Pembuktian Validitas terkait Struktur Tes Potensi Akademik Pascasarjana (PAPS) Universitas Gadjah Mada

https://doi.org/10.22146/jpsi.38223

Wahyu Widhiarso(1*)

(1) Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


This study examined the construct validity of the Graduate Academic Potential Test (PAPS). The examination was performed on all existing PAPS series (6 forms) to identify the consistency of dimensionality structure of PAPS. Data of this study were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The results of the analysis support assumption that the structure of the PAPS test is unidimensional. All of the model fit indices support the decision that the unidimensional model fit the data. The study also examined factor loading that the non-verbal components, especially the quantitative components that had a higher factor weight than the other components.

Keywords


confirmatory factor analysis; PAPS; validity construct

Full Text:

PDF


References

Åberg‐Bengtsson, L. (2005). Separating Quantitative and Analytic Dimensions in the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test (SweSAT). Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(4), 359–383. doi: 10.1080/00313830500202892

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.

Armstrong, R. D., & Shi, M. (2009). A parametric cumulative sum statistic for person fit. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33(5), 14–19.

Azwar, S., & Ridho, A. (2013). Abilitas komposit dalam tes potensi. Jurnal Psikologi, 40(2), 127–142.

Brodnick, R. J., & Ree, M. J. (1995). A structural model of academic performance, socioeconomic status, and Spearman’s g. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55(4), 583–594. doi: 10.1177/0013164495055004006

Cook, M. D. (2003). Personnel selection. Adding value through people. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Dienstag, J. L. (2011). The medical college admission test — Toward a new balance. New England Journal of Medicine, 365(21), 1955-1957. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1110171

Domino, G., & Domino, M. L. (2006). Psychological testing an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., Nussbeck, F. W., & Trierweiler, L. I. (2003). Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait – multimethod models: A Multiple-Indicator CT-C(M-1) model. Psychological Methods, 8(1), 38–60. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.8.1.38

Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., & Conway, A. R. A. (1999). Working memory, short-term memo­ry, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(3), 309–331. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.309

Everson, H. T. (2003). Innovation and change in the SAT: A design framework for future college admission tests. In R. Zwick (Ed.), The SAT rethinking the future of standardized testing in university admissions. New York, NY: Routledge.

Flanagan, Dawn P. & Dixon, S. G. (2005). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues, 136–181. doi: 10.1002/9781118660584.ese0431

Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2004). Scholastic assessment or g? Psychological Science, 15(6), 373–378. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00687.x

Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2008). Psychometrics: An introduction. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Gre, E. T. S., Walters, A. M., & Kaufman, J. C. (2011). The role of noncognitive constructs and other background variables in graduate education. ETS Research Reports Series, (RR-11-12 April), 1–131.

Gustafsson, J. E. (1988). Hierarchical models of individual differences and cognitive abilities. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Gustafsson, J. E., Westerlund, A., & Wedman, I. (1992). The dimensionality of the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 36(1), 21–39. doi: 10.1080/0031383920360102

Harvey, R. J., Billings, R. S., & Nilan, K. J. (1985). Confirmatory factor analysis of the job diagnostic survey: Good news and bad news. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(3), 461–468. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.70.3.461

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118

Jenkings, D. J. (2016). The predictive validity of the General Scholastic Aptitude Test (GSAT) for first-year students in information technology. University of Zululand, Kwadlangezwa.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1990). Model search with Tetrad-Ii and Lisrel. Sociological Methods & Research, 19(1), 93–106.

Kobrin, J. L., Camara, W. J., & Milewski, G. B. (2002). Jennifer L. Kobrin, Wayne J. Camara, and Glenn B. Milewski. College board research report. New York, NY.

Matsunaga, M. (2008). Item parceling in Structural Equation Modeling: A primer. Communication Methods and Measures, 2(4), 260–293. doi: 10.1080/19312450802458935

Reise, S. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models, 667–696. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2012.715555

Rock, D. A., Werts, C., & Grandy, J. (1982). Construct validity of the gre aptitude test across populations: An empirical confirmatory study. ETS Research Report, 78–1P, 81–57.

Sincoff, J. B., & Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Two faces of verbal ability. Intelligence, 11(4), 263–276. doi: 10.1016/0160-2896(87)90010-9

Spearman, C. (1904). General intelligence, objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.

Taub, G. E., & Mcgrew, K. S. (2004). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory and Cross-Age lnvariance of the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of cognitive abilities. School Psychology Quarterly, 19(1), 72–87.

Thacker, J. W., Fields, M. W., & Tetrick, L. E. (1989). The factor structure of Union Commitment: An application of confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(2), 228–232. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.2.228

Visser, B. A., Ashton, M. C., & Vernon, P. A. (2006). Beyond g : Putting multiple intelligences theory to the test, 34, 487–502. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.004

Vuong, Q. H. (1989). Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica, 57, 307–333.

Wallbrown, F. H., Carmin, C. N., & Barnett, R. W. (1988). Investigating the construct validity of the multidimensional aptitude battery. Psychological Reports, 62(3), 871–878. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1988.62.3.871

Ward, L. C., Ryan, J. J., & Axelrod, B. N. (2000). Confirmatory Factor Analyses of the WAIS-III standardization data. Psychological Assessment, 12(3), 341–345. doi: 10.1037//1040-3590.12.3.341

Ward, W. C. (1982). A comparison of free-response and multiple-choice forms of verbal aptitude tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6(1), 1–11. doi: 10.1177/014662168200600101

Widhiarso, W. (2016). Mengakomodasi efek metode dalam pengujian validitas konstruk melalui analisis faktor konfirmatori. Jurnal Psikologi Psikologia, 1(1), 37–51. doi: 10.21070/psikologia.v1i1.478

Widhiarso, W., Azwar, S., Suhapti, R., & Haryanta. (2015). Analisis dan penyempurnaan Tes PAPS Seri A1. Seri Technical Report UPAP, 2(2), 1–7.

Widhiarso, W., & Haryanta. (2015). Examining method effect of synonym and antonym test in verbal abilities measure. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 419–431. doi: 10.5964/ejop.v11i3.865

Widhiarso, W., & Haryanta. (2016). Comparing the performance of synonym and antonym tests in measuring verbal abilities. TPM - Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 23(3), 335–345. doi: 10.4473/TPM23.3.5

Widhiarso, W. & Suhapti, R. (2018). Penggunaan Testlet dalam Pengem­bangan Tes Psikologi. InsanJurnal Psikologi dan Kesehatan Mental, 3(1). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jpkm.V3I12018.%25p

Wulan, R. (1996). SPM untuk mengukur inteligensi. Jurnal Psikologi, 2, 67–73.

Young, J. W. ., Klieger, D., Bochenek, J., Li, C., & Cline, F. (2014). The validity of scores from the GRE® revised general test for forecasting performance in business schools: Phase one. ETS Research Reports Series, (GRE-14-01, RR-14-17), 1–10. doi: 10.1002/ets2.12019

Zwick, R. (2004). Part I: Standardized tests and American education: What Is the past and future of college admissions testing in the United States? In R. Zwick (Ed.), SAT Rethinking the future of standardized testing in university admissions. New York, NY: Routledge.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jpsi.38223

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 7495 | views : 14734

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Copyright (c) 2019 Jurnal Psikologi

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

 

Recent Issues

Buku 1 Buku 1 Buku 1 Buku 1 
Vol 51 Issue 1 (2024)
Page 219-332		 Vol 50 Issue 3 (2023)
Page 219-332		 Vol 51 Issue 1 (2023)
Page 125-218		 Vol 51 Issue 1 (2023)
Page 1-124		 

 

 

Published by Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia Building D-6th, Floor No. D-606. Jl. Sosio Humaniora No. 1, Bulaksumur Yogyakarta, 55281
Email: jurnalpsikologi@ugm.ac.id
Phone/whatsApp: +6281125210175

Web Analytics Made Easy - StatCounter View My Stats