Publishing, 2018.Google Scholar
Rust, J, Golombok, S. Modern psychometrics: the science of psychological assessment. Routledge, 1989.Google Scholar
Wade, DL. Racial discrimination in IQ testing – Larry P v. Riles. DePaul Law Rev 1980; 29[4]: 1193–214.Google Scholar
Davidov, E, Meuleman, B, Cieciuch, J, Schmidt, P, Billiet, J. Measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Annu Rev Sociol 2014; 40[1]: 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnick, DL, Bornstein, MH. Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: the state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Dev Rev 2016; 41: 71–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandenberg, RJ, Lance, CE. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organisational research. Organ Res Methods 2000; 3[1]: 4–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, DJ. A more general model for testing measurement invariance and differential item functioning. Psychol Methods 2017; 22[3]: 507–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steele, CM, Aronson, J. Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995; 69[5]: 797–811.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yuan, H, Dollaghan, C. Applying item response theory modeling to identify social [pragmatic] communication disorder. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2020; 63[6]: 1916–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department for Business Innovation and Skills. The 2011 Skills for Life Survey: a survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT levels in England, BIS/12/P168. Department for Business Innovation and Skills, 2012. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/attachment_data/file/36000/12-p168-2011-skills-for-life-survey.pdfGoogle Scholar
Cuffe, R. A readability analysis of the PHQ-9: how much of the general public may struggle to understand it? Clin Psychol Forum 2021; 347: 18–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHugh, RK, Behar, E. Readability of self-report measures of depression and anxiety. J Consult Clin Psychol 2009; 77[6]: 1100–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sentell, TL, Shumway, MA. Low literacy and mental illness in a nationally representative sample. J Nerv Ment Dis 2003; 191[8]: 549–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boateng, GO, Neilands, TB, Frongillo, EA, Melgar-Quiñonez, HR, Young, SL. Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: a primer. Front Public Health 2018; 6: 149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loewenthal, KM, Lewis, CA. An introduction to psychological tests and scales. 3rd ed. Routledge, 2021.Google Scholar
Streiner, DL, Norman, GR, Cairney, J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 5th ed. Oxford University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
British Psychological Society. Psychological testing: a test user’s guide. The British Psychological Society: Psychological Testing Centre, 2017. https://ptc.bps.org.uk/sites/ptc.bps.org.uk/files/guidance_documents/ptc02_test_users_guide_2017_web.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hunsley, J, Mash, EJ, eds. A guide to assessments that work. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antony, MM, Barlow, DH, eds. Handbook of assessment and treatment planning for psychological disorders. 3rd ed. Guilford Press, 2020.Google Scholar
Sellbom, M, Suhr, JA, eds. The Cambridge handbook of clinical assessment and diagnosis. Cambridge University Press, 2020.Google Scholar
Wikipedia. List of diagnostic classification and rating scales used in psychiatry [Internet]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diagnostic_classification_and_rating_scales_used_in_psychiatryGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.