Psychometric Characteristics of the Culture Fair Intelligence Test Scale 2

Novina Sabila Zahra; Widyastuti Widyastuti; Ahmad Ridfah

Psychometric Characteristics of the Culture Fair Intelligence Test Scale 2

Novina Sabila Zahra, Widyastuti Widyastuti, Ahmad Ridfah

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the psychometric characteristics of the CFIT-scale-2, including investigation of difficulty level, discrimination, distractor effectiveness, DIF (Differential item functioning), IRT (Item Response Theory) 2PL model, validity, and reliability. Respondents were 507 students with 245 (48%) females and 262 (52%) males, with ages ranged from 8-13 years (M= 10.88; SD = 1.35). The classical test theory (CTT) analysis showed that the item difficulty level on the CFIT-scale-2 had varying item difficulty levels, from easy to difficult. However, the test arrangement was not structured according to the suggested difficulty level from easy to medium to difficult. The discrimination of items was poor because 28 items were not included in the very good category (p > .40). In addition, 47 (25%) of the 184 distractors are ineffective. CFIT-scale-2 did not contain DIF (Adj.p > .05), and IRT analysis showed that the CFIT-scale-2 was not structured according to the difficulty pattern from easy, medium, and difficult. The CFIT-scale-2 based on IRT analysis contained 44 items or 96% with good discrimination. The results of a construct validity test using the CFA technique showed a good fit model (p < .001; RMSEA < .08; SRMR < .08), which was acceptable and supported the fit between the theoretical and empirical model. The reliability coefficient value of Cronbach's alpha was 0.88 (α > .70), indicating that the CFIT-scale-2 had good reliability, but the construct reliability was below an acceptable value (CR < .69). According to this study, the psychometric characteristics of the CFIT-scale-2 should be revised and reevaluated.

Keywords

CFIT; CTT; DIF; IRT; psychometric characteristics

References

Azwar, S. (2016). Konstruksi tes kemampuan kognitif. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Coaley, K. (2010). An introduction to psychological assessment and psychometrics.

De Mars, C. (2010). Item response theory understanding statistics measurement.

Diahsari, E. Y. (2017). Memotret kemampuan intelektual siswa SD di pedusunan. Seminar Nasional dan Gelar Produk, (9), 746–752.

Fayers, P. M., & Machin, D. (2016). Quality of life: the assessment, analysis and reporting of patient‐reported outcomes. John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1, 648.

Fitriani, S. D. (2018). Karakteristik psikometri pada culture fair intelligence test skala 3. Universitas Negeri Makassar.

Fitriyani, E., & Nulanda, P. Z. (2017). Efektivitas media flash cards dalam meningkatkan kosakata bahasa Inggris. Psympathic : Jurnal Ilmiah Psikologi, 4(2), 167–182. https://doi.org/10.15575/psy.v4i2.1744

Goldstein, G., & Hersen, M. (2000). Handbook of psychological assessment. Elsevier.

Gottschling, J., Hahn, E., Beam, C. R., Spinath, F. M., Carroll, S., & Turkheimer, E. (2019). Socioeconomic status amplifies genetic effects in middle childhood in a large German twin sample. Intelligence, 72(November 2018), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2018.11.006

Gregory, R. J. (2013). Tes psikologi sejarah, prinsip, dan aplikasi (6th ed.). Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga.

Habersaat, S., Ramain, J., Mantzouranis, G., Palix, J., Boonmann, C., Fegert, J. M., Urben, S. (2018). Substance-use disorders, personality traits, and sex differences in institutionalized adolescents. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 44(6), 686–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990.2018.1491587

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. USA: Pearson.

Hays, J. R. A. Y., & Smith, A. L. (1980). Comparison of wisc-r. Psychological Reports, 46, 1–4.

Heine, J.-H., Gebhard, M., Schwab, S., Neumann, P., Gorges, J., & Wild, E. (2018). Testing psychometric properties of the CFT 1-R for students with special educational needs. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 60(1), 3–28.

Mustari, M. A. (2015). Penyusunan norma tes inteligensi culture fair intelligence test (CFIT). Universitas Negeri Makassar.

Nenty, H. J., & Dinero, T. E. (1981). A cross-cultural analysis of the fairness of the cattell culture fair intelligence test using the rasch Model. 5(3), 355–368.

Nurhadini, D. (2017). Studi pendahuluan: uji validitas konstruk culture fair intelegency test (CFIT) dengan metode confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) di Pusdikbang SDM Perum Perhutani Madium. Universitas Negeri Makassar.

Pranungsari, D. (2010). Hubungan antara kecerdasan dengan perfeksionisme pada anak gifted di kelas akselerasi. Humanitas: Indonesia Psychological Journal, 7(1).

Price, L. R. (2017). Psychometric methods: theory into practice. In Measurement: interdisciplinary research and perspectives. Retrieved from https://lccn.loc.gov/2016013346

Purwanto. (2013). Evaluasi hasil belajar. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Putra, A. S., & Soetikno, N. (2018). Pengaruh intervensi psikoedukasi untuk meningkatkan achievement goal pada kelompok siswi underachiever. Jurnal Muara Ilmu Sosial, Humaniora, Dan Seni, 2(1), 254. https://doi.org/10.24912/jmishumsen.v2i1.1514

Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53(4), 495–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294403

Ruiz, P. E. (2009). Measuring fluid intelligence on a ratio scale: Evidence from nonverbal classification problems and information entropy. Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 439–445. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.439

Saptoto, R. (2018). Pengaruh adaptasi waktu administrasi yang disebabkan penggunaan lembar jawaban komputer terhadap hasil CFIT 3 A dan 3 B. 45, 52–65. https://doi.org/10.22146/jpsi.30853

Setiawati, F. A., Izzaty, R. E., & Hidayat, V. (2018). Analisis respon butir pada tes bakat skolastik. Jurnal Psikologi, 17(1), 1–17.

Shetty, R. M., Pashine, A., Jose, N. A., & Mantha, S. (2018). Role of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) on anxiety and behavior in children with hearing and speech impairment. Special Care in Dentistry, 38(1), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/scd.12264

Shin, J., Guo, Q., & Gierl, M. J. (2019). Multiple-choice item distractor development using topic modeling approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(APR), 825. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2019.00825/BIBTEX

Sim, S.-M., & Isaiah Rasiah, R. (2006). Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of a para-clinical multidisciplinary paper. 35(2). Retrieved from http://www.ams.edu.sg

Smith, A. L., Hays, J. R., & Solway, K. S. (1977). Comparison of the wisc-r and culture fair intelligence test in a juvenile delinquent population. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 97(2), 179–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1977.9923959

Sukadji, S. (2005). Tes kecerdasan fair skala 2 dengan Petunjuk Penyajian.

Suryabrata, S. (2005). Pengembangan alat ukur psikologi. Yogyakarta: ANDI.

Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Post-examination analysis of objective tests. Medical Teacher, 33(6), 447–458. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.564682

Tellegen, P. J., & Laros, J. A. (1993). The construction and validation of a nonverbal test of intelligence: the revision of the snijders-oomen tests desenvolvimento da teoria psicometrica view project. Article in European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 2(January), 147–157. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233387445

Yusup, F., Studi, P., Biologi, T., Islam, U., & Antasari, N. (2018). Uji validitas dan reliabilitas instrumen penelitian kuantitatif. Jurnal Tarbiyah: Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 7(1), 17–23.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.15408/jp3i.v11i2.25947