Psychological Assessment

Psychological Assessment




Itis imperative to enquire on a patient’s medical history. Itprovides clues on the patients risk to various health conditions. The requisite medical history for Emma’s case, involves informationabout close relatives such as children, parents, uncles and sisters.Specifically, additional questions are required to identify whetherher family has a history of developing psychological disorders. Further questions include asking Emma and the children to reflectback on their family. The aim is to identify members who havedeveloped the conditions in the past. Besides, questions about therelationship with the member and the time when the conditiondeveloped are necessary. Additional questions involve the evaluationof the patient’s lifestyle and life history to uncover occurrencesthat contribute to her illness (Buros, 1978).

Accordingto Frisch, Cornell, Villanueva, and Retzlaff (1992), it is importantto obtain information on Emma’s current and historical prescriptionof drugs. The aim is to avoid medication errors and duplication ofdrugs. Duplication may pose more harm to her. Additional questionsencompass the various drug reactions and the patient’shypersensitivity issues. In addition, it shall include the use ofover the counter medication. Besides, there is need to identifytherapy or alternative medicine in the recent past. The pastprescription details will enhance the design of the future course ofaction towards treatment.

Amajor critic of the Leeds scales method is the use of a four-pointLikert scale. The scale contains points such as “definitely,sometimes, not much, and not at all.” The two points on the likertsscale – ‘sometimes’ and ‘not much’ sound as equal measuringpoints. Consequently, they may confuse the patient while taking theassessment (Lee, Reynolds, &amp Willson, 2003).

Anothercritic on the Leeds scales is the ability to tilt the efficiency ofthe tests towards extraversion. It is due to the sole use ofpsychological symptoms related to extraversion. The scale arbitrarilyexcludes the symptoms of somatic reference related to introversion.Consequently, it implies the tests have no regard for somaticreference and tilt the efficiency of the results (Snaith, Bridge, &ampHamilton, 1976).

Themajor critic of the CAP procedure is the inability to capture theintelligence of the patients. The critic is dismissed since thepsychological tests are not meant to assess the intelligence of theaged. Their major use is to assist in the diagnosis of thepsychological disorders (Meyer, Finn, Eyde, Kay, Moreland, Dies,Eisman, Kubiszyn, &amp Reed, 2001)

Snaithet al. (1976) provide that the major strength of the Leeds scales liein the use of reasonably appropriate procedures. The proceduresvalidate the scales against clinical judgment, the items, andanalysis. Consequently, they can be clinically useful. The majorlimitation is the ability to diagnose old patients.

Incomparison, Buros(1978) provide that the CAP procedures are made specifically for theelderly. They are an outgrowth of significant research in the pastdecade. The procedures are broad and cover a range of the elderlygroups. The range includes those living independently to theinstitutionalized ones. The procedures contain an impressivecomparative and predictive validity data. The data is also availablein manuals. The CAP processes provide beneficial tools to assess thestatus of the elderly. Other advantages include the fact that theprocesses are short and easy to administer.

Snaithet al. (1976) contend that the Leeds scale’s strength emanates fromthe encouragingly high correlations of the various items that proofsatisfactory. Consequently, the scales can produce efficient resultsif substituted with interviews. The main limitation is their reducedefficiency when they are used exclusively.

Incomparison, the CAP processes are used exclusively. They are suitablefor a wide range of functional ability levels. Besides, they canclassify individuals based on an objective criterion. The criterionsubstantiates its wide application in clinical research. In addition,they assist in the identification of patients for rehabilitationpurposes (Buros, 1978).

Thefunctional aspects of the processes provide the ability to determinethe effect of a disease to the elderly. Besides, the processes canprovide information on the effects of intervention programs. Thescales face criticism for not being submitted to the kind of analysisthat provides enough evidence regarding the items correlations andsignificance. A further critic is the lack of matrixinter-correlations between the items and the scales. Consequently,they lack factor analysis. Additionally, the scales fail to correlatewith widely accepted fundamental dimensions of personality likeneuroticism introversion and extraversion (Frisch et a1., 992).

Themost appropriate test for answering the question is the CliftonAssessment Procedures for the Elderly. First, the test is designedspecifically for the old. They are more appropriate for Emma Kinchwho is 78 years old. Considered to the Leeds scale, the CAPprocedures are backed up by significant research in the past decade(Snaith et al., 1976)

Second,the test procedures are wide enough to cover a range of conditionsfor the old. The various conditions include the independent and theinstitutionalized. The test then applies to Emma Kinch, who liveswith her children. The procedures provide the ability to compare andpredict the validity of data that lacks from the Leeds scales. Afurther characteristic of the CAP test processes is their ease ofuse, application, and administration. Finally, the test is objectiveand frequently used in clinical research.

Asa conclusion, there are critical areas to assess the applicability ofa psychology test process. First, the process requires backing fromsolid research. Second is the objectivity of the process to providethe desired outcome. Third is the variety of processes to cover arange of possibilities including the ability to make comparisons andpredictions. Finally, a test process should be brief and easy touse.


Buros,O. K. (1978). Theeighth mental measurements yearbook.Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Frisch,B.M., Cornell, J., Villanueva, M. &amp Retzlaff, P.J. (1992).Clinical validation of the quality of life inventory: Ameasure of life. , 4(1),92-101.

Lee,D., Reynolds, R.C. &amp Willson, L.V. (2003). Standardized testadministration: Why brother? Journalof Forensic Neuropsychology, 3(3),55- 83.

Meyer,J.G, Finn, E.S., Eyde, L.D, Kay, G.G., Moreland, L.K., Dies, R.R.,Eisman, J.E. Kubiszyn, W.T. &amp Reed, M.G. (2001). Psychologicaltesting and psychological assessment: A review of evidence andissues. TheAmerican Psychological Association, Inc.,56(2),128-165. DOI: 10.1037//OOO3-O66X.56.2.128

Snaith,R.P, Bridge G. W, Hamilton, M. (1976). The Leeds scales for theself-assessment of anxiety and depression. TheBritish Journal of Psychiatry, 128,156-65.