Perbandingan Properti Psikometris Skala Kesehatan Mental (SKM) antara Metode Administrasi Paper-and-Pencil dan Web-Based

Mikael Reno Prasasto, Wahyu Widhiarso
(Submitted 15 January 2018)
(Published 20 April 2016)


Advancements on information technology had helped scientific development.
For example, now we could present a test using computers rather than using printed
papers. This research compares the differences between the psychometric properties of a
paper-and-pencil test (PPT) and web-based test (WBT). This research used Skala Kesehatan
Mental (SKM) which was given to 544 junior and senior high-school grade school. The
scale has 32 items and administered with either paper or on a website. The result showed
that each method has a different but not significant psychometric properties. Compared to
PPT, WBT was able to deliver fewer cases of outliers and higher item-total correlation.
Reliability coefficient on both method were satisfying and able to stay unidimensional on
factor analysis. Item endorsability does not appear to have significant differences. More
research on this topic is needed to further examine the effect between each method on test


computer testing; web-based test; skala kesehatan mental


Azwar, S. (2016). Reliabilitas dan validitas (Edisi IV). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Becker, L. A. (2000). Effect size (ES). s.htm

Berk, R. A., & Theall, M. (2006). Thirteen strategies to measure college teaching: A consumer's guide to rating scale construction, assessment, and decision making for faculty, administrators, and clinicians: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Chadha, N. K. (2009). Applied psychometry. New Delhi: Sage Publications India.

Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development.
Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309-311.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillside. NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Cohen, R. J. & Swerdlik, M. E. (2009). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests
and measurement (Edisi 7): McGraw-Hill.

Conole, G. & Warburton, B. (2005). A review of computer-assisted assessment. ALT-J, 13(1), 17-31. doi:

Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2013). Psychometrics: An introduction. Sage. Ginty, A. T. (2013). Psychometric Properties. InM. D. Gellman & J. R.Turner (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine (pp. 1563-1564). New York, NY: Springer New York.

PRASASTO & WIDHIARSO Hadi, S. (2004). Statistik (Edisi II. Vol. 1). Yogyakarta:

ANDI. Hart, R. R., & Goldstein, M. A. (1986). Computer-assisted psychological assessment. Computers in Human Services, 1(3), 69-75. doi:10.1300/J407v01n03_05

Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (2005). Psychological testing:Principles, applications, and issues (Edisi 6). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.

Leong, F. T. (2008). Encyclopedia of counseling (Vol. 2): Sage.

McCreary, L. L., Conrad, K. M., Conrad, K.J., Scott, C. K., Funk, R. R., & Dennis, M. L. (2013). Using the Rasch measurement model in psychometric analysis of the family effectiveness measure. Nursing research, 62(3), 149-159. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0b013e31828eafe6

Natda, K. V. (2013). Responsive web design. Eduvantage, 1(1). Nunnally, J. C. (1970). Introduction to
psychological measurement. Tokyo:Kogakusha Co. Ltd.

Piaw Chua, Y. (2012). Effects of computer-based testing on test performance and testing motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1580-1586. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.020

Preckel, F., & Thiemann, H. (2003). Online-versus paper-pencil version of a high potential intelligence test. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 62(2), 131-138.

Rosenfeld, P., Doherty, L. M., Vicino, S. M., Kantor, J., & Greaves, J. (1989). Attitude assessment
in organizations: Testing three microcomputer-based survey systems. The Journal of General 46
Psychology, 116(2), 145-154. doi:10.1080/00221309.1989.9711119

Thomas J. Ward, J., Hooper, S. R., & Hannafin, K. M. (1989). The effect of computerized tests
on the performance and attitudes of college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(3), 327-333. doi:10.2190/4U1D-VQRM-J70D-JEQF

Vispoel, W. P. (2000). Computerized versus paper-and-pencil assessment of self-concept: Score comparability and respondent preferences. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33(3), 130.

Watson, D. (1992). Correcting for acquiescent response bias in the absence of a balanced scale.
Sociological Methods & Research, 21(1), 52-88. doi: 10.1177/ 00491 24192 021001003

Widhiarso, W. (2010). Analisis butir dalam pengembangan pengukuran psikologi.Diambil dari
dalam_pengembangan_pengukuran _psikologi.pdf

Widhiarso, W., & Sumintono, B. (2016) Examining response aberrance as a cause of outliers in statiztical
analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 11-15.doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.099

We Are Social. (2015). Digital, Social & mobile in Southeast Asia. Diunduh dari

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.22146/gamajpp.32317


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2016 Gadjah Mada Journal of Professional Psychology

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.