+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Scoring the bender gestalt test using the koppitz developmental system interrater reliability item difficulty and scoring implications



Scoring the bender gestalt test using the koppitz developmental system interrater reliability item difficulty and scoring implications



Perceptual & Motor Skills 60(2): 627-636



Three raters using the Koppitz developmental scoring system assessed the Bender protocols of 200 six-yr olds as part of a wider ranging longitudinal study. Interrater reliability was high (Mr = 0.92), but considerable variation occurred when individual error items were analyzed, ranging from 71% agreement when figure A, distortion of shape was involved, to 94% agreement for rotations of figure 1. Full agreement was not achieved for any scoring item. A record form for scoring errors was developed and used as an aid in scoring and as a means of reducing inconsistency in marking. Analysis of item difficulty established that children at this age have more frequent problems with some types of error. Angulation errors in particular could be regarded as fairly typical of the grapho-motor skills of this age group, while errors of integration, distortion and substitution constituted the best discriminating types of error. Investigation of the relationship between the major categories of error and development of perceptual motor skills, expressed in early school performance, is needed.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 006368740

Download citation: RISBibTeXText


Related references

Item analysis inter examiner reliability and scoring problems for koppitz scoring on the bender gestalt for 6 year olds. Perceptual & Motor Skillspart 2: 1351-1358, 1968

Interrater reliability for scoring the bender gestalt using the koppitz method. Perceptual & Motor Skills 34(3): 765-766, 1972

Reliability of the Koppitz scoring system for the Bender Gestalt Test. Journal of Clinical Psychology 32(2): 468-469, 1976

Reliability of the koppitz scoring system for the bender gestalt test. Journal of Clinical Psychology 25(4): 407-409, 1969

The Bender-Gestalt test in an Italian sample: an analysis of Koppitz's Developmental Bender Scoring System deviations. Perceptual and Motor Skills 90(2): 373-385, 2000

A quick-scoring system for the Bender-Gestalt: Interrater reliability and scoring validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology 32(1): 86-89, 1976

Reliability of Koppitz' scoring system for the bender gestalt. Journal of Clinical Psychology 19(2): 211-211, 1963

The Bender-Gestalt test: Koppitz's Developmental Scoring System administered to two samples of Italian preschool and primary school children. Perceptual and Motor Skills 88(3 Pt 2): 1235-1244, 1999

Confirmation of interrater reliability of the Marley Differential Diagnostic Scoring System for the Bender-Gestalt Test. Perceptual and Motor Skills 68(3 Pt 1): 915-920, 1989

The Koppitz developmental scoring system for the Bender-Gestalt: Is it developmental?. Psychology in the Schools 21(4): 425-428, 1984

Test Reviews: Reynolds, C. R. (2007). Koppitz Developmental Scoring System for the Bender Geslalt Test (KOPPITZ-2). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 26(2): 195-201, 2007

The Bender Gestalt Test with Mentally Retarded Children Using the Koppitz Revised Scoring System. Journal of Clinical Psychology 19: 430-431, 1963

Expanded Koppitz scoring system of the bender gestalt visual-motor test for adolescents: A pilot study. Psychology in the Schools 29(2): 113-115, 1992

Comparison of the Koppitz and Watkins scoring systems for the Bender Gestalt Test. Journal of Learning Disabilities 18(7): 377-378, 1985

The Koppitz Bender Gestalt test for young children: a scoring guide. Journal of Clinical Psychology 22(4): 440-441, 1966