module 33 asserting personality

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF)

A widely used self-report test that identifies people with psychological difficulties and is employed to predict some everyday behaviors. One of the best examples of a self-report measure, and one of the most frequently used personality tests, is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF). Although the original purpose of this measure was to identify people with specific sorts of psychological difficulties, it has been found to predict a variety of other behaviors. For instance, MMPI-2-RF scores have been shown to be good predictors of whether college students will marry within 10 years of graduating and whether they will get advanced degrees. Police departments use the test to measure whether police officers are likely to use their weapons. Psychologists in Russia administer a modified form of the MMPI-2-RF to the country's astronauts and Olympic athletes. The test consists of a series of 338 items to which a person responds "true," "false," or "cannot say." The questions cover a variety of issues ranging from mood ("I feel useless at times") to opinions ("People should try to understand their dreams") to physical and psychological health ("I am bothered by an upset stomach several times a week" and "I have strange and peculiar thoughts"). There are no right or wrong answers. Instead, interpretation of the results rests on the pattern of responses. The test yields scores on 51 separate scales, including several scales meant to measure the validity of the respondent's answers. For example, there is a "lie scale" that indicates when people are falsifying their responses in order to present themselves more favorably (through items such as, "I can't remember ever having a bad night's sleep"). When the MMPI-2-RF is used for the purpose for which it was devised—identification of personality disorders—it does a good job. However, like other personality tests, it presents an opportunity for abuse. For instance, employers who use it as a screening tool for job applicants may interpret the results improperly by relying too heavily on the results of individual scales instead of taking into account the overall patterns of results, which requires skilled interpretation. Furthermore, critics point out that the individual scales overlap, which makes their interpretation difficult. In sum, although the MMPI-2-RF remains the most widely used personality test and has been translated into more than 100 languages, it must be used with caution.

Test norms

Finally, psychological tests are based on test norms, the distribution of test scores for a large sample of individuals who have taken a test. Test norms allow us to compare one person's score on a test with the scores of others who have taken the same test. For example, knowing the norms of a test permits test-takers who have received a certain score to know that they have scored in the top 10% of all those who have taken the test. Test norms are established by administering a specific test to a large number of people and determining the typical scores. It is then possible to compare a single person's score with the scores of the group, which provides a comparative measure of test performance against the performance of others who have taken the test. The establishment of appropriate test norms is not a simple endeavor. For instance, the specific group that is employed to determine test norms has a profound effect on the way an individual's performance is evaluated. the process of establishing test norms can take on political overtones.

reliability and validity

Like the assessments that seek to measure intelligence, all psychological tests must have reliability and validity. Reliability refers to a test's measurement consistency. If a test is reliable, it yields the same result each time it is administered to a specific person or group. In contrast, unreliable tests give different results each time they are administered. For meaningful conclusions to be drawn, tests also must be valid. Tests have validity when they actually measure what they are designed to measure. If a test is constructed to measure sociability, for instance, we need to know that it actually measures sociability and not some other trait. The distinction between reliability and validity is important. For instance, a test that measures trustfulness is reliable if it yields the same results each time it is administered, whereas it is valid if it measures trustfulness accurately.

Assessing Personality Assessments

Many companies, ranging from General Motors to Microsoft, employ personality tests to help determine who gets hired. In fact, workplace personality testing has become a big business, with companies spending $500 million a year to help identify the best employees. What kinds of questions are potential workers asked? In one example, potential Microsoft employees have been asked brainteasers such as "If you had to remove one of the 50 U.S. states, which would it be?" (Hint: First define remove. If you mean the death of everyone in the state, suggest a low-population state. If you mean quitting the country, then go for an outlying state such as Alaska or Hawaii.) Other employers ask questions that are even more vague ("Describe November"). With such questions, it's not always clear that the tests are reliable or valid. Before relying too heavily on the results of such personality testing as a potential employee, employer, or consumer of testing services, you should keep several points in mind: Understand what the test claims to measure. Standard personality measures are accompanied by information that discusses how the test was developed, to whom it is most applicable, and how the results should be interpreted. Read any explanations of the test; they will help you understand the results.Do not base a decision only on the results of any one test. Test results should be interpreted in the context of other information, such as academic records, social interests, and home and community activities. Remember that test results are not always accurate. The results may be in error; the test may be unreliable or invalid. For example, you may have had a "bad day" when you took the test, or the person scoring and interpreting the test may have made a mistake. You should not place too much significance on the results of a single administration of any test. In sum, it is important to keep in mind the complexity of human behavior—particularly your own. No single test can provide an understanding of the intricacies of someone's personality without considering a good deal more information than can be provided in a single testing session.

Rorschach test

Rorschach test is a test that involves showing a series of symmetrical visual stimuli to people who then are asked what the figures represent to them. The best-known projective test is the Rorschach test. Devised by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach (1924), the test involves showing a series of symmetrical stimuli to people who are then asked what the figures represent to them. Their responses are recorded, and people are classified into personality types requiring a complex set of judgments on the part of the examiner. For instance, individuals who see a bear in one particular Rorschach inkblot are thought to have a strong degree of emotional control, according to the scoring guidelines Rorschach developed. In projective tests such as the Rorschach, researchers present an ambiguous stimulus and ask a person to describe or tell a story about it. They then use the responses to make inferences about personality. In projective tests such as the Rorschach, researchers present an ambiguous stimulus and ask a person to describe or tell a story about it. They then use the responses to make inferences about personality.

the projective methods

Tests with stimuli as ambiguous as those used in the Rorschach and TAT require a high degree of training, skill, and care in their interpretation—so much so that many psychologists question the validity of projective test results. The Rorschach in particular has been criticized for requiring examiners to make many broad inferences that lack an objective basis, at least in the view of critics. Furthermore, attempts to standardize the scoring of the Rorschach have frequently failed. Despite such problems, both the Rorschach and the TAT are widely used, especially in clinical settings, and their proponents suggest that their reliability and validity are great enough to provide useful inferences about personality.

other types of self-report measures

The MMPI is not the only self-report questionnaire. For example, a commonly used one is the Kuder Career Interest Assessment--Likert (KCIA-L), which measures the relative level of interest a person has in six broad areas. These results are used to identify career pathways and occupations that match those interests. The Kuder test has been carefully validated, and research has supported its use. Another self-report measure that is widely used in business settings is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which aims to place people along four dimensions: (1) introverts versus extraverts; (2) intuitors versus sensors; (3) thinkers versus feelers; and (4) perceivers versus judgers. Originators of the test argue that employees work best in situations where others share or complement their types and where their personality type is well suited to the tasks on which they must work. Despite its widespread use--some 2 million people a year take the test, at a cost of billions of dollars--many critics believe that objective scientific validation for the test is lacking. They argue that researchers have failed to find that the test predicts much of interest, including professional job-related success. The disconnect between its widespread use and the lack of scientific support is puzzling.

psychological tests

The ease with which we can agree with such imprecise statements underscores the difficulty in coming up with accurate and meaningful assessments of people's personalities. Psychologists interested in assessing personality must be able to define the most meaningful ways of discriminating between one person's personality and another's. To do this, they use psychological tests, standard measures devised to assess behavior objectively. With the results of such tests, psychologists can help people better understand themselves and make decisions about their lives. Researchers interested in the causes and consequences of personality also employ psychological tests. psychological tests are Standard measures devised to assess behavior objectively; used by psychologists to help people make decisions about their lives and understand more about themselves.

race and ethnicity establishing test norms

The passions of politics may confront the objectivity of science when test norms are established, at least in the realm of standardized tests that are meant to predict future job performance. In fact, a national controversy has developed around the question of whether different test norms should be established for members of various racial and ethnic groups. The test that sparked the controversy was the U.S. government's General Aptitude Test Battery, a test that measures a broad range of abilities from eye-hand coordination to reading proficiency. The problem was that African Americans and Hispanics tend to score lower on the test, on average, than do members of other groups. The lower scores often are due to a lack of prior relevant experience and job opportunities, which in turn has been due to prejudice and discrimination. To promote the employment of minority racial groups, the government developed a separate set of test norms for African Americans and Hispanics. Rather than using the pool of all people who took the tests, the scores of African American and Hispanic applicants were compared only with the scores of other African Americans and Hispanics. Consequently, a Hispanic who scored in the top 20% of the Hispanics taking the test was considered to have performed equivalently to a white job applicant who scored in the top 20% of the whites who took the test, even though the absolute score of the Hispanic might be lower than that of the white. Critics of the adjusted test norming system suggested that such a procedure discriminates in favor of certain racial and ethnic groups at the expense of others, thereby fanning the flames of racial bigotry. The practice was challenged legally; with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1991, race-based test norming on the General Aptitude Test Battery was discontinued. However, proponents of race-based test norming continue to argue that test norming procedures that take race into account are an affirmative action tool that simply permits minority job-seekers to be placed on an equal footing with white job-seekers. Furthermore, a panel of the National Academy of Sciences supported the practice of adjusting test norms. It suggested that the unadjusted test norms are not very useful in predicting job performance and that they would tend to screen out otherwise qualified minority group members. Job testing is not the only area in which issues arise regarding test norms and the meaning of test scores. The issue of how to treat racial differences in IQ scores is also controversial and divisive. Clearly, race-based test norming raises profound and intense feelings that may come into conflict with scientific objectivity. The issue of establishing test norms is further complicated by the existence of a wide array of personality measures and approaches to assessment. We next consider some of these measures.

Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)

Thematic Apperception Test is a test consisting of a series of pictures about which a person is asked to write a story. The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) is another well-known projective test. The TAT consists of a series of pictures about which a person is asked to write a story. The stories are then used to draw inferences about the writer's personality characteristics. For example, the TAT is used to assess need for achievement and other motivational needs.

behavioral assessment

behavioral assessment are direct measures of an individual's behavior used to describe personality characteristics. If you were a psychologist subscribing to a learning approach to personality, you would be likely to object to the indirect nature of projective tests. Instead, you would be more apt to use behavioral assessment—direct measures of an individual's behavior designed to describe characteristics indicative of personality. As with observational research, behavioral assessment may be carried out naturalistically by observing people in their own settings: in the workplace, at home, or in school. In other cases, behavioral assessment occurs in the laboratory under controlled conditions in which a psychologist sets up a situation and observes an individual's behavior. Regardless of the setting in which behavior is observed, an effort is made to ensure that behavioral assessment is carried out objectively and quantifies behavior as much as possible. For example, an observer may record the number of social contacts a person initiates, the number of questions asked, or the number of aggressive acts. Another method is to measure the duration of events: the duration of a child's temper tantrum, the length of a conversation, the amount of time spent working, or the time spent in cooperative behavior. Behavioral assessment is particularly appropriate for observing—and eventually remedying—specific behavioral difficulties, such as shyness in children. It provides a means of assessing the specific nature and incidence of a problem and subsequently allows psychologists to determine whether intervention techniques have been successful. Behavioral assessment techniques based on learning theories of personality have also made important contributions to the treatment of certain kinds of psychological difficulties. In addition, they are also used to make hiring and personnel decisions in the workplace.

projective personality test

projective personality test is a test in which a person is shown an ambiguous stimulus and asked to describe it or tell a story about it in order to infer information about their personality. A shape in a inkblot is used in projective personality tests. to a psychodynamic theoretician, responses to such an ambiguous figure would provide valuable clues to the state of someone's unconscious and ultimately to someone's general personality characteristics. Responses are considered to be "projections" of the test-taker's personality, and they are scored and interpreted using a standardized scoring method.

self-report measure

self-report measure is a method of gathering data about people by asking them questions about their own behavior and traits. If someone wanted to assess your personality, one possible approach would be to carry out an extensive interview with you to determine the most important events in your childhood, your social relationships, and your successes and failures. Obviously, though, such a technique would take extraordinary time and effort. It is also unnecessary. Just as physicians draw only a small sample of your blood to test, psychologists can use self-report measures. This sampling of self-report data is then used to infer the presence of particular personality characteristics. For example, a researcher who was interested in assessing a person's orientation to life might administer a questionnaire.

test standardization

test standardization is a technique used to validate questions in personality tests by studying the responses of people with known diagnoses. How did the authors of the MMPI-2-RF determine what specific patterns of responses indicate? The procedure they used is typical of personality test construction—a process known as test standardization. Test standardization is a technique used to validate questions on personality tests by analyzing the responses of people who have completed the same set of questions, under the same circumstances. The responses then can be used to determine an individual's key personality characteristics. To create and standardize the MMPI-2-RF, the test authors asked groups of psychiatric patients with a specific diagnosis, such as depression or schizophrenia, to complete a large number of items. They then determined which items best differentiated members of those groups from a comparison group of normal participants and included those specific items in the final version of the test. By systematically carrying out this procedure on groups with different diagnoses, the test authors were able to devise a number of subscales that identified forms of abnormal behavior.