Personality Assessment: Personality Assessment The Objective and Projective Measurement of Personality Development of Personality Testing: Development of Personality

Testing Initial attempts to measure personality first emerged at the turn of the 20th century. Theory-driven, not empirically derived, pyschometric properties (e.g., reliability, validity) were not established World War I ushered along the evolution of personality tests importance of predicting adjustment of new recruits to the military based on single dimensions of personality and behavior Within two decades following WWI, tests evolved to measure multiple dimensions of personality Development of Personality Testing: Development of Personality Testing During the 1930s and 1940s personality testing evolved further and diverged along two measurement methodologies Projective tests theory-driven Designed to probe deeper dimensions of personality Development of Personality Testing: Development of Personality Testing Empirically derived tests (Objective Measures) measures designed using factor-analysis measures created around predetermined criteria (criterion-referenced) Objective Personality Measures: Objective Personality Measures Objective measures utilize highly structured response formats Consist of unambiguous stimulus items Forced choice (e.g., true/false) Likert scale ratings Result in a quantitative score that can be compared with normative score data Objective Personality Measures: Objective Personality Measures The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (mmpi) The original MMPI inventory was published in 1953 by Starke Hathaway and J.C. McKinley Designed to assess and diagnose mental disorders in University of Minnesota Hospitals - became one of the most widely distributed and used measure of psychopathology both domestically and internationally MMPI: MMPI 3. Scale development: items for each scale were chosen based on ability to statistically discriminate between clinical subgroups andamp; control groups 4. Efforts to revise the inventory spanned a decade or so; were structured to address psychometric andamp; practical flaws (e.g., need for improved normative sample, need to update items deemed inappropriate/outdated given contemporary culture, need to devise a version uniquely suited to assessing adolescent population) MMPI: MMPI In 1989 development of the MMPI-2 was completed (Bucher et al.) incorporating an updated 2,600-person stratified normative sample 6. This was shortly followed by the production of the MMPI-A measure for adolescents MMPI: MMPI 7. Contains 10 scales yielding complex profile analyses that integrate the following clinical dimension of pathology and personality: Hypochondriasis, Depression, Hysteria, Psychopathic Deviate, Masculinity-Femininity, Paranoia, Psychasthenia, Schizophrenia, Hypomania, and Social Introversion Scaled scores yield 2 or 3-point code type descriptors that provide information regarding symptoms/behaviors, personality characteristics, and predictions/dispositions for the above-mentioned profiles Contains built-in lie scales to assess response patterns that pose a threat to internal validity (e.g., defensive responding, exaggerated responding, random responding) MMPI: MMPI Allows for a variety of administration and scoring methods (e.g., computerized administration, abbreviated forms, computer scoring, mail-in scoring) Amenable to the development and use of coding indices that allow for specialized interpretation of clusters of selected scales (e.g., Goldberg Index, Megargee Classification System for Criminal Offenders, The Welsh Code, the Harris-Lingoes Content Interpretation Approach) Slide11: I love/loved my mother. I like to wear brown shoes. Everything tastes the same. I often feel as if there is a tight band around my head. 5. I like to read mechanics magazines. 6. Rules

should be followed 'to the letter of the law.' 7. I would certainly enjoy beating criminals at their own game. THE ICE CREAM TEST: THE ICE CREAM TEST based on the mmpi What is your favorite flavor of ice cream from this list of possible flavors? 1. Mint chip 2. Vanilla 3. Butter pecan 4. Coffee 5. Rocky Road 6. Strawberry Slide13: Face validity items make sense, given what the test measures. The MMPI and ice cream test have low face validity because the items are empirically derived, not rationally derived. Empirically derived - subgroups of people are given a test, only the items that differentiate the groups are retained for the final version. Rationally derived items with face validity are chosen by the authors of the test. Objective Personality Measures: Objective Personality Measures Sixteen Personality Factors Test Raymond Cattell (1949, 1982) Unique development: Cattell and colleagues surveyed all English language words descriptive of personality Followed up with factor analyses, yielding 16 first-order factors of personality and four second-order factors Multiple forms, can be used as a component of the Clinical Analysis Questionnaire to simultaneously assess personality and pathology 187 items rated on a 3-point Likert scale Psychometric properties: large, stratified normative sample, excellent reliability (internal consistency) and validity (construct) Objective Personality Measures: Objective Personality Measures Also the NEO-PI Based on five factor model Lew goldbergs BIG FIVE adjective checklists - Based on the whorfian hypothesis: that the values of any society are determined by its lexicon. the most important constructs in our society are those that have the highest numbers of words to describe them. - native american languages 60 different words for green - over 1000 shades of red tile in the back of the vatican stained glass/mosaic school! the most important personality aspects are encoded into the lexicon. Objective Personality Measures: Objective Personality Measures California Psychological Inventory (1987) 462 true/false items grouped into 20 scales Target population: adolescents and adults Scores are used to interpret an examinees position within a three-dimensional construct of personality (interpersonal orientation, normative perspective, and level of realization) Very little psychometric data exists to validate this measure, but recent factor analyses suggest that the 20 scales of the CPI map onto four major personality dimensions (i.e. extraversion, control, flexibility, and consensuality) Projective Measures of Personality: Projective Measures of Personality Utilize ambiguous, unstructured or semi-structured stimuli (e.g., inkblots) to allow the examinee to project covert personality characteristics into responses on test items Overall, little to no psychometric data have been established on projective measures Despite a lack of empirical support, these measures have provided the impetus for more in-depth theoretical and applied research in the area of personality Can provide important qualitative information and outcomes to be used in clinical practice with individual clients Projective Measures of Personality: Projective Measures of Personality Rorschach Inkblot Test Developed by Hermann Rorschach, 1921 Consists of 5 black and white symmetrical inkblots, 2 red and grey inkblots, and 3 multicolored inkblots Examinees are presented each card and asked to express and describe everything they see in the images they are shown Responses are coded and compared with diagnostic patterns (e.g., emotionality, movement, anxiety, etc.) for clinical subgroups Projective Measures of Personality: Projective Measures of Personality Rorschach Inkblot Test (continued) Psychometric properties: attempts have been made to improve the psychometric properties of this measure Holtzman technique: Utilizes 45 inkblots, demonstrates moderate interscorer reliability and predictive validity Exner scoring system: Standardized scoring and interpretive system, has increased the promise of improved reliability and validity

Slide20: Rorschach Test Projective Measures of Personality: Projective Measures of Personality Thematic Apperception Test Developed by Henry Murray, 1943 Examinees are presented a series of picture cards (usually depicting human action and/or interaction) and are asked to tell a brief story about each card Responses are coded along dimensions measuring constructs such as needs, emotions, conflicts, attitudes, etc. Psychometric properties: little to no data exist supporting the reliability or validity of this measure Slide22: Thematic Apperception Test Projective Measures of Personality (show example): Projective Measures of Personality (show example) Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank Developed by Julian Rotter et al., 1947 and 1950 Derived from the work of Ebbinghaus that had been completed in the early 20th century Originally designed for use in the military, later adapted for use with college students and adults Unique application: unlike the Rorschach and TAT, this quasi-empirical measure was intended only to screen for emotional maladjustment Semi-structured measure of 40 items (sentence stems) that can be administered individually or in a group setting Yields a total score that captures emotional adjustment and the content of individual responses for more subjective clinical interpretation Projective Measures of Personality (show example): Projective Measures of Personality (show example) Draw-A-Person Test Karen Machover, 1949 Examinees are asked to draw two figures, which are thought to represent projections of the examinees impulses, desires, anxieties, etc. The first task requires the examinee to draw a figure The second task requires the examinee to draw a figure of the opposite sex The examiner records key aspects of each drawing (e.g., order of body parts drawn, prominence or absence of features, expression, etc.) Psychometric properties: newer scoring procedures have established preliminary data on reliability, but little to no empirical evidence exists to validate this measure Psychometrics of Assessment: Psychometrics of Assessment Stratified, representative normative/norming samples Reliability: Consistency of assessement results internal consistency of test items Split-half Test-retest reliability Alternate forms Validity: Ability to appropriately draw conclusions or generalize from results Construct validity Content validity Concurrent validity Predictive validity Discriminative validity