Sources
Find the evidence behind a measure and the limits of what was inspected.
What the source labels mean
Primary research supplies study-specific findings. Developer guidance documents intended use, versions and permissions. Publisher information establishes current product details but is not an independent evaluation. Textbook sections introduce concepts and supply the course map.
Sources were checked October 22, 2026. Access includes complete web guidance, selected article text, abstracts and indexed excerpts. Each note names the actual scope and failed direct access where relevant. This is a selected educational reference, not a systematic psychometric review.
Availability to read does not establish permission to administer, adapt or redistribute an instrument. Follow the current rights-holder guidance for the exact form and purpose. No item sets, protected stimuli or normative conversion tables are reproduced here.
Source catalog
44 distinct URLs across 22 profiles.
- Ainsworth, M. D., & Bell, S. M. (1970). Attachment, exploration, and separation: Illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation. Child Development, 41(1), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1970.tb00975.xConsulted sourcePrimary research: PubMed bibliographic record
PubMed citation record (Child Development, 1970, 41(1), 49–67) inspected; PubMed displays no abstract text, and full coding manuals were not directly inspected.
Used in: Strange Situation procedure
- Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind” ? Cognition, 21(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8Primary research: indexed publisher abstract and bibliographic record
The indexed publisher abstract was inspected; direct publisher access returned 403 and PubMed has no abstract. Historical terminology is preserved only in the source title. This study cannot justify a general claim that autistic people lack understanding of minds.
- Berkeley personality lab: BFI-2. (n.d.). https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/bfiDeveloper page: description and permission terms
The first description and permission sections were inspected. Later FAQ material mixes older BFI and BFI-2 information; it is not used as an edition-specific scoring manual.
Used in: Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2)
- Carnegie Mellon University. (n.d.-a). Carnegie mellon: Cohen scales and permission requests. https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/psychology/stress-immunity-disease-lab/scales/index.htmlDeveloper laboratory: permission notice
Current notice routes PSS permission requests through ePROVIDE/MAPI Research Trust. A downloadable form alone is not a blanket license.
Used in: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)
- Carnegie Mellon University. (n.d.-b). Carnegie mellon: Perceived stress scale, 10-item form. https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/psychology/stress-immunity-disease-lab/scales/html/pss.htmlDeveloper laboratory: indexed form excerpt
The 10-item form, last-month reference period, 0-to-4 response format and four reverse-scored items were inspected. Items are not reproduced.
Used in: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)
- Cohen, kamarck & mermelstein (1983): A global measure of perceived stress. (n.d.). https://kilthub.cmu.edu/articles/journal_contribution/A_Global_Measure_of_Perceived_Stress/6613130Author institution repository: abstract
The original article concerns the 14-item PSS. Its results are not presented as coefficients for the later 10-item version introduced by Cohen and Williamson (1988).
Used in: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)
- Ed diener: Satisfaction with life scale. (n.d.). https://eddiener.com/satisfaction-with-life-scale-swls/Developer estate: description and permission notice
Five-item cognitive life-satisfaction purpose, 7-point scale (5 to 35 total) and noncommercial research terms inspected. No population norms or clinical cutoffs verified.
Used in: Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS)
- Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception &, 16(1), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03203267Consulted sourcePrimary research: publisher abstract
Letter-based target/flanker manipulation and response-compatibility effects inspected. Full article is subscription content; arrow variants are not attributed to this original protocol.
Used in: Eriksen flanker task
- Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732Consulted sourcePrimary research: publisher abstract
Original three-item test purpose and reported relations with choices inspected. Original questions and answers are not reproduced.
Used in: Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT)
- Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 38(5), 581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.xConsulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
Foundational 1997 article introducing the 25-item SDQ and comparing parent/teacher SDQ scores with Rutter questionnaires.
- Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337–1345. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
British epidemiological sample, factor structure, reliability, informant agreement and interview comparison inspected. Results are not US norms.
- Gosling lab: Ten item personality measure. (n.d.). https://gosling.psy.utexas.edu/scales-weve-developed/ten-item-personality-measure-tipi/Developer page: description, abstract, scoring and permission
Includes the 2003 Gosling, Rentfrow and Swann reference, the 1-to-7 response scale, reverse-scoring of five contrait items and the developers’ explicit brevity tradeoff. Translation listings are not independent validation.
- Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.74.6.1464Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
Foundational 1998 article introducing the categorized response-latency paradigm across three experiments. Does not establish individual diagnostic classification.
Used in: Implicit Association Test (IAT)
- Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. an improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
Alternative D-score algorithms and their evaluation inspected. Does not establish individual diagnostic accuracy or a moral classification.
Used in: Implicit Association Test (IAT)
- Hedge, C., Powell, G., & Sumner, P. (2017). The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1166–1186. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0935-1Consulted sourcePrimary research: open article abstract and conceptual introduction
Distinguishes dependable experimental effects from reliable individual differences. Online publication was 2017; journal issue is 2018. No universal reliability coefficient assigned to task families.
Used in: Eriksen flanker task, Stroop color-word task
- Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Meier, B. (2010). The concurrent validity of the n-back task as a working memory measure. Memory (Hove, England), 18(4), 394–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211003702171Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
Three experiments with different stimuli and loads; the reported reliability concern belongs to those implementations. N-back is not treated as equivalent to every working-memory measure.
Used in: N-back task
- Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. (2001). The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(9), 606–613. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.xConsulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
6,000 respondents and 580 independent interviews; 0–27 severity bands (5, 10, 15, 20) and the sensitivity and specificity quoted here belong to that study, criterion and cutoff.
- PAR: Wisconsin card sorting test. (n.d.). https://www.parinc.com/products/WCSTPublisher description, scoring overview and qualification information
Administration, score types and publisher-reported interscorer evidence inspected. Product claims are identified as publisher information, not independent validation.
Used in: Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
- Pearson: Raven’s 2 clinical edition flyer. (n.d.). https://www.pearsonassessments.com/content/dam/school/global/clinical/us/assets/ravens-2/ravens-2-flyer.pdfPublisher document: indexed description
2018 publication and nonverbal reasoning purpose inspected in the indexed publisher document. Technical manual, item bank and independent psychometrics were not inspected.
Used in: Raven’s 2 Progressive Matrices
- Pearson: WAIS-IV and WAIS-5 comparison. (n.d.). https://www.pearsonclinical.co.uk/content/dam/school/global/clinical/uk-clinical/assets/wais-5-us-version/wais-5-comparison-flyer.pdfPublisher document: indexed comparison text
Edition-specific subtest changes and 2024 US version inspected through the indexed text. No test items, scoring tables or normative conversions reproduced.
Used in: Digit-span tasks, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fifth Edition (WAIS-5)
- Pearson: Wechsler adult intelligence scale, fifth edition. (n.d.). https://www.pearsonassessments.com/store/en/usd/p/P100071002.htmlPublisher description and edition information
US WAIS-5 publication year 2024, intended ages and qualification level inspected. Technical manual and independent validation studies were not accessed.
Used in: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fifth Edition (WAIS-5)
- Project implicit: Frequently asked questions. (n.d.). https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/faqs.htmlDeveloper organization: explanation and interpretation guidance
Association-based interpretation and time-dependent score limitations inspected. Developer guidance is distinguished from an independent evidence review.
Used in: Implicit Association Test (IAT)
- Russell, D. W. (1996). UCLA loneliness scale (version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
College-student, nurse, teacher and older-adult datasets; reported internal consistency and one-year retest figures. Full item text is not reproduced.
Used in: UCLA Loneliness Scale, Version 3
- SDQ team: Copyright and electronic-use notice. (n.d.). https://sdqinfo.org/Developer guidance: current copyright notice
Qualifying paper copying, restrictions on modifications and translations, and prior authorization for electronic forms inspected. No forms redistributed.
- SDQ team: Scoring the SDQ. (n.d.). https://www.sdqinfo.org/py/sdqinfo/c0.pyDeveloper guidance: scoring and licensing notices
Computer scoring recommendations and software licensing notices inspected. No scoring code or questionnaire forms redistributed.
- SDQ team: What is the SDQ? (n.d.). https://www.sdqinfo.org/a0.htmlDeveloper guidance: structure and forms
25 attributes, five scales, 0–40 Total Difficulties structure, informant/age versions (2–17 parent/teacher, 11–17 self-report) and impact supplement inspected. Age and reference period depend on the selected form.
- Soto & John: BFI-2 form and scoring key. (n.d.). https://www.colby.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bfi2-form.pdfDeveloper-hosted document: indexed scoring-key excerpt
Domain and facet scoring structure checked in the indexed excerpt. Instrument items are not reproduced here.
Used in: Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2)
- Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed record and abstract
Development and hierarchical domain/facet structure. Full validation tables were not independently reanalyzed.
Used in: Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/11-9-personality-assessmentTextbook: conceptual context
Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.
Used in: Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/14-1-what-is-stressTextbook: conceptual context
Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.
Used in: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/14-5-the-pursuit-of-happinessTextbook: conceptual context
Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.
Used in: Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/15-1-what-are-psychological-disordersTextbook: conceptual context
Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.
Used in: Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/2-2-approaches-to-researchTextbook: conceptual context
Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.
Used in: Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), Eriksen flanker task, Implicit Association Test (IAT), Stroop color-word task, UCLA Loneliness Scale, Version 3, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/7-5-measures-of-intelligenceTextbook: direct and contextual discussion
Direct discussion for directly covered instruments; conceptual context alongside instrument-specific sources for related profiles.
Used in: Raven’s 2 Progressive Matrices, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fifth Edition (WAIS-5)
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/8-1-how-memory-functionsTextbook: conceptual context
Conceptual context; the instrument-specific sources in this profile provide the primary evidence.
Used in: Digit-span tasks, N-back task
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/9-3-stages-of-developmentTextbook: direct and contextual discussion
Direct discussion for directly covered instruments; conceptual context alongside instrument-specific sources for related profiles.
Used in: False-belief tasks (Sally–Anne lineage), Strange Situation procedure, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)
- Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
US primary-care development sample, 0–21 scale, cut point of 10 and interview comparison inspected; no universal accuracy or optimal cutoff inferred.
- Steffens, M. C., & Buchner, A. (2003). Implicit association test: Separating transsituationally stable and variable components of attitudes toward gay men. Experimental Psychology, 50(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1027//1618-3169.50.1.33Consulted sourcePrimary research: indexed abstract
Two studies found substantial between-situation variability despite internal consistency. This is a particular IAT implementation, not a coefficient for every IAT.
Used in: Implicit Association Test (IAT)
- Stroop (1935): Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. (n.d.). https://www.yorku.ca/pclassic/Stroop/Primary article: university-hosted transcription
Original color-word interference procedure and distinction between reading and color naming inspected. Modern test editions require their own manuals.
Used in: Stroop color-word task
- University of maryland: Rosenberg self esteem scale. (n.d.). https://socy.umd.edu/about-us/rosenberg-self-esteem-scaleInstitutional custodian: overview and public-domain notice
The institutional description and public-domain notice were inspected (an earlier check encountered a temporary 502 before succeeding on recheck). This does not constitute inspection of the original 1965 validation data.
Used in: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
- University of maryland: Using the rosenberg self-esteem scale. (n.d.). https://socy.umd.edu/about-us/using-rosenberg-self-esteem-scaleInstitutional custodian: scoring instructions and 1965 reference list
Official University of Maryland sociology guidance documenting the 10-item 4-point scale, five reverse-scored items (3, 5, 8, 9, 10), 0–30 and 10–40 sum conventions, and the 1965 book reference. Original 1965 validation tables were not directly inspected.
Used in: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
- University of wisconsin: Wisconsin card sorting test. (n.d.). https://primate.wisc.edu/outreach/wisconsin-card-sorting-test/Origin institution: indexed historical description
Institutional account identifies 1948 Grant and Berg development at Wisconsin and sorting by color, form and number. No original norms or clinical diagnostic accuracy reviewed here.
Used in: Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
- VA national center for PTSD: PCL-5. (n.d.). https://ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/adult-sr/ptsd-checklist.aspOfficial instrument guidance
Description, 20-item 0–4 rating structure, DSM-5 Criteria B–E alignment, provisional 31–33 threshold guidance, public-domain statement and limits on thresholds inspected. The full clinical assessment process is not reproduced.
Used in: PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5)
- Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063Consulted sourcePrimary research: PubMed record and indexed article excerpts
PubMed bibliographic record (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070) and indexed text excerpts covering the two 10-item scales, 1-to-5 rating format and time-frame instructions were inspected. A third-party PDF link returned 502 and PubMed displays no abstract text; full-page inspection is not claimed.