A scoring manual for anxiety indexes in the Draw A Person Test (DAP) was based, in part, on the work of Hoyt, and of Goldworth, with a number of additions and modifications by the author. Twenty indexes of anxiety were described. Alternative scoring procedures were suggested for some indexes. The Draw-a-Person test is commonly used as a measure of intelligence in children, but this has been criticized. Harlene Hayne et al. Compared scores on the Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test to scores on the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence in 100 children and found a very low correlation (r=0.27). Death Attitude Profile-Revised (DAP-R) Wong, P.T.P., Reker, G.T., & Gesser, G. This questionnaire contains a number of statements related to different attitudes toward death. Read each statement carefully, and then decide the extent to which you agree or disagree. For example, an item might read: 'Death is a friend.' Indicate how. The first step in successful use of DAP data to positively impact program design and support involves the familiarization of DAP data managers with the DAP tool itself. This might involve carefully reading the DAP's 58 items, exploring the DAP scoring sheets, and taking the time to familiarize oneself with. A Draw-a-Person test is scored by psychologists using a points system. It is a cognitive and intelligence test that is scored based on the test-taker's creativity. The scoring system developed by J.A. Naglieri in 1992, called the Draw-A-Person: Screening Procedure of Emotional Disturbance (DAP:SPED), lists 55 things that psychologists can use.
| General Information on the Measure | |
|---|---|
| Purpose of the measure | The DAP assesses young people's strengths, supports, and other noncognitive factors critical for success in life. The DAP can be used to plan positive youth development programs or to identify areas in need of strengthening. |
| Main constructs measured | Intrapersonal competencies; Interpersonal competencies |
| Applicable grade levels | Ages 8-18 |
| Publication year for the most recent version | No information is available in the references reviewed. |
| Year originally developed | 2004 |
| Related measures | |
| Measure Administration | |
| Respondent | Student |
| Method of administration | Paper/Pencil, Digital |
| Number of items | 58 |
| Item format | Four-point Likert-type scale |
| Administration time | 10 minutes |
| Available languages | English, Spanish, and other languages including Albanian, Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, French, Japanese, Nepali, Portuguese, and Tagalog |
| Fee for use | Fee charged by developer |
| Credentials required for administration | None |
| Scoring | |
| Overall score reporting | A total DAP score is reported. |
| Subscore reporting | Eight subscores are reported:
Scores are also provided by family, school, community, social, and personal contexts. |
| Scoring procedures | An online scoring service is provided by the assessment developers. |
| Interpretive information | Score reports include narrative information on areas of strength and growth, and they identify asset levels as challenged, vulnerable, adequate, or thriving. |
| Evidence of Technical Quality | |
| Populations for which technical quality evidence has been collected | Evidence was collected from two samples: 6th-12th grade students in Minnesota (N=13,00), and 6th-8th grade students in Oregon (N=1,110). Additional pilot-testing has occurred with international populations to validate contextualized and translated measures. |
| Reliability evidence | Internal consistency estimates averaged 0.81 for the eight asset category scales and 0.88 for the five context scales. Overall DAP score had an internal consistency of 0.97. Compressor 4.2.2 for mac. Test-retest reliability was estimated over a two-week interval, and averaged 0.79 for the eight asset categories. Overall DAP score had a test-retest reliability of 0.87. (Search institute, 2016). |
| Validity evidence |
|
| Locating the Measure | |
| Obtaining a copy of the measure | search-institute.org |
| References | |
Search Institute, 'Developmental assets profile: User manual,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016a. Search Institute, 'User Guide for the Attitudes and Behaviors Survey,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016b. | |
| Notes | |
This measure is also reviewed in the AWG Guide. |
Measure summary updated October 3, 2018.
- PRODUCTS
Systematic method for evaluating the process used in a common drawing task to evaluate cognitive abilities
Cecil Reynolds and Julia Hickman
- Ages: 4-0 through 89-11
- Testing Time: 10-12 minutes
- Administration: Individual or Group
The Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults (DAP:IQ) provides a common set of scoring criteria to estimate intellectual ability from a human figure drawing. Until now, measurement of cognitive ability by scoring drawings of human figures focused mainly on children and adolescents. The DAP:IQ applies this form of evaluation to adults as well, allowing for a more direct, continuous measurement of a common construct across the age range.
The DAP:IQ improves the practice of evaluating human figure drawings (HFDs) as a measurement of cognitive ability by scoring elements representative of universal features of the human figure. The collection of a HFD is easily standardized with a set of simple, easily understood instructions, and requires a very short period of time.
This flexible assessment is for use by psychologists, school counselors, and professionals working with special-needs populations. The DAP:IQ allows you to derive reliable, quantitative ability estimates by using the largest single collection of normative data on this task ever gathered. Psychometric data, including normative reference data, are provided for ages 4 years to 89 years and are based on a total sample of 3,090 individuals across the United States. The validity and utility of this test lie in the scoring system¹s emphasis of concepts over artistic skill and motor coordination.
Features of the DAP:IQ
A scoring manual for anxiety indexes in the Draw A Person Test (DAP) was based, in part, on the work of Hoyt, and of Goldworth, with a number of additions and modifications by the author. Twenty indexes of anxiety were described. Alternative scoring procedures were suggested for some indexes. The Draw-a-Person test is commonly used as a measure of intelligence in children, but this has been criticized. Harlene Hayne et al. Compared scores on the Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test to scores on the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence in 100 children and found a very low correlation (r=0.27). Death Attitude Profile-Revised (DAP-R) Wong, P.T.P., Reker, G.T., & Gesser, G. This questionnaire contains a number of statements related to different attitudes toward death. Read each statement carefully, and then decide the extent to which you agree or disagree. For example, an item might read: 'Death is a friend.' Indicate how. The first step in successful use of DAP data to positively impact program design and support involves the familiarization of DAP data managers with the DAP tool itself. This might involve carefully reading the DAP's 58 items, exploring the DAP scoring sheets, and taking the time to familiarize oneself with. A Draw-a-Person test is scored by psychologists using a points system. It is a cognitive and intelligence test that is scored based on the test-taker's creativity. The scoring system developed by J.A. Naglieri in 1992, called the Draw-A-Person: Screening Procedure of Emotional Disturbance (DAP:SPED), lists 55 things that psychologists can use.
| General Information on the Measure | |
|---|---|
| Purpose of the measure | The DAP assesses young people's strengths, supports, and other noncognitive factors critical for success in life. The DAP can be used to plan positive youth development programs or to identify areas in need of strengthening. |
| Main constructs measured | Intrapersonal competencies; Interpersonal competencies |
| Applicable grade levels | Ages 8-18 |
| Publication year for the most recent version | No information is available in the references reviewed. |
| Year originally developed | 2004 |
| Related measures | |
| Measure Administration | |
| Respondent | Student |
| Method of administration | Paper/Pencil, Digital |
| Number of items | 58 |
| Item format | Four-point Likert-type scale |
| Administration time | 10 minutes |
| Available languages | English, Spanish, and other languages including Albanian, Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, French, Japanese, Nepali, Portuguese, and Tagalog |
| Fee for use | Fee charged by developer |
| Credentials required for administration | None |
| Scoring | |
| Overall score reporting | A total DAP score is reported. |
| Subscore reporting | Eight subscores are reported:
Scores are also provided by family, school, community, social, and personal contexts. |
| Scoring procedures | An online scoring service is provided by the assessment developers. |
| Interpretive information | Score reports include narrative information on areas of strength and growth, and they identify asset levels as challenged, vulnerable, adequate, or thriving. |
| Evidence of Technical Quality | |
| Populations for which technical quality evidence has been collected | Evidence was collected from two samples: 6th-12th grade students in Minnesota (N=13,00), and 6th-8th grade students in Oregon (N=1,110). Additional pilot-testing has occurred with international populations to validate contextualized and translated measures. |
| Reliability evidence | Internal consistency estimates averaged 0.81 for the eight asset category scales and 0.88 for the five context scales. Overall DAP score had an internal consistency of 0.97. Compressor 4.2.2 for mac. Test-retest reliability was estimated over a two-week interval, and averaged 0.79 for the eight asset categories. Overall DAP score had a test-retest reliability of 0.87. (Search institute, 2016). |
| Validity evidence |
|
| Locating the Measure | |
| Obtaining a copy of the measure | search-institute.org |
| References | |
Search Institute, 'Developmental assets profile: User manual,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016a. Search Institute, 'User Guide for the Attitudes and Behaviors Survey,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016b. | |
| Notes | |
This measure is also reviewed in the AWG Guide. |
Measure summary updated October 3, 2018.
- PRODUCTS
Systematic method for evaluating the process used in a common drawing task to evaluate cognitive abilities
Cecil Reynolds and Julia Hickman
- Ages: 4-0 through 89-11
- Testing Time: 10-12 minutes
- Administration: Individual or Group
The Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults (DAP:IQ) provides a common set of scoring criteria to estimate intellectual ability from a human figure drawing. Until now, measurement of cognitive ability by scoring drawings of human figures focused mainly on children and adolescents. The DAP:IQ applies this form of evaluation to adults as well, allowing for a more direct, continuous measurement of a common construct across the age range.
The DAP:IQ improves the practice of evaluating human figure drawings (HFDs) as a measurement of cognitive ability by scoring elements representative of universal features of the human figure. The collection of a HFD is easily standardized with a set of simple, easily understood instructions, and requires a very short period of time.
This flexible assessment is for use by psychologists, school counselors, and professionals working with special-needs populations. The DAP:IQ allows you to derive reliable, quantitative ability estimates by using the largest single collection of normative data on this task ever gathered. Psychometric data, including normative reference data, are provided for ages 4 years to 89 years and are based on a total sample of 3,090 individuals across the United States. The validity and utility of this test lie in the scoring system¹s emphasis of concepts over artistic skill and motor coordination.
Features of the DAP:IQ
- Standardized instructions for the task are easy to derive
- Standardized scoring systems emphasize conceptual aspects of drawings, not artistic quality
- Drawings collected in a rapid, efficient manner
- Few people are hesitant to do the drawing once they are assured that the artistic quality is not being evaluated
- Drawings can be obtained in even the most challenging of clinical situations (such as the assessment of autistic or severely hyperactive children, non-reading or non-English speaking clients)
- Scoring criteria have less cultural specificity than most intelligence tests, verbal or nonverbal (culture-reduced)
- All you need to give and score of the DAP:IQ is the test manual, the Administration/Scoring Form, and a sharpened pencil.
See Full List On Aasm.org
COMPLETE DAP:IQ KIT INCLUDES:Examiner's Manual, 50 Administration/Scoring Forms, and 50 Drawing Forms, all in a sturdy storage box. (2004)
