This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More
uncaged (2)
PSYCHOMETRICS VS ECOMETRICS

“Horses for Courses” is the best approach when considering if psychometrics should be applied instead of Ecometrics and would have better results applied to specific case studies.

The service of a psychiatrist is by no means devalued and is most helpful in treating conditions with underlying Psychiatric tendencies. But when evaluating and improving circumstances, values, relationships, trauma, stress, and career ventures it is important to serve the client’s reality.

We are not all the same and Ecometrics endeavors to supply a personal/customized experience in adding value to the client’s life.

Advantages and Disadvantages

PSYCHOMETRICS: Measurement of personality for diagnostic purposes

  • Do not always take the immediate effect of the environment on the functionality of the individual into consideration.

  • Norm-referenced

  • Sample needs to be representative of the population.

  • Biased towards populations groups

Norm-referenced scaling explained: Use the average & standard deviation, minimum and maximum scores to establish the norm for the specific group E.g.: – A total score between 15 & 45 with an average of 30 and a standard deviation of 5 – A respondent’s score is then compared to see how it differs from the average – with one, two, three, or more standard deviations.

The biggest argument against norms: – The average of a population can’t be seen as the norm, otherwise, we expect all people to act mediocre

ECOMETRICS: Has to do with the quantification of the degree of balance between people and their environment.

  • It focuses on the way people adapt to their environments.

  • Criterion-referenced scaling

  • The Sample needs not to be representative of the population.

Criterion-referenced scaling explained: Specific attention is given to the unique score of a client on a scale with the unique problems that the client faces. Rather than comparing the score with a population mean score.

Basic comparisons are made with criterion-referenced scaling with: – The minimum possible score of 0 – The maximum possible score of 100 – The clinical cutting scores

  • Clinical cutting scores are based on specific criteria determined by professionals to differentiate between people who (most likely) have a problem and those who don’t have a problem in a specific area.

  • Criterion validity – how well a scale can differentiate between “healthy” and “unhealthy”.

– Less judgmental – just want to establish if a person needs “help

Supplied Information forms part of Perspektief Training Centre Study Material