ch8

• Objective Personality Measures


  Fixed set of responses (true/false, yes/no, dimensional scaling)
• Assessment Procedures


  • Objective Testing
• Objective Testing


  • Economical
  • Large group testing
  • Computer scoring & interpretation
  • Single dimension or trait can be targeted
  • Straightforward
  • Objective & reliable
• Objective Testing


  • Questions may be uncharacteristic of respondent
  • Underlying reason for behavior not evident
  • Mixed behaviors, unrepresentative
  • Distorted or lost information
  • Purposeful incorrect answering
  • Misinterpretation
• Content validation


  1. Define variables

  2. Consult experts

  3. Assess relevance with judges

  4. Psychometric analysis
• Content validation


  • Assumption of interpretation
  • Patient accuracy
  • Honesty
  • "Expert" definitions
• Empirical criterion keying


  1. No assumption based on content of item

  2. Those in the diagnostic group share responses

  3. Empirical basis, not always rational

  4. Difficult to interpret meanings
• Factor analysis


  1. Exploratory: Reduce to basic dimensions

  2. Confirmatory: Test hypothesized structure

  3. Empirical emphasis
• Construct validity


  • Combination of approaches
  • Specific scales for specific concepts
  • Valid when scale matches target
  • Feedback modifies theories and measures
• MMPI & MMPI-2


  Self-report inventory<|>Originally to identify psychiatric diagnoses<|>Categorical organization<|>Also used to infer personality traits<|>Computerized
• MMPI & MMPI-2 Validity

  • Test taking attitudes
  • Response sets
  • Response bias
• MMPI & MMPI-2 Validity Scales

  • ? (cannot say)
  • F (infrequency)
  • L (Lie)
  • K (defensiveness)
  • Fb (back page)
  • VRIN (variable response infrequency)
  • TRIN (true response infrequency)
• MMPI & MMPI-2


  • Screening capabilities: Severity, Hypothesis generation, Issues of test length
  • Personality traits: Atheoretical test, Not developed with constructs in mind
• MMPI & MMPI-2 Reliability and Validity


  • Difficulties in evaluating
  • Poor internal consistency
  • Incremental validity
  • Cutoff scores
• Concerns with MMPI & MMPI-2

  • Non-clinical usage (e.g., personnel selection)
  • Necessary revisions?
  • Appropriate test pool?
  • Unclear validity
  • Excessive overlapping among scale items
• Revised NEO-Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)

  240 items<|>5 point response scale<|>Five factor model: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness
• Revised NEO-Personality (NEO-PI-R)


  • Rational-empirical test
  • Reverse scoring
  • Strong reliability & stability
  • Relevant to psychological disorders
• Revised NEO-Personality


  • Lack of validity scales
  • Need for more demonstration of clinical relevance
  • Treatment planning
  • Psychometric criticisms
• Projective Testing


  Procedure for discovering a person's characteristic modes of behavior by observing behavior in response to a situation that does not elicit or compel a specific response
• Projective Testing


  • Examinee imposes own structure
  • Unstructured stimulus
  • Indirect methodology
  • Freedom of response
  • Many variables to rate
• Projective Testing Standardization


  • Benefits: Facilitation of communication, Established norms
  • Issues: Misleading descriptions, Too many variables
• Projective Testing Reliability


  • Test retest, Split half issues
• Projective Testing Validity


  • Must be specific in what is predicted
• Projective Testing


  • Examinee imposes own structure
  • Unstructured stimulus
  • Indirect methodology
  • Freedom of response
  • Many variables to rate
• Standardization (of Projective Testing)

  Facilitation of communication<|>Established norms
• Issues with Standardization (of Projective Testing)

  Misleading descriptions<|>Too many variables
• Reliability (of Projective Testing)


  • Test retest
  • Split half issues
• Validity (of Projective Testing)

  • Must be specific in what is predicted
• Rorschach inkblots


  1. Card is shown, responses offered & noted

  2. Evaluation and rating of answers
• Rorschach inkblot scoring


  Location<|>Content<|>Determinants<|>Popular/original answers<|>Exner's Comprehensive system of scoring
• Rorschach inkblot scoring is a research based approach with psychometric data
• Reliability (of Rorschach)


  • Facing challenges
  • Lacks retest studies
  • Reliability of clinicians' interpretations
• Validity (of Rorschach)


  • Anecdotal accounts vs. empirical research
  • When is the test most useful?
  • Environmental conditions, and influence on interpretations
• Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)


  Reveals personality characteristics<|>Interpretation to stories about pictures<|>Infers psychological needs, themes, interpersonal styles<|>Rarely formally scored<|>Subjective instrument
• Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) administration


  1. 6-12 pictures selected

  2. Examinee creates story
• Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) scoring


  Less emphasis on quantified system<|>Avoids distortion<|>Lacks empirical data
• Reliability (of TAT)


  • Difficult to evaluate
  • Must rely on judges' interpretation
• Validity (of TAT)


  • Comparisons to case data & therapist evaluations
  • Matching techniques & analysis of protocol
  • Comparison of clinical diagnoses & judgment
  • Principles of interpretation
• Rotter Sentence Blank


  7 point scale<|>Varied for youth<|>Objective scoring, free response<|>Cognitive & behavioral assessment, in some sense
• Illusory Correlation


  Clinicians learn false association of test responses to specific characteristics over time