Week 10 Flashcards
Objective measures of Personality
Typically administered as paper-and-pencil, or via computer.
Contains short answer items for which the assesse’s task is to select one response from those provided.
The term “objective” in relation to personality measures must be
considered with caution.
Personality measures do not contain one correct answer.
A distinct lack of objectivity is associated with self report.
Example: MMPI-2 (covered last week)
Uses a restricted response format, limited judgement required when scoring
How objective can these tests really be?
Projective Measures
Projective hypothesis: The idea that individual supplies structure to unstructured stimuli in a manner consistent with the individual’s own unique pattern of conscious and unconscious needs, fears, desires, impulses, conflicts, and ways of perceiving and responding.
Projective techniques are indirect methods of personality assessment.
Inkblots as projective stimuli
Rorschach inkblots – Psychodiagnostik, Hermann Rorschach (1921)
Debate around how to classify the Rorschach inkblots. Intended to measure a person’s personality characteristics and emotional functioning
Consists of 10 bilaterally symmetrical inkblots on separate cards (or plates), half which are achromatic (black and white).
Inkblots are initially presented in order from 1 to 10; test-takers are asked to interpret the inkblot and are provided a great deal of freedom.
No one Rorschach test!
Inkblots as projective stimuli
percept, third component…
After the entire set of inkblots has been administered, an inquiry is conducted and the assessor attempts to determine what features of the inkblot played a role in formulating the test-takers percept.
A third component, testing the limits, may be also included to enable the examiner to restructure the situation by asking specific questions concerning personality functioning.
Interpretation
Hypotheses concerning personality functioning are formed on the basis of variables such as content and location of the response, and the time taken to respond.
Rorschach protocols are scored according to several categories, including location, determinants, content, popularity, and form.
Patterns of response, recurring themes, and interrelationships among the different categories are all considered in the final description.
Validity and reliability of inkblots
John Exner Jr. developed a comprehensive system for administering, scoring, and interpreting the Rorschach inkblots.
–Exner’s system brought uniformity to Rorschach use, but despite the improvements, the psychometric properties of the Rorschach are still debated.
Test-retest reliability is of little value to the Rorschach because of the very nature of the measurement; inter-rater reliability may be a more appropriate.
Does it seem to actually predict anything?
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)
Christiana Morgan and Henry Murray (1953)
30 picture cards contain a variety of scenes that present the test-taker with “certain classical human situations”
The administering clinician selects the cards that are believed to elicit responses pertinent to the objective of testing.
Thematic apperception test
material used incudes
The material used in deriving conclusions includes:
The stories as they were told by the examinee
The clinician’s notes about the way or the manner in which the examinee responded
The clinicians notes about extra-test behaviour and verbalisations.
Interpretation (of tat)
Interpretive systems incorporate, or are based on Murray’s concepts of:
Need: Determinants of behaviour arising from within the individual.
Press: Determinants of behaviour arising from within the environment
Thema: Unit of interaction between needs and press.
Criticisms of the TAT
Lack of standardisation in administration, scoring, and interpretation procedures.
Highly susceptible to faking.
Test-taker’s responses may be affected by situational factors and transient internal need states.
Different TAT cards have different stimulus pulls.
The TAT cards have a negative or gloomy tone, which may restrict the range of affect projected by the test-taker.
TAT and self-report
Comparison of TAT-Derived Data and Self-Report Derived Data
McClelland et al. (1989).
-Argued that SR measures yielded self-attributed motives, whereas the TAT yielded implicit motives
-Implicit motives: Nonconscious influence on behaviour typically acquired on the basis of experience.
Apperceptive Personality test (APT)
Consists of eight stimulus cards that depict recognisable people in everyday situations that have an emotionally-neutral ambiance.
Introduces ‘objectivity’ into the measure by having test-takers respond to multiple-choice questions after they have “told their story”.
–This provides quantitative data to help fill in the information gaps from the stories that were too cryptic or brief when scoring.
Factor structure of the APT indicates a 3 factor model: positive evaluation, negative evaluation, and an “intensity” factor.
Other tests using pictures as projective stimuli
Hand Test – Edwin Wagner
Consists of nine cards with
pictures of hands on them and a tenth blank card.
Test-taker is asked what the hands on each card might be doing.
Hand test interpretation
Interpersonal responses: claim the hands are preparing for handshakes, offering comfort,
communicating by pointing or beckoning, or even pushing people away.
Environmental responses: include anything about the hand interacting with nonhuman objects. The responses can be about acquisition - grabbing or taking something - or more general actions like closing doors or gripping steering wheels.
Maladaptive responses: indicate distress of some kind. They can be responses that insist a fist is tensed to hold in anger or a hand is warding off a blow.
Withdrawal: which consists of people refusing to go along with the test. Withdrawing subjects often just describe the hand, rather than making up an idea for what it is doing, or going completely abstract.
Hand test interpretation
Wagner came up with a ratio, called the Acting Out Ratio; using the Hand Test score, provided an indication on how likely each subject was to act out violently.
Test weakness: No matter how ambiguous the hand gestures seem to the people drawing them, different cultures have different hand gestures – limits cross-cultural validity.