Southern Luzon State University

College of Arts and Science

Lucban, Quezon

Differential Aptitude Test: An Overview

A partial Fulfillment of the requirements for Psychological Assessment (PSY107)

Submitted By:
Emanuel R. Ronquillo

Submitted to:
Prof. Marissa C. Esperal

Name of the Test:

Differential Aptitude Test (DAT)

Test Developer:

Unknown

Test Publisher:The Psychological Corporation

Type of Test:
Administration:

Aptitude Test; Performance Measure

Paper & Pencil Administration
Computerized Administration

Population:

6 - 17 years old

Duration:

1 3 Hours; (each sub tests requires 12 25 minutes)

Main Objective:

to measure ability to learn or to succeed in selected areas.

Test Description:

It is an Aptitude Test that contains eight scales: Verbal

Reasoning (VR), Numerical Ability (NA), Abstract Reasoning
(AR),

Perceptual

(Clerical)

Speed

and

Accuracy

(PSA),

Mechanical Reasoning (MR), Space Relations (SR), Spelling (Sp)

and Language Usage (LU). Nine scores are provided, one for each
scale and a composite score from VR and NR--the Scholastic
Aptitude score (SA). All the tests except PSA are multiple-choice.
In MR, problems are presented using drawings. Users may choose
to score the tests by hand, by scanner, or to have them scored by
The Psychological Corporation. The DAT is linked to the Career
Interest Inventory to assist with vocational counseling and
planning.

Test Validity:

Excellent predictive validity for VR and NA at 9th grade level

when correlated to future performance on 11th grade American Council on
Education Psychological Examination, Cooperative English Test, and high
school

rank

(males

r= 0.63-0.69;

females

- r= 0.61-0.71).

Excellent predictive validity for VR when correlated to Military Academic

Class Standing (For all DAT subsets r= 0.69-0.78). Excellent to
Adequate predictive validity for AR when correlated to Military Academic
Class Standing (For all DAT subsets r= 0.51 - 0.68). Adequate predictive
validity for LU (Sentences) when correlated to Military Academic Class
Standing (For all DAT subsets r= 0.41 - 0.52). Adequate predictive validity
for the NA test, in both computerized and pencil formats, when correlated
with all the training courses and with the overall evaluation (For all DAT
subsets r= 0.36-0.40). Adequate predictive validity for NA test when
correlated to first year mathematics scores at the University of Minnesota
Institute of Technology (r= 0.45). Adequate predictive validity for SR test
when correlated to first year drawing scores at University of Minnesota
Institute of Technology (r= 0.38). Poor predictive validity for the AR test
when correlated with overall evaluation and with all training courses (For
all DAT subsets r= 0.19-0.21). Poor to Adequate predictive validity for the
MR test when correlated with overall evaluation (For all DAT
subsets r= 0.26-.031). Excellent concurrent validity on VR test when
correlated to verbal scores on Test of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA)
(r= 0.74). Excellent concurrent validity on NA test when correlated to
numerical scores on PMA (r= 0.63). Adequate concurrent validity on SR
test when correlated to spatial scores on PMA (r= 0.47)

Test Reliability:

According to (French & Beaumont, 1991), test re test reliability

shows, Language Usage Test was Excellent (ICC = 0.89) and Spelling Test
also was Excellent (ICC = 0.91) using an unknown population.

Norms:

The norming process for the edition was impressive, with about
170,000 students in the standardization samples. Evidence for reliability
and validity is reviewed. The fact that the DAT has remained one of the
most frequently used batteries is a tribute to its quality, credibility, and
utility. The new items and new norming data of the most recent edition
have improved the test while preserving psychometric quality.

Reference:
Alkhadher, O., Clarke, D. D., & Anderson, N. (1998). Equivalence and predictive validity of
paper-and-pencil and computerized adaptive formats of the Differential Aptitude Tests. Journal
Of Occupational And Organizational Psychology, 71(3), 205-217. doi:10.1111/j.20448325.1998.tb00673.x
Berdie, R. F. (1951). The Differential Aptitude Tests as predictors in engineering training.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 42(2), 114-123. doi: 10.1037/h0060648
Doppelt, J. E., & Wesman, A. G. (1952). The Differential Aptitude Tests as predictors of
achievement

test

scores. Journal

Of

Educational

Psychology,43(4),

210-217.

doi:10.1037/h0060030
Evers, A., Nijenhuis, J. T., & Mur, J. P. (2000). Validity of the differential aptitude test for the
assessment

of

immigrant

children.

Educational

Psychology,

20(1),

99-115.

doi:10.1080/014434100110416
French, C. C., & Beaumont, J. G. (1991). The Differential Aptitude Test (Language Usage and
Spelling): A clinical study of a computerized form.Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse
Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 10(1-2), 31-48. doi: 10.1007/BF02686779
Gray, B. (1965). The differential aptitude tests in a military academic setting. The Journal of
Educational Research, 58(8), 352-354. doi:10.1080/00220671.1965.10883242
Layton, W. L., & Swanson, E. O. (1958). Relationship of ninth grade Differential Aptitude Test
scores to eleventh grade test scores and high school rank. Journal Of Educational
Psychology, 49(3), 153-155. doi:10.1037/h0046365
Lynn, R. (1992). Sex differences on the Differential Aptitude Test in British and American
adolescents. Educational Psychology, 12(2), 101-106.
Wang, L. (1993). The Differential Aptitude Test: A Review and Critique.
Wolking, W. D. (1955). Predicting academic achievement with the Differential Aptitude and the
Primary

Mental

Ability

doi:10.1037/h0039856

Tests. Journal

Of

Applied

Psychology, 39(2),

115-118.