Personality Testing
Definitions: J.P. Guilford (1959)
“An individual’s personality, then, is his unique pattern of traits.”
– A trait is “any distinguishable, relatively enduring way in which one individual differs from others.”
Definitions: Mackinnon (1959)
Personality refers to “factors” inside people that explain their behavior
The sum total of typical ways of acting, thinking, and feeling that makes a person unique.
Definitions: DSM-IV-TR (2000)
“Are enduring patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and oneself that are exhibited in a wide range of social and personal context.
Definitions: R.B. Cattell (1950)
The personality of an individual is that which enables us to predict what he will do in a given situation”
3 Facts to Consider When Defining “Personality”
Individuals are unique
Individuals behave differently in different situations
Although individuals are unique and behave inconsistently across situations, there is considerable commonality in human behavior
History WW-I: saw the first real organized assessment of
personality- seeing if new recruits could make adjustment to the military.– Just focused on one facet of personality– Very specific (e.g., ability to follow orders, submission to
authority, degree of comfort when socializing with others)
Over the next 2 decades multiscaled test emerged that examined assertiveness, anxiety, impulsiveness
History 1930’s and 1940’s—Allport and Murray began
writing about personality and theories of personality
Then came two camps:– Objective –empirically derived tests – Projective—produced items and interpretations based
on the theory of personality. This method was more unstructured and less defined (e.g., TAT)
History
Empirically based tests used statistics and a criterion to develop test items– Item correlations– Factor analytic approach– Criterion-referenced approach– These two branched from empirically
based tests of the early part of the century
Today
New tests have emerged but most tend to be variants of the original themes and theories of personality
Most excepted to use a theory and to test out items on a criterion as well as using statistics
“Personality” as a construct may include:– Emotional responses– Social behavior– Emotional thoughts and behaviour– Motivations– Values– Interests
Methods of Measuring Personality:– Paper & pencil tests: questionnaires, inventories– Situational exercises– Field or natural observations– Projective measures
Value of Personality Questionnaires
Value to the individual (face validity)
– Self-insight
– Points of discussion
– Norms provide comparison info
Value of Personality Questionnaires Value to research (construct validity)
– Study relationships of personality w/ other variables– Study changes over time
Value for Counseling - marital therapy - university counseling centers
Value for personnel management – Screening– Prediction of success– Placement & counseling
Disadvantage of Personality Tests
Social Desirability Faking “Good” Faking “Bad” Random Responding
Two Main Personality Theories
1. Trait theory: people differ based on stable attributes (called “traits”)– characteristics lie on a continuum– e.g., the Big Five
2. Type theory: people can be sorted into categories (either one type or the other)
There are many different personality inventories that measure traits or types
The Big Five
OCEAN
Openness to Experience Conscientiousness Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism
Personality Tests – Using Traits NEO – Personality Inventory Revised (NEO
PI-R, 1992)
- Unaware of the Big Five, Costa & McCrae built the NEO Inventory in 1978
– Assessed Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience
– Added Agreeableness and Conscientiousness– Items are behavioral statements
The NEO PI-R (cont.) Examples of Items:Neuroticism - Frightening thoughts sometimes come into my
head.
Extroversion - I don’t get much pleasure from chatting with people.
Openness - I have a very active imagination
Agreeableness - I believe that most people will take advantage of you if you let them.
Conscientiousness - I pay my promptly and in full.
The NEO PI-R (cont.)
Example Neuroticism facet: Anxiety
I am not a worrier. I am easily frightened. I rarely feel fearful or anxious. I often feel tense and jittery. I am seldom apprehensive about the future. I often worry about things that might go wrong. I have fewer fears than most people. Frightening thoughts sometimes come into my head.
Personality Tests – Using Traits NEO – Personality Inventory Revised (NEO
PI-R, 1992)– 5 traits x 6 facets each x 8 items each = 240 total– Items are all very face valid - anchored by SD to
SA– No Validity Scales– Raw scores for the domain converted to T scores– Norms provided for adults (21 and up) & college
age individuals (17 - 20)– Norms come from 500 men and 500 women (U.S)
List of Domain and Facet ScoresNeuroticism Extraversion OpennessAnxiety Warmth Fantasy
Angry Hostility Gregariousness Aesthetics
Depression Assertiveness Feelings
Self-Consciousness Activity Actions
Impulsiveness Excitement-Seeking Ideas
Vulnerability Positive Emotions Values
Agreeableness ConscientiousnessTrust Competence
Straightforwardness Order
Altruism Dutifulness
Compliance Achievement Striving
Modesty Self-Discipline
Tender-Mindedness Deliberation
The NEO PI-R (cont.) Other test characteristics:
- criterion validity: conscientiousness- construct validity (e.g., openness to exp.)- practical uses?- relies on honesty of examinee- reliability of domain scales – excellent (highest
is .92 for N, lowest is .86 for A)- reliability of facet scales – acceptable
(highest is .80 for ideas facet of O, lowest is .58 for Actions facet of O)
Personality Tests – Using Traits
California Psychological Inventory (CPI)
Gough (1957) “sane person’s MMPI” revised in 1987 based on 20 concepts to predict behavior in social/interpersonal situations 13 special purpose scales (e.g., leadership,
managerial potential)
California Psychological Inventory CPI - one of the most popular personality inventory
Measures: various facets of normal personality; helps to make predictions about behaviours
Gough’s theory (3 assumptions): Important characteristics in all societies and cultures Understandable and useful for both sides Valid predictors of future behavior in similar social contexts
CPI 462 true-false items covers 20 scales:
– Dominance, Social Presence, Sociability, Self-Acceptance, Self-Control, Responsibility, Well-Being, Achievement vs. Conformity, Achievement vs. Independence, Psychological Mindedness, Flexibility, Capacity for Status, Empathy, Tolerance, Femininity vs. Masculinity, Independence, Good Impression, Socialization,Communality (p.380)
– 3 scales provide measures of test-taking attitudes
CPI (cont.) test construction: empirical approach (13 scales),
internal consistency (4), combo of both (3) either high or low scores administration: 1 hr scores: count the “true” responses profiles extensive norms: 6000 gender specific norms converts raw scores to T scores CPI had factor loading on 4 of 5 - Big 5 Factors
(extroversion, openness, neuroticism, conscientiousness) - not agreeableness
CPI (cont.)
• interpretation of profiles: (p.383)
1. profile “validity”
2. height of scales
3. high and low scores
4. analyze patterns (examples)
CPI (cont.) Other test characteristics
– Construct validity: 20 scales are not independent– Predictive validity: best predicts
academic underachievement potential delinquency Job performance in a number of careers Performance in school
CPI
Advantages:1. Looks at interpersonal relating well 2. Predicts underachieving, potential delinquency,
job performance 3. Has good norming sample
16 Personality Factor (16PF) Raymond Cattell developed the Cattel Sixteen Personality
Factor Test (1949) Revised 4 times (1956, 1962, 1968, 1993) Survey all words in the the English language that described
personal characteristics (approx. 4000) Categorized the words into 45 groups and approx. 15 factors Designed to measure more personality traits and conflicts
than psychopathology 185 items across 16 scales 3 Point Likert Scale
16PF Suggests Personality is made up of 16 independent traits -
Warmth, Reasoning, Emotional Stability, Dominance, Liveliness, Rule-Consciousness, Social Boldness, Sensitivity, Vigilance, Abstractedness, Privateness, Apprehension, Openness to Change, Self-Reliance, Perfectionism, Tension (p. 389)
Each item is scored a between 0,1, or 2 depending if the item is scored correctly
Raw score are changed to standard scores know as sten (out of 10). Standard scores are calculated in reference to the norm group.
Psychometrics of 16PF
Reliability: test-retest (.80 x2wk; .70 x3wk) Internal consistency reliability .74 Only sporadic studies found reliability below .70 Most validity studies have validity coefficients
above .70
16PF Supports: 1. Less time to give than MMPI-2
2. Has 5 global factors than correspond to the BIG FIVE
3. Reliability and Validity
Criticisms: 1. Overeducated sample
2. New version more complicated to score
3. Converts raw scores to “stens”- hard for people to understand
16PF Applications
Research and Clinical Settings Vocational Psychology Personnel selection and placement With adults or adolescents (16-year-
olds) and 5th grade reading level
Type Theories of Personality Type A - Coronary-prone behavior pattern:
aggressive, need to achieve more and more, workaholic, hidden lack of self-esteem (always need to prove self), always hurried, hostile
Type B – easygoing, noncompetitive, relaxed People fall on a continuum somewhere between the
two
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Myers-Briggs: based on Jungian theory of personality
– Classifies individuals along 4 theoretically independent dimensions.
MBTI (cont.)
1. Introversion / Extroversion(E-I) : How is your general attitude toward the world?
2. Sensing / Intuition (S-N) : How do you acquire information?
3. Thinking / Feeling (T-F) : How is information processed?
4. Judging / Perceiving (J-P): How do you make decisions?
MBTI Scales
Extroversion-Introversion Scale
E: Oriented primarily toward the outer world; focus on people and objects
I: Oriented primarily toward the inner world; focus on concepts and ideas
Sensing-Intuition Scale
S: Individual reports observable facts through one or more of the five senses
N: Reports meanings, relationships and/or possibilities that have been worked out beyond the reach of the conscious mind
MBTI Scales
Thinking-Feeling Scale
T: Judgment is impersonally based on logical consequences
F: Judgment is primarily based on personal or social values
Perception-Judging Scale
P: Preference for using a perceptive process for dealing with the outer world
J: Preference for using a judgment process for dealing with the outer world
MBTI Psychometrics Test-retest intervals range from:
1. Introversion / Extroversion(E-I) : .73 to .83
2. Sensing / Intuition (S-N) : .69 to .87
3. Thinking / Feeling (T-F) :.56 to .82
4. Judging / Perceiving (J-P): .60 to .87
Internal Consistency intervals range from: 1. Introversion / Extroversion(E-I) : .55 to .65
2. Sensing / Intuition (S-N) : .64 to .73
3. Thinking / Feeling (T-F) :.43 to .75
4. Judging / Perceiving (J-P): .58 to .84
MBTI (cont.)
Uses:– Career counseling– Team building– Family counseling
Criticisms:– Profiles generally positive– Barnum effect– Validation evidence is sticky– Factor analysis shows Big Five solution
MMPI
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
MMPI-II – most widely used psychological test
10 clinical scales and several Auxiliary
MMPIMMPITable 4-6
The MMPI (cont.)
Scale Descriptor: Psychopathic Deviate Tend to act without considering consequences. Experience absence of emotional response. May feign guilt and remorse when in trouble. Are impulsive. Are not seen as overwhelmed by emotional turmoil.
The MMPI (cont.)
Example Items: I am about as able to work as I ever was. I work under a great deal of tension. I am sure I get a raw deal from life. I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job. I am certainly lacking in self-confidence I have difficulty in starting to do things. When in a group of people I have trouble thinking of
the right things to talk about. I cannot keep my mind on one thing.
Original MMPI
Items on the clinical scales of the original MMPI were selected on the basis of their ability to discriminate between normal and clinical groups.
Clinical groups were comprised of depressed, paranoid, schizophrenic, hypomanic, hypocrondriacal
Normal groups were comprised of University of Minnesota students
Initially items were selected from various sources – clinical cases, textbooks, and previous tests
MMPI II
MMPI-II was normed on a nationally representative sample – 1138 men and 1462 women
MMPI added several content and supplementary scales
A high score on a particular scale indicates the likelihood that the individual possesses those characteristics
Projective Personality Tests
The Projective Techniques Projective tests allow the examinee to respond
to vague stimuli with their own impressions Assumption is that the examinee will project his
unconscious needs, motives, and conflicts onto the neutral stimulus
Word association tests, inkblot tests, sentence completion tests, storytelling in response to pictures, etc.
The Projective Techniques (cont.)
Three features:- Disguised: no face validity- Global: the whole personality- Reveals unconscious aspects of personality
- Types:- Inkblot: Rorschach- Picture interpretation: TAT- Sentence completion: Rotter Incomplete SB- Picture construction: DAP
The Rorschach Inkblot Test
The Rorschach Inkblot Test is the most commonly used projective test– In a 1971 survey of test usage, it was used
in 91% of 251 clinical settings survey– It is one of the most widely used tests that
exists– It is widely cited in research
History The earliest use of inkblots as projective surfaces
was J. Kerner's (1857)– He was the first to claim that some people make
idiosyncratic or revealing interpretations
In 1896, Alfred Binet suggested that inkblots might
be used to assess personality (not psychopathology)
History
Herman Rorschach, a Swiss psychiatrist, was the first to suggest (1911) the use of inkblot responses as a diagnostic instrument– In 1921 he published his book
on the test, Psychodiagnostik (and soon thereafter died, age 38)
History Rorschach's test was not well-received, attracting little
notice– David Levy brought it to the United States - thought it was scientifically
unsound.– His student, Samuel Beck, popularized its use here, writing several
papers and books on it starting with Configurational Tendencies in Rorschach Responses (1933)
Several other early users also published work on he Rorschach– Several offered their own system of administration, scoring, and
interpretation, leading to later problems in standardization
What is the Rorschach? The stimuli were generated by dropping ink onto a card and folding it
– They are not, however, random: the ten cards in the current test were hand-selected out of thousands that Rorschach generated
Ten blots – 5 black/white, 2 red/gray (II & III) and 3 color (VIII – X)
Thought to tap into the deep layers of personality and bring out what is not conscious to the test taker
The following are the inkblots
Administering the Rorschach The test is usually administered with as little instruction and
information as possible
– The tester asks 'What might this be? and gives no clues or restrictions on what is expected as a response
– Anxious subjects often do ask questions, and vague answers are offered
– Some advocate sitting beside the subject to avoid giving clues by facial expression
– If only one response is given, some hint to find more may be offered: "Some people see more than one thing.“
Administering the Rorschach
The cards are shown twice:
– The first time responses are obtained - free association phase
– The second time they are elaborated – inquiry phase
Rorschach (cont.)Exner’s Comprehensive Scoring System
1. Location
- W = whole (intellectual potential)
- D = subdivisions (common sense)
- Dd = details (compulsive tendencies)
- DW (confabulated detail)
2. Content (i.e., general class to where response belongs)
- people, part of a person, clothing, animal, part of an animal, nature, anatomical
Rorschach (cont.)
3. Determinants (i.e., specific property of the blot)
- F = shape/outline (rational approach)
- M = movement (imagination)
- C = color (emotional reactions)
- Y = shades of grey (depression)
4. Form Quality
5. typical vs. unusual response
6. time
Rorschach (cont.)
norms = unrepresentative inter-rater reliability test-retest reliability construct validity criterion validity
Psychometric Properties of the Rorschach
The Rorschach is a popular test, however, it has been plagued by low reliability and validity.
Obviously, it is difficult to measure any of the usual psychometric properties in the usual way
– Validity and reliability are usually low because of the open-ended multiplicity of possibility that is allowed and by the lack of universally-accepted standardized instructions, administration protocol, and scoring procedure
Interpreting the Rorschach
Uses norms for five groups: nonpatient, outpatient nonpsychotic, inpatient character problem, inpatient depressive, inpatient schizophrenics one
Deviation from norms can mean an invalid protocol, or brain damage, or emotional problems, or a low mental age (or just an original person)
Psychometric Properties of the Rorschach
Reliability studies that have been done find r-values varying from 0.1 to 0.9
Parker (1983) analyzed 530 statistics through meta-analysis (9 studies) and found an internal reliability of .83
W responses has been linked to general intelligence (r = 0.4); Movement responses are said to suggest strong impulses or high motor activity; DW (confabulatory) responses are taken as signs of a disordered state; low response rate is associated with mental retardation, depression, and defensiveness
Overall, more research is needed to determine the reliability and validity of the Rorschach.
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) Construct a story about what you see on the
following picture
Describe: - what led up to the scene - what is happening - what the characters in the story might think or feel - how the story will end
Thematic Apperception Tests The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT): 30
grayscale pictures + one blank for elicitation of stories – each contain a dramatic event or critical situation
Most subjects see 10-12 cards, over two sessions
Based on Murray's (1938) theory of 28 social needs (sex, affiliation, dominance, achievement, attitudes etc.)
People would project into their story their needs Attention is paid to the protagonist in each story
and his/her environmental stressors Many variations on this 'story-telling' test exist
TAT (cont.)
Administration: not standardized- Not the same 20 cards- Not the same order- Seldom 2 sessions- Instructions differ
• Scoring is Minimal• Low Reliability & Validity
TAT – scoring/interpretationScoring Congruence with picture stimuli Conformity with directions Conflict
Psychometric properties: internal consistency is low; high reliability but diminishes with time, 2 months, r
= .80; 10 months r = .50; Inter-rater reliability vary with studies: range .3 to .9
Examples of Projectives
Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank (RISB)
Complete the following sentences to express your real feelings:
- I like ……..- My greatest fear ……..- This PSY 3090.D instructor is ……..
RISB (cont.) Designed to screen for emotional maladjustment Info about wishes, desires, likes, dislikes, fears, and
locus of control 40 items: easy to administer (group or ind.) Rigorous scoring system: high interrater r Scoring ranges from 0 to 6 Responses are scored as to the degree of conflict
expressed, optimism shown, length of responses, omissions
Psychometrically sound but less used
Draw-a-Person Test
- Originally to assess children’s intelligence- Now: a screening procedure for emotional disturbance- Cannot constitute a diagnosis
- The administration:• Draw a person• Draw a person of the opposite sex• Draw yourself
Draw-a-Person Test Administrator Asks:
- Can you please draw a person?- Draw whatever you like in any way you like?
Administrator Then Asks:
- Draw a person of the opposite sex?
Draw-a-Person Test (cont.) Subjective vs. quantitative scoring system Clinician looks for:
– Sequence of body parts– Verbalizations during the drawing process– Size & placement of figures on the page– Amount of action depicted– Systematization in doing the task– Number of erasures– Shading– Gender of picture– Over attention to certain body parts
Draw-a-Person Test (cont..)
Among the plausible but empirically untrue relations that have been claimed:
- Large size = Emotional expansiveness or acting out
- Small size = emotional constriction; withdrawal, or timidity
- Overworked lines = tension, aggression
- Distorted or omitted features = Conflicts related to that feature
- Large or elaborate eyes = Paranoia
Other common projective tests CAT – Children Apperception Test – (Bellak, 1975) Word Association Test – Rapaport et al. (1946, 1968) – 60
words: neutral and traumatic – scored: popularity, RT, content, test-retest responses
Sentence Completion – Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank – 40 sentences – evaluated on 7 point scale by “need for therapy” to “extremely good adjustment”
House-Tree-Person Test (Buck, 1948) & Draw-A-Person (Machover, 1949): Subject is asked to draw– Scoring is on absolute size, relative size of elements, omissions
"If there is a tendency to over-interpret projective test data without sufficient empirical grounds, then projective drawing tests are among the worst offenders."
Kaplan & Saccuzo, Psychological Testing, 2001, p. 467
Sources of Inaccuracy in Personality Testing
Personality assessment largely depends on self-report
Response sets may affect personality results
Social Desirability
Some test takers choose socially acceptable answers or present themselves in a favourable light
People often do not attend as much to the trait being measured as to the social acceptability of the statement
This represents unwanted variance
Social Desirability (cont.)
Example items:
– Friends would call me spontaneous.
– People I know can count on me to finish what I start.
– I would rather work in a group than by myself.
– I often get stressed-out in many situations.
Faking
Faking -- some test takers may respond in a particular way to cause a desired outcome
– may “fake good” (e.g., in employment settings) to create a favourable impression
– may “fake bad” (e.g., in clinical or forensic settings) as a cry for help or to appear mentally disturbed
– may use some subtle questions that are difficult to fake because they aren’t clearly face valid
“Faking Bad”– People try to look worse than they really are
Common problem in clinical settings
– Reasons: Cry for help Want to plea insanity in court Want to avoid draft into military Want to show psychological damage
– Most people who fake bad overdo it
Random Responding
Random responding may occur when test takers are unwilling or unable to respond accurately.
– likely to occur when test taker lacks the skills (e.g., reading), does not want to be evaluated, or lacks attention to the task
– try to detect by embedding a scale that tends to yield clear results from vast majority such that a different result suggests the test taker wasn’t cooperating
Random Responding– Detection:
Duplicate items:
“I love my mother.”
“I hate my mother.”
Infrequency scales:
“I’ve never had hair on my head.”
“I have not seen a car in 10 years.”
Impression Management
– Mitigating IM:
Use positive and negative impression scales (endorsed by 10% of the population)
Use lie scales to “flag” those who score high (e.g., “I get angry sometime”).
Inconsistency scales (e.g., two different responses to two similar questions)
(Use multiple assessment methods (other than self-report)
Top Related