Applications in Clinical and Counseling Settings PDF

Applications in Clinical and Counseling Settings OUTLINE Strategies of Structured Personality-Test Construction The Logical-Content Strategy The Criterion-Group Strategy The Factor Analytic Strategy The Theoretical Strategy Combination Strategies Frequently Used Measures of Positive P...

Applications in Clinical and Counseling Settings OUTLINE Strategies of Structured Personality-Test Construction The Logical-Content Strategy The Criterion-Group Strategy The Factor Analytic Strategy The Theoretical Strategy Combination Strategies Frequently Used Measures of Positive Personality Traits Personality relatively stable and distinctive patterns of behavior that characterize an individual and his or her reactions to the environment Structured personality tests attempt to evaluate personality traits, personality types, personality states, and other aspects of personality, such as self-concept Personality traits refer to relatively enduring dispositions—tendencies to act, think, or feel in a certain manner in any given circumstance and that distinguish one person from another. Personality types refer to general descriptions of people; for example, avoiding types have low social interest and low activity and cope by avoiding social situations Personality states refer to emotional reactions that vary from one situation to another. Self-concept refers to a person’s self-definition or, according to C. R. Rogers (1959a), an organized and relatively consistent set of assumptions that a person has about himself or herself. World War I self-report questionnaires – provided a list of statements and required subjects to respond in some way to each, such as marking “True” or “False” to indicate whether the statement applied to them.  structured  The general procedure in which the subject is asked to respond to a written statement.  objective  characterized by structure and lack of ambiguity.  A clear and definite stimulus is provided, and the requirements of the subject are evident and specific. Strategies of Structured Personality-Test Constructio Deductive Strategies Deductive strategies use reason and deductive logic to determine the meaning of a test response. A. Logical-Content Strategy - as its name implies, uses reason and deductive logic in the development of personality measures. - In the most general use of this strategy, the test designer tries to logically deduce the type of content that should measure the characteristic to be assessed. B.Theoretical Strategy begins with a theory about the nature of the particular characteristic to be measured items must be consistent with the theory If the theory hypothesizes that personality can be broken down into six major areas, then developers strive to create items that tap each of these six areas. theoretical strategies demand that every item in a scale be related to the characteristic being measured. the theoretical approach attempts to create a homogeneous scale and, toward this end, may use statistical procedures such as item analysis. Empirical Strategies rely on data collection and statistical analyses to determine the meaning of a test response or the nature of personality and psychopathology. empirical strategies attempt to use experimental research to determine empirically the meaning of a test response, the major dimensions of personality, or both. A. Criterion-Group Strategy - begins with a criterion group, or a collection of individuals who share a characteristic such as leadership or schizophrenia. - Constructors then attempt to locate items that distinguish the criterion and control groups, or how the two groups contrast. - cross-validate - the criterion approach is to conduct additional research to ascertain empirically what it means when subjects endorse a large number of items on a particular scale. B. Factor Analytic Strategy -The factor analytic strategy uses factor analysis to derive empirically the basic dimensions of personality - factor analysis boils down or reduces data to a small number of descriptive units or dimensions - Factor analysts begin with an empirical database consisting of the intercorrelation of a large number of items or tests. The Logical-Content Strategy Woodworth Personal Data Sheet The first personality inventory ever, the Woodworth Personal Data Sheet, was developed during World War I and published in its final form after the war (Woodworth, 1920). Its purpose was to identify military recruits who would be likely to break down in combat. The final form of the Woodworth contained 116 questions to which the individual responded “Yes” or “No.” Early Multidimensional Logical-Content Scales Bell Adjustment Inventory - evaluate the subject’s adjustment in a variety of areas such as home life, social life, and emotional functioning. Bernreuter Personality Inventory - could be used for subjects as young as age 13 and included items related to six personality traits such as introversion, confidence, and sociability. Mooney Problem Checklist contains a list of problems that recurred in clinical case history data and in the written statements of problems submitted by approximately 4000 high-school students The Criterion-Group Strategy Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI and MMPI-2) is a true– false self-report questionnaire. The heart of the test consists of its validity, clinical, and content scales. The clinical scales were designed to identify psychological disorders such as depression and schizophrenia. Raw scores are then converted to T scores, with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 Purpose the purpose of the MMPI and MMPI-2 is to assist in distinguishing normal from abnormal groups. Specifically, the test was designed to aid in the diagnosis or assessment of the major psychiatric or psychological disorders. The MMPI requires at least a sixth-grade reading ability; the MMPI-2 requires an eighth-grade reading ability. Original Development of the Scales Beginning with a pool of 1000 items selected from a wide variety of sources, including case histories, psychological reports, textbooks, and existing tests, the original authors of the MMPI, S. R. Hathaway, a psychologist, and J. C. McKinley, a physician, selected 504 items judged to be relatively independent of one another. The final eight criterion groups each consisted of approximately 50 patients: ▶ hypochondriacs—individuals preoccupied with the body and fears of illness; ▶ depressed patients; ▶ hysterics—primarily individuals who showed a physical problem with no physical cause, such as physical pain without cause; ▶ psychopathic deviates—delinquent, criminal, or antisocial individuals; ▶ paranoids—individuals who showed symptoms such as poor reality testing (e.g., delusions in which they falsely believed that people were plotting against them); ▶ psychasthenics—individuals with a disorder characterized by excessive doubts and unreasonable fears; ▶ schizophrenics—individuals with a psychotic disorder involving dramatic symptoms (such as hallucinations) and thinking problems (such as illogical reasoning); and ▶ hypomanics—individuals with a disorder characterized by hyperactivity and irritability Addition to the eight scales just described, two content scales were added: the masculinity-femininity (MF) scale, which contained items differentially endorsed by men and women, and the social-introversion (Si) scale, which measures introversion and extroversion (L. C. Ward & Perry, 1998). validity scales - to measure test-taking attitude and to assess whether the subject took a normal, honest approach to the test. - The L, or lie, scale was designed to detect individuals who attempted to present themselves in an overly favorable way. - The K scale served the same purpose but was empirically constructed  - In deriving the K scale, Hathaway and McKinley compared the MMPI scores of nondisturbed individuals showing normal patterns with the MMPI scores of disturbed individuals who produced normal MMPI patterns—that is, they showed no scales that deviated significantly from the mean. - The K scale thus attempts to locate those items that distinguished normal from abnormal groups when both groups produced a normal test pattern. - The F or infrequency scale, which is designed to detect individuals who attempt to fake bad, consists of those items endorsed by less than 10% of the control group.  - Of the 64 items on the F scale, most of which contain pathological content such as “Odd odors come to me at times,” the average number of items endorsed in the scored direction is four. California Psychological Inventory (CPI)–Third Edition The CPI (Gough, 1987) is a second example of a structured personality test constructed primarily by the criterion-group strategy. For three of the 36 CPI scales in the most recent revision, criterion groups (e.g., men versus women; homosexual men versus heterosexual men) were contrasted to produce measures of personality categorized as (1) introversion–extroversion, (2) conventional versus unconventional in following norms, and (3) self- realization and sense of integration the CPI attempts to evaluate personality in normally adjusted individuals and thus finds more use in counseling settings. The test contains 20 scales, each of which is grouped into one of four classes. Class I scales measure poise, self-assurance, and interpersonal effectiveness. Individuals who score high on these scales tend to be active, resourceful, competitive, outgoing, spontaneous, and self-confident. Class II scales, which evaluate socialization, maturity, and responsibility, tend to be conscientious, honest, dependable, calm, practical, cooperative, and alert to ethical and moral issues. Class III scales measure achievement potential and intellectual efficiency. High scores in this class tend to indicate organized, efficient, sincere, mature, forceful, capable, and well-informed people. Class IV scales examine interest modes. High scorers tend to respond well to the inner needs of others and adapt well socially.  CPI also includes 13 scales that are designed for special purposes such as managerial potential, tough-mindedness, and creativity as well as several experimental scales evaluating dimensions of operating style The Factor Analytic Strategy  Recall that factor analysis is a statistical procedure for reducing the redundancy in a set of intercorrelated scores Guilford’s Pioneer Efforts One usual strategy in validating a new test is to correlate the scores on the new test with the scores on other tests that purport to measure the same entity. The result of the initial attempt to apply this strategy was a series of inventories that Guilford and his associates published in the 1940s and which were ultimately collapsed into a single scale—the Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey (Guilford & Zimmerman, 1956). This survey reduces personality to 10 dimensions, each of which is measured by 30 different items. The 10 dimensions are general activity, restraint, ascendance (leadership), sociability, emotional stability, objectivity, friendliness, thoughtfulness, personal relations, and masculinity. Cattell’s Contribution Rather than attempting to uncover the major dimensions of personality by intercorrelating personality tests, R. B. Cattell began with all the adjectives applicable to human beings so he could empirically determine and measure the essence of personality. The 171 terms were reduced to 36 dimensions, called surface traits. Subsequent investigation by factor analysis finally produced 16 distinct factors that accounted for all the variables. Thus, Cattell had reduced personality to 16 basic dimensions, which he called source traits Problems with the Factor Analytic Strateg Common variance is the amount of variance a particular variable holds in common with other variables. Unique variance refers to factors uniquely measured by the variable. Error variance is variance attributable to error. The factor analyst must determine which factors these groupings measure, but no definite criteria or rules exist for naming factors. The Theoretical Strategy The Theoretical Strategy To avoid the potential disagreement and biases that stem from factor analytic approaches, developers have proposed using theory as a way to guide the construction of structured personality tests. items are selected to measure the variables or constructs specified by a major theory of personality. After the items have been selected and grouped into scales, construct-related evidence for validity is sought. In other words, predictions are made about the nature of the scale; if the predictions hold up, then the scale is supported Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS) According to Edwards, the EPPS is not actually a test in the strictest sense of the word because there are no right or wrong answers. the EPPS elucidates some interesting concepts in personality-test construction, such as the concept of ipsative scores. Ipsative scores present results in relative terms rather than as absolute totals. The theoretical basis for the EPPS is the need system proposed by Murray (1938), probably the most influential theory in personality-test construction to date. The human needs proposed by Murray include the need to accomplish (achievement), the need to conform (deference), and the need for attention (exhibition). In developing the EPPS, Edwards selected 15 needs from Murray’s list and constructed items with content validity for each.  Norms for the EPPS were based on more than 1500 college men and women and approximately 9000 adults from the general population selected from urban and rural areas in 48 states. Personality Research Form, Third Edition (PRF-III) and Jackson Personality Inventory Revised (JPI-R) Like the EPPS, the original PRF and JPI were based on Murray’s (1938) theory of needs. However, unlike Edwards, the constructors of these tests developed specific definitions of each need Biserial correlational analysis then located the items that correlated highest with the proposed scale while showing relatively low correlations with other scales, particularly social desirability. In other words, strict definitional standards and statistical procedures were used in conjunction with the theoretical approach. This use of a combination of procedures is the latest trend in personality-test construction.  Items for the PRF and JPI are balanced in true-false keying. Unlike the scales of the MMPI, the PRF and JPI scales have no item overlap. Furthermore, the scales are relatively independent Self-Concept —the set of assumptions a person has about himself or herself. what you believe to be true about yourself will strongly affect your behavior. If you believe you are honest, then you will tend to act in conformity with this belief. Gough’s Adjective Checklist, for instance, contains 300 adjectives in alphabetical order The Piers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale–Second Edition contains 80 self- statements (e.g., “I like my looks ”) and requires a “Yes” or “No” response (Piers, Harris, & Herzberg, 1999). the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale–Second Edition is a formal paper-and-pencil test that is designed to measure self-concept data  A novel approach to the assessment of self-concept is based on Carl Rogers’s theory of the self. According to Rogers, the self is organized to remain consistent. New experiences that are consistent with a person’s self-concept are easily integrated; experiences that are inconsistent with the self-concept tend to be denied or distorted. Q-sort technique Combination Strategies Positive Personality Measurement and the NEO Personality Inventory–Three (NEO-PI-3) hardiness and “self-efficacy” Currently, several such measures of positive characteristics exist that evaluate traits such as conscientiousness, hope, optimism, and self-efficacy The NEO Personality Inventory–Three (NEO PI- R™) The developers of this test used both factor analysis and theory in item development and scale construction. Quite ambitious, the NEO-PI-3 attempts to provide a multipurpose inventory for predicting interests, health and illness behavior, psychological well-being, and characteristic coping styles. Based on their review of extensive factor analytic studies and personality theory, the authors of the NEO-PI-3 identified three broad domains: neuroticism (N), extroversion (E), and openness (O)—thus the name NEO Neuroticism (N) is defined primarily by anxiety and depression. The six facets of this domain are anxiety, hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability (describing people who do not feel safe).  Extraversion (E) refers to the degree of sociability or withdrawal a person tends to exhibit. Its six facets are warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement seeking, and positive emotions. Finally, openness (O) refers to the breadth of experience to which a person is amenable. Its six facets are fantasy, aesthetics, feelings (openness to feelings of self and others), actions (willingness to try new activities), ideas (intellectual curiosity), and values The NEO-PI-R has supported what is perhaps becoming one of the most accepted notions in personality and personality assessment—the five-factor model of personality (Costa et al., 2002; Sutin & Costa, 2011  Research with the NEO has supported the notion of the following five dimensions (after Wiggins, 1994): 1. Extroversion is the degree to which a person is sociable, leader-like, and assertive as opposed to withdrawn, quiet, and reserved. 2. Neuroticism is the degree to which a person is anxious and insecure as opposed to calm and self-confident. 3. Conscientiousness is the degree to which a person is persevering, responsible, and organized as opposed to lazy, irresponsible, and impulsive. 4. Agreeableness is the degree to which a person is warm and cooperative as opposed to unpleasant and disagreeable. 5. Openness to experience is the degree to which a person is imaginative and curious as opposed to concrete-minded and narrow in thinking.  Among positive characteristics, conscientiousness as identified on the NEO has been of particular interest. Conscientiousness has been found to be valid as a positive predictor of performance in all occupations studied and to be positively correlated with effective styles of coping with stressful situations (Bartley & Roesch, 2011; Haren & Mitchell, 2003; Hu et al., 2002) and with the Satisfaction with Life Scale. The trait openness correlated significantly with crystallized intelligence (Bates & Sheiles, 2003), and the traits of openness, agreeableness, and extraversion were found to be beneficial in predicting success in specific job settings. In addition, Judge and Bono (2000) found that extraversion and agreeableness were effective in predicting transformational leadership. Frequently Used Measures of Positive Personality Traits Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) is widely used today in the United States (Heatherton & Wyland, 2003) and in various countries worldwide such as Hungary (Bödecs, Horváth, & Szilágyi, 2011), Germany (Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson, 2003), the United Kingdom (Huang & Dong, 2011; Schaefer, Koeter, Wouters, Emmelkamp, & Schene, 2003), and Turkey (Kugu, Akyuez, Dogan, Ersan, & Izgic, 2002). This scale measures global feelings of self-worth using 10 simple and straightforward statements that examinees rate on a 4-point Likert scale. General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) The GSE (Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1992) was developed to measure an individual’s belief in his or her ability to organize resources and manage situations, to persist in the face of barriers, and to recover from setbacks. The scale consists of 10 items and takes only 4 minutes to complete. The GSE has been found to be positively correlated with favorable emotions, dispositional optimism, self-esteem, and work satisfaction. Negative correlations have been found with depression, anxiety, stress, burnout and health complaints. Ego Resiliency Scale Revised This measure of ego resiliency or emotional intelligence was developed by Block and Kremen in 1996 (see Alessandri, Vecchione, Caprara1, & Letzring, 2011). The Ego Resiliency Scale (ER89-R) consists of 14 items, each answered using a 4- point Likert scale to rate statements such as “I am regarded as a very energetic person,”“I get over my anger at someone reasonably quickly,” and “Most of the people I meet are likeable.” ER89-R scores correlated highly with ratings for being sympathetic, considerate, dependable, responsible, cheerful, warm, assertive, socially adaptive, and not hostile. widely used in psychological research. Dispositional Resilience Scale (DRS) The DRS was developed by Bartone, Wright, Ingraham, and Ursano (1989) to measure “hardiness,” which is defined as the ability to view stressful situations as meaningful, changeable, and challenging. Furthermore, research has indicated that those who measure high in hardiness have lower levels of worry (Hanton, Evans, & Neil, 2003); others have suggested that hardiness, as measured by the DRS, can function as an index of mental health (Taylor, Pietrobon, Taverniers, Leon, & Fern, 2011). Hope Scale Snyder et al. (1991) proposed a cognitive model that characterizes hope as goaldriven energy (agency) in combination with the capacity to construct systems to meet goals (pathways) (Tennen, Affleck, & Tennen, 2002). Life Orientation Test–Revised (LOT-R) The LOT-R is the most widely used self-report measure of dispositional optimism, which is defined as an individual’s tendency to view the world and the future in positive ways. The LOT-R consists of 10 items developed to assess individual differences in generalized optimism versus pessimism. Items are answered on a 5point response scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. The LOT-R and its predecessor, the LOT, have been used extensively in studies of stress and coping. Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS The five-item SWLS (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) was developed as a multi-item scale for the overall assessment of life satisfaction as a cognitivejudgmental process, rather than for the measurement of specific satisfaction domains. Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) The PANAS was developed by Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988) to measure two orthogonal dimensions of affect. One of the most widely used measures of affect (Schmukle, Egloff, & Burns, 2002), the instrument has two scales—one for positive affect (PA) and one for negative affect (NA). Coping Intervention for Stressful Situations (CISS) Active behavioral and cognitive coping strategies have been shown to be associated with measures of positive affect, and the strategy of coping by avoidance has been shown to be associated with high levels of negative affect (Pernas et al., 2001). Using a 5-point Likert scale with choices ranging from “not at all” to “very much,” this inventory assesses individuals according to three basic coping styles: task-oriented coping, emotion-oriented coping, and avoidance-oriented coping. Core Self-Evaluations  It has been suggested that measures of personality, to some extent, are all tapping into a single core construct (Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2002). Core Self-Evaluations is a framework for understanding and evaluating this core. This broad-based personality construct is composed of four specific traits: selfesteem, generalized self-efficacy, neuroticism, and locus of control. The construct is not simply a descriptive system but explanatory of the dispositional source of life satisfaction and performance. In other words, the system not only describes the positive traits of individuals but also suggests ways in which these positive traits affect emotions and behaviors. Projective Personality Tests Outline Projective Personality Tests The Rorschach Inkblot Test An Alternative Inkblot Test: The Holtzman The Thematic Apperception Test Alternative Apperception Procedures Nonpictorial Projective Procedures The Projective Hypothesis  Simply stated, this hypothesis proposes that when people attempt to understand an ambiguous or vague stimulus, their interpretation of that stimulus reflects their needs, feelings, experiences, prior conditioning, thought processes, and so forth. The concept of projection is also reflected in Shakespeare’s “Nothing is either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.” Although what the subject finally sees in a stimulus is assumed to be a reflection of personal qualities or characteristics, some responses may be more revealing than others. The Rorschach Inkblot Test Historical Antecedents More than 25 years before the birth of Herman Rorschach, the originator of the test that bears his name, J. Kerner (1857) noted that individuals frequently report idiosyncratic or unique personal meanings when viewing inkblot stimuli. first set of standardized inkblots by Whipple (1910) Rorschach, however, receives credit for finding an original and important use for inkblots: identifying psychological disorders. Stimuli, Administration, and Interpretation Rorschach constructed each stimulus card by dropping ink onto a piece of paper and folding it. Of the 10 finally selected, five were black and gray; two contained black, gray, and red; and three contained pastel colors of various shades. Each card is administered twice. In the second phase. Responses are scored according to at least five dimensions, including location (where the perception was seen), determinant (what determined the response), form quality (to what extent the response matched the stimulus properties of the inkblot), content (what the perception was), and frequency of occurrence (to what extent the response was popular or original; popular responses occur once in every three protocols on average).  In scoring for location, the examiner notes whether the subject used the whole blot (W), a common detail (D), or an unusual detail (Dd). One or more of at least four properties of an inkblot may determine or lead to a response: its form or shape, its perceived movement, its color, and its shading. Form quality is the extent to which the percept (what the subject says the inkblot is) matches the stimulus properties of the inkblot. Scoring form quality is difficult. Confabulatory responses An Alternative Inkblot Test: The Holtzman  The Holtzman Inkblot Test was created to meet these difficulties while maintaining the advantages of the inkblot methodology (Holtzman, Thorpe, Swartz, & Herron, 1961; also see Wong & Jamadi, 2010). In this test, the subject is permitted to give only one response per card. Administration and scoring procedures are standardized and carefully described. An alternate form is available that correlates well with the original test stimuli. Interscorer as well as split-half reliabilities are comparable to those found for objective personality tests. Both forms, A and B, of the Holtzman contain 45 cards. Each response may be scored on 22 dimensions. The Thematic Apperception Test  The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) was introduced in 1935 by Christina Morgan and Henry Murray of Harvard University. the TAT is based on Murray’s (1938) theory, which distinguishes 28 human needs, including the needs for sex, affiliation, and dominance. Stimuli, Administration, and Interpretation The TAT is more structured and less ambiguous than the Rorschach. TAT stimuli consist of pictures that depict a variety of scenes There are 30 pictures and one blank card. Specific cards are designed for male subjects, others for female. Some of the cards are appropriate for older people, others for young ones. Almost all methods of TAT interpretation take into account the hero, needs, press, themes, andoutcomes Nonpictorial Projective Procedures Word Association Test Imagine yourself comfortably seated in a psychologist’s examining office. Your task is simple, or at least it seems so. The psychologist says a word and you say the first word that comes to mind. The test begins. The purpose of word association tests is to infer possible disturbances and areas of conflict from an individual’s response to specific words. Sentence Completion Tasks As with all projective techniques, the individual’s response is believed to reflect that person’s needs, conflicts, values, and thought processes. Clinicians look for recurring themes of conflict and pathological content. Figure Drawing Tests In the Draw-a-Person Test (Machover, 1949), the subject, most often a child, is asked to draw the picture of a person. Later the child is asked to tell a story about the person. A similar technique is the House-Tree-Person Test (Buck, 1948), in which the subject draws a picture of a house, tree, and person and then makes up a story about it. In the Kinetic Family Drawing Test (Burns & Kaufman, 1970, 1972), the subject draws a picture of his or her family.  Projective drawing tests are scored on several dimensions, including absolute size, relative size, omissions, and disproportions. For example, in drawing her family, a young child may omit herself. Interpreters might then assume that the child feels alienated from her family. In drawing a house-tree-person, the child might draw himself in the house looking out, perhaps reflecting a feeling of being isolated or trapped. One projective drawing test that has been proven valid and useful in clinical settings is the Goodenough Draw-a-Man Test (Wood et al., 2003),