Do You Think Dr. Zak Has a Good Sample on Which to Norm His Test? Why or Why Not? What Are Your Suggestions?

Do you think Dr. Zak has a good sample on which to norm his test? Why or why not? What are your suggestions?

This is a good sample on which to norm his test according to the readings. To develop a test, a test developer selects a specific group of people with basically one characteristic in common. The characteristic has to be observable. It is expensive, impractical and impossible according to the text to administer Dr. Zaks test to everyone and it wouldn't be necessary. Dr. Zak could have obtained a distribution of test responses from the one-hundred participants by administering the test to a sample population. That would be a portion of the universe of people that would be representative of the whole population. In evaluating a test, it is critical to consider the inferences that may reasonably be made as a result of administering that test, such as: Will we learn something about why people have depressive moods? Will the test show how many more men have depression than women? These are some of the questions that could be answered after administering the test. These few questions represent just a small sampling of critical question for which answers must be inferred on the basis of test scores and other data derived from various tools of assessment. The sample could be as small as one person.