Individual Differences PDF

Individual respondent/ participant may not respond/answer in a responsible way or sincerely. Differences May give random answers without really understanding the question. This may be due to the reason that the respondent is not interested or has simply got bored....

Individual respondent/ participant may not respond/answer in a responsible way or sincerely. Differences May give random answers without really understanding the question. This may be due to the reason that the respondent is not interested or has simply got bored. Thus the mood and the emotional-motivational aspects are important factors to be considered. Self Assessment Questions II 1) What are the areas in which personality assessment is used?......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2) What is observer effect?......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3) What is unstructured interview?......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4) Explain the ‘halo effect’.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.5.4 Rating Scales Rating scales consist of standardized items that are to be rated on a fixed parameter. For example, the teacher can rate the student with regard to sociability or initiative quality. Thus, rating scales involve assigning of ratings by the concerned individual himself/ herself or by another individual/assessor (e.g., parents, teacher, supervisor etc.) with 44 regard to different aspects of personality of the individual. In both the cases, there are advantages as well as limitations. You know yourself better than anyone else, so you Assessment of can rate yourself better and more accurately. However, there is also a possibility that Personality you may give good ratings even when it is not correct as it will reflect good on you. This is called social desirability effect which means that one acts according to what is desirable by the society. The social desirability effect may also operate in case of personality inventories and even in interview.Further when the rating is done by another individual, it may give a biased response. Advantages Rating by oneself will give a better picture of the behaviour/trait being assessed. Moreover, rating by significant others also will provide a more accurate picture of the personality of the individual as they know the individual in a significant way. Limitations If rating is not done honestly, it may result in biased responses and also socially desirable responses. People always want to project their self in a better way, which may affect their responses/ratings to the test items. 2.5.5 Behavioural Data As we have seen in direct observation mentioned earlier, similarly behavioural data also includes observation of the behaviour of the individual. The difference is that it does not require a researcher/psychologist to be present to observe the behaviour, rather the job is done by a device. Mehl, Pennebaker, Crow, Dabbs & Price (2001) created the electronically activated record (EAR) which is worn by the individual and it unobtrusively monitors his/her real world moment-to-moment interactions. This device picks up the auditory information and relates it to their personality traits. For example, studies (Mehl, Gosling, & Pennebaker, 2006) found that the happiest people have the most social interactions in their daily life. Thus, the EAR device helps in having an objective assessment of personality as reflected in the day-to-day life. Advantages It provides an objective measurement in natural or real world setting. The person wearing the device goes on with his/her daily interactions and these are audio recorded for analysis. Thus, it offers a valuable source of real life information. Limitations The person may become conscious of the device and may not behave naturally. 2.5.6 Situational Tests Situational tests, as the name suggests, involves assessing the individual in carefully designed situations. Here, the behaviour of the individual is observed in a purposefully designed situation. Situational tests of personality were first used for selection of military personnel for critical overseas assignments during World War II. One of the variants of this test is Situational Stress Test in which the individual has to react to various stressful, frustrating, or emotionally disruptive situations where his helpers are obstructive and uncooperative. Hartshorne, May, and their associates (1928, 1929, 1930) used situational tests for the Character Education Enquiry (CEE). It involved testing children in natural situations 45 Individual like playing in the school ground or as part of homework or class exam etc. where the Differences child is not aware of being tested. This test measures traits like altruism, honesty and self-control. Advantages Situational tests have the advantage of assessing personality in real life situations. In fact, it has the twin advantage of natural setting as well as controlled way of assessing through well designed observations. Limitations Situational tests are time consuming, require more energy and planning. It also has the problem of whether the observer will be participating or be a non-participant as we have discussed in the earlier section. Further, there is also the issue of ‘what to observe’ during the situational test. 2.5.7 Projective Techniques Projective measures of personality are widely used personality assessment tools. Unlike the self-report measures where the individual is provided with structured test stimuli, in projective tests the individual has to respond to unstructured or ambiguous stimuli. The basic assumption behind using unstructured test stimuli in projective tests are that the individual projects his/her latent or unconscious feelings, needs, emotions, motives etc. on to the ambiguous stimulus. The responses of the individual in the form of projection reflect the nature of his/her personality. Projective techniques are based on the psychoanalytic viewpoint of personality which says that the real nature of personality lies deep in the unconscious. Hence responses to the questions asked in the inventories or the interview may not reflect the true personality characteristics of the individual. According to the projective techniques, direct methods are not capable to assess one’s personality and it can be revealed only through indirect methods. Further, when the person is on guard and knows what is being asked, social desirability may operate, and sometimes, the person may not even be aware of his true personality to answer correctly. Hence, indirect measures like projective techniques are more effective in assessing the real personality of the individual. While projective tests tap the unconscious and reveals the personality of the subject through interpretation of their responses, an in depth training is required to interpret such responses. Projective techniques involve making up a story based on some pictures or drawing. The unconscious feelings, emotions or thoughts are projected onto these drawings, pictures or stories which are then analyzed to find out the personality of the individual. Some widely used projective techniques are discussed below. Rorschach Inkblot Test (Rorschach, 1921) consists of 10 inkblots showing ambiguous visual stimuli. These are shown to the client one by one and asked to simply say whatever comes to their mind. The scoring is based on different elements of the response such as the content, reference to shape, colour, part or whole of the image etc. Scoring and interpretation of the responses is extensive and detail; one needs to be really trained in administering and scoring the Rorschach test. Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) developed by Murray and Morgan (1930) consists of 20 picture cards in black and white colour. The client is asked to see each 46 picture which are structured and meaningful unlike the ink-blots in Rorschach, and then Assessment of tell a story about it. The test aims at measuring the motivational traits of the individual as Personality reflected through the stories. Indian adaptation of TAT has been developed by Uma Choudhary in 1960. It consists of 14 cards as modified for the Indian population. Children Apperception Test (CAT), developed by Bellak and Bellak (1949), is based on the TAT which is meant for adults. The CAT cards uses animal figures instead of human figures as it is meant for children between 3 to 10 years. Sentence Completion Test consists of statements that are required to be completed by the respondent. Some other projective tests are Draw-a-Person (DAP) test, and the Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study. Projective tests have been widely used for clinical purposes. Advantages: The hidden aspects of personality such as unconscious motives, wishes and conflicts come to the fore. Hence it can reflect the true nature of one’spersonality. Limitations Projective techniques are subjective in nature, though predetermined categories are used for scoring and details are specified for interpreting. Exner (1986) method of scoring provides a more standardized ways for scoring responses. Low reliability and validity Time consuming Requires skill and expertise in administration and scoring and interpretation of the projective tests. Thus, in the above sections, we learnerd about various methods of assessing personality and also some example of the tests under these methods. As personality is not a uni- dimensional characteristic, assessment of personality also cannot be a single technique based. We need to combine the various methods of assessing personality if we want to have a comprehensive, better and truer understanding of individual’s personality. The various methods of personality assessment discussed above are guided by different approaches to personality. For example, personality inventories are influenced by the trait theories. The behavioural assessments including direct observation, interview and rating scales are guided by the behavioural and social learning approach to personality. Psychoanalytic approach is the underlying factor for projective techniques of personality assessment. However, in the practical context of assessing personality, there is a fluidity of the approaches and various methods are used as per the requirement of the situation. Self Assessment Questions III 1) What is social desirability effect?.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 47 that Type A personality are more competitive, ambitious, restless, has compulsive Assessment of tendencies, lack introspection, aggressive in nature and have the urgency of time always. Personality Individuals having such personality have been found to be more prone to heart related problems (e.g., Williams et al., 2000). Thus personality can have an impact on our health and knowing one’s personality can help us to modify our health behaviours and practices. Personality has a bearing on our health and well-being. It influences our health practices. Studies have found relationship between personality traits and our health. A study by Booth-Kewley and Vickers (1994) reported that the OCEAN (openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) factors are related to both good and bad health practices. For example, they found extraversion and conscientiousness to be related to healthier lifestyles; and openness to experiences was found to be related to more risky behaviours like taking drugs etc. Personality assessment has an important role in the industrial and organizational context. We need to know how our personality affects us as well as others in the workplace. This also becomes crucial as we spend a major chunk of our time in the workplace alongwith our colleagues, juniors, seniors and peers. It becomes essential to have people managing skills, adaptability, perseverance, managing emotions, leadership qualities etc. to function effectively. It is required to work in team, motivate and encourage others and communicate effectively. In fact, personality traits contribute more to job performance, job satisfaction and success in the organization than the academic degrees only. Application of personality assessment can also be seen in many other fields such as sports and military setting. Defense services require a person to work in typical conditions and with a typical work structure and hierarchy. Hence, the person needs to have specific personality traits. Thus, personality assessment has relevance and applications in varied settings. As personality is an integral part of us, it has implications for everything we do and hence, the importance of personality assessment cannot be denied. Now let us know about the various methods used for assessing personality. 2.5 METHODS OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT Multiple methods are used to assess personality. Broadly they can be grouped under two: Direct Methods and Indirect Methods. Direct methods include Observation, Interviews, Personality Inventories/Questionnaires, Rating scales, Behavioural data and Situational tests. Indirect methods include Projective techniques. Let us now discuss each of these. 2.5.1 Observation Observation is a direct method where the person is directly observed in different situations. It is obvious that if I want to know about the personality of an individual, I would be able to know it if I observe that person in various situations. However, this method has practical difficulty as it is not feasible to move around and constantly observe the person in different situations. Nevertheless, direct observation as a method offers a rich source of information about the individual. During observation, a psychologist has an objective to view a pattern in the behaviour which explains cause and effect specifically. While observing the client, a psychologist will make notes which are further used to draw conclusions about the client based on 39 Individual the observations made. During observation the psychologist makes an effort not to Differences disturb the natural conditions of the client. Observation is of two types based on the involvement of the psychologist. Depending on the case, a psychologist may decide whether she or he should choose a participant observation method or a non-participant observation method. A participant observation method is where the psychologist becomes a part of the group under observation. For example, during “Kumbh festival”, a religious festival of the Hindus in India, a psychologist may plan to be a part of a monk group and will thus participate in all activities of that group and will make careful notes of the observations. In such a case the self-experience may help the psychologist understand personality and patterns of behaviour in a much better way. On the other hand, his/her own experience may color the perception of the group of monks. Another method of observation is non-participant; it is also known as naturalistic observation method. In this psychologist does not seek to participate as a group member rather observes the client or group from a distance to note down the observations about the client. This is considered as a good method of observation as the client is behaving and interacting in a natural environment without any interference from the psychologist. The only drawback of this method is that it is very time consuming. At times a psychologist may sit the entire day observing the client and may not be able to make notes of any significant observation that he/she decided to observe. Observation method is useful in specific situations, for example, observing the child’s behaviour in a home setting or the teacher observing the child in the school setting or the psychologist observing the client in a clinical setting. Observation needs to be done systematically and record needs to be maintained properly. It can contain information such as time of observation, duration of observation, context of observationand frequency of observation in a day. Advantages: It offers firsthand information when the individual is actually engaging in a behaviour. So it may be more accurate. Limitations: Two limitations of observation method are the (a) observer bias – the person who is observing have his own biases, beliefs and value system which may affect the observation process and interpretation of the observation data and, (b) observer effect – refers to the effect on the person because of the fact of being observed. The person may become conscious and may not show the natural response or behaviour. 2.5.2 Interview Interview as you know, consists of asking questions to the person/interviewee about his/her behaviour. But it is not like the job interview which is more formal. Here, the interview may be semi-structured or even unstructured without having any specific questions and it starts flowing as the dialogue between the interviewer and interviewee proceeds. Whether it is semi-structured or unstructured, the goal of interview as a method of personality assessment is to collect information about the behaviour, and personality patterns of the individual. Thus, an interview allows you to directly ask questions to the client. Interview questions are pre defined based on which the interview can be structured, semi structured or unstructured. 40 Structured interview is where the psychologist has a pre-defined set of questions which has an expectation of one word or a single sentence answers from the client or the Assessment of participant. This type of interview is conducted to verify facts from the client and is Personality usually when the psychologist has already drawn conclusions and is only verifying facts or looking forward to fill small gaps in information. This type of interview is not time consuming but fetches very limited information. Here, the psychologist has full control during the interview. Semi structured interview is the best form of an interview as it allows the psychologist to ask specific and detailed questions as and when required based on the need. Such interviews also have pre-defined questions. Here psychologist has control during the interview. Semi structured interviews allows the psychologist to focus on information which is specific and at the same time allows to explore the possible grey areas of information which they have not explored. In an unstructured interview one question leads to another and a larger pool of information can be collected from the client. In this type of interview, the aim or objective of the session is just to explore the information about the client. This method is highly time consuming and may or may not fetch relevant information. So, interview is a technique of self-report. It can provide a rich source of data as the interviewer can take various facets of the individual into consideration such as the verbal response, as well as the non-verbal aspects of facial expression, the tone of voice, the body language, mannerisms etc. All these can provide lot more information than only observing the individual or having the responses to the personality inventories (discussed next). Further, one can obtain in-depth information also from the interview. Advantages: A lot of relevant and in-depth information, both verbal and non-verbal, can be collected with the help of interview method. Interview offers greater flexibility than other methods of psychological assessment. Limitations Bias of interpretation – Interviewer may be biased and his/her beliefs and prejudices may colour the interpretation of the responses of the interviewee/client. The ‘halo effect’– which may create a positive or negative first impression of the client in the beginning of the interview. This accordingly may affect the subsequent interactions with the client. Interviewer subjectivity – As the interviewer plays a crucial role in interviewing and interpreting the responses of the individual, the subjectivity of the interviewer may affect the result. Lacks reliability and validity – As we discussed earlier, reliability and validity are two of the properties of a good psychological test. In case of unstructured and semi-structured interview, the reliability and validity will be less because of the subjective nature of the interview. On the other hand, if the interview is structured, it may not provide much useful information. Time consuming – Interview will require more time and energy if it has to give really in-depth and useful information. Not easy to take the interview – Interview is not just asking questions. It is a skill and it takes trained interviewers to really get relevant and pertinent information about the measured aspect. 41  1 THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF PERSONALITY  2 There are a number of popular definitions of personality in the sense that there are several different meanings attached to the word as it is used conversationally. Perhaps the commonest of these maybe reduced to the formula “personality is your effect upon other people.” When one hears “Miss Smith has a lot of personality” he knows that people who meet Miss Smith do not forget her easily. She has a high stimulus value. Another popular view of personality identifies it with the characteristic of aggressiveness. “Jimmy has a weak personality” is interpreted to mean that he is easily imposed upon or that he is lacking in forcefulness. Personality is also used colloquially to imply personal attractiveness, the ability to withstand hardships, and others specific qualities. Although, occasionally it is used to identify a general integration of responses, an individual style of life, or a unique point of view. Each personality is unique. Friends can be recognized as much by their manner of thinking, talking, and acting as by physical appearance. Often we hear such remarks such as “He would do it that way, that’s part of his personality!” Experts in the fields of art, music, and literature ordinarily can identify the works of well known figures by style alone. This tendency to identify personalities in terms of a single characteristic is of course a common feature of unscientific thinking.  3 The scientific concept of personality has been work out to some extent by trial and error. Kempf (1919) – “the habitual mode of adjustment which the person effects (shifts) between its own egocentric drive and the exigencies (urgent need or demand) of the environment.” As phrased, it would include practically all of human behaviour, since the vast majority of our responses do consist of just such habitual ways of adjusting. Morton Prince (1924) – “personality is the sum total of all the biological innate dispositions, impulses, tendencies, appetites, and instincts of the individual, and the acquired disposition and tendencies.” This definition places a potentially useful emphasis on the inner aspect of personality. Like Kempf, it seems to cover virtually all of psychology, rather than to delimit a particular field. Floyd Allport (1924) –This seems too much inclusive “personality traits may be considered as so many important dimensions in which people may be found to differ.” For example, it includes physical dimensions which are only indirectly of importance to personality.  4 Gordon Allport (1937) – personality is the “dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustment to this environment.” It recognizes the changing nature of personality (a dynamic organization); it focus on the inner aspect rather than superficial manifestations, but it establishes the basis for the social stimulus value of personality (unique adjustments to the environment). He does not mention which psychophysical systems, but one such system is our pattern of beliefs and expectancies: When John meets a snarling dog, he cries and runs away. His younger brother is unperturbed. He scolds the dog and reassures his playmates. This is an important personality difference, which can be described as a difference in belief or expectancy regarding the harmful potentialities of the dog.  5 Definitions in terms of Stimulus and Response: We can consider personality in terms of two groups: one, in terms of the stimulus value (the effect one has on others) and those that consider it in terms of responses (what the person actually does). There is no necessary contradiction between the two. John’s stimulus value for others is necessarily a function of John’s behaviour. 1. Personality as Stimulus: Most people would define personality in terms of stimulus value. This is a natural consequence of everyday situations in which the concept is particularly useful such as picking prospective employees, describing friends, or grading school children. An attempt to scientifically use a definition of personality as stimulus leads to immediate difficulty. This is especially true if we are looking for increased logical precision and quantitative measurement of personality traits. This creates an unlimited number of personalities – one for each acquaintance which he has for each a differing stimulus value. He will not be evaluated in the same way by his mother, his wife, his employer, his secretary, his rival for a promotion.  6 2. Personality as a Response: In an attempt to get away from the abovementioned limitation, many psychologists have shifted to the definition of personality as a response. Guthrie (1944) has defined personality as “those habits and habit systems of social importance that are stable and resistant to change”. While more precise, it still raises numerous questions. What about habits which are not of social importance? Some people like to pose before a mirror when they are alone, a habit that may not be of “social importance”. His intent was to combine the definitions of personality as stimulus and response. However, the definition encounters some problems. When faced with the same stimulus, a person will not always act in the same way.  7 3. Personality as Intervening Variable There are certain intervening variables between the stimulus and the response which affect the nature of the final behavioural pattern. Such variables are the person’s intelligence, his motives, his past experience with the stimulus, and his attitude towards the situation in which the stimulus appears. Thus, if the stimulus is an invitation to dance, variables influencing the final response might be the young man’s past mishaps at dancing, his expectation of meeting a certain girl who attracts him, his financial status, his need to study for an examination during the evening of the dance, etc. The decision will be a function of these forces (which may not be necessarily conscious).  8 ANALYSIS OF PERSONALITY  9 Sam is a quiet, reserved youngster who talks freely only about impersonal matters and answers direct personal questions with reticence and apparent resistance. Don is jolly, somewhat noisy, and talkative. He discusses personal matters with no apparent embarrassment and a good sense of humour. When asked to look at a series of pictures, and imagine stories for which each picture could be an illustration, Sam follows the instructions quickly and makes up stories in elaborate detail and full of incisive, barbed comments about people. Most of his stories are tragic and the central figure in each story suffers the loss of something he values highly. Don, on the other hand, finds difficulty in making up stories and when he does, he gives brief, conventional plots leading to the ever popular “happy ending”. They are asked to fill out a questionnaire scale for personality traits. Sam score high on introversion and self-sufficiency, a moderate score on neurotic tendency and low score on dominance. Don scores high on dominance, moderate on self- sufficiency, and low scores on introversion and neurotic tendency. Both score the same on IQ, speed of reading. When asked to predict how fast he could read a similar passage on a second test in reading, Sam guesses he can do it faster while Don thinks he would do only a little better the second time. Sam reveals that he sets a high standard for himself, while Don feels that he could make higher grades if he puts his mind to it, but that he loves playing a little too much. In an experiment, they are interrupted during tasks. Sam fidgets around until he can get back to the table and finish the uncompleted task. Don sits on the table and begins telling the experimenter about his vacation. When the experimenter leaves the room, Don completes one task, ignoring the other.  10 These two boys are completely different from each other. It is apparent that they different in their impression upon their friends (stimulus value) but also as they are studied by interview, by experiments, and by tests. Personality is something which shows up in our relations to people around us, in our answers to an interview, or to a set of printed questions, in our overt behaviour, and verbal constructs. Many different techniques have been worked out for the study of human personality.  11 The Value of Constructs: It is easier to describe Sam Wilson by contrasting him with Don Young. Varying aspects of personality are brought into focus by this method. To a young child, “cold” takes on meaning as it is contrasted with “hot”. Most studies have thus found it expedient to derive descriptions in terms of pairs of polar opposites, such as sociable-seclusive, optimistic-pessimistic, introversive-extratensive, dominant- submissive. There is less danger of confusion and misunderstanding in working with this method than others. It is therefore, proper to state that personalities differ on specific traits and such traits can be identified by pairs of polarized terms. It would however, be misleading to suggest that personality can be sharply divided into these dichotomous classifications.  12 OBSERVATIONS  13 It is convenient to classify these techniques according to the approach to personality which they exemplify: personality as stimulus, as response, and as intervening variable. For the study of personality in terms of social-stimulus value, the best method is the rating technique. The formal ratings of the psychologist and the casual judgments of the layman differ only with respect to the controls which are imposed. Rating techniques seek to eliminate certain sources of error which are common in amateur observations.  14 RATINGS  15 Graphic Rating Scale: Uniformity is introduced into the rating situation, first, by prescribing a standard form in which all judgments must be cast. One of the most used, and probably one of the best forms is that of the graphic rating scale. The key question is followed by a line divided into 10 equal segments. The judge is asked to characterize the subject by placing a check mark somewhere on this line, indicating the degree of this trait exhibited by this person. (The extra dash at the end is checked in case the judge has had no opportunity to observe the trait in question.) It is believed that the segmented line, with its resemblance to a foot rule, induces in the judge an attitude appropriate to measurement as opposed to loose description of personality. The spacing gives an opportunity to mark between descriptive phrases, indicating that neither exactly characterizes this individual. Judgments are converted into numerical values for statistical purposes, by measuring the distance from the left- hand end of the line to the check mark.  16 The “Guess Who” Test: Slightly different from the orthodox rating scales is the guess-who technique, a method of determining social-stimulus value, devised by Hartshorne and May (1928). The procedure involves reading a description to the group: “a bully”; “a restless, giggling girl”; “a neat, popular boy”; and so on. The members are asked to write down the names of people who fit this description. It is thus a way of identifying people who are perceived as fitting a given pattern. Scores are computed in terms of the number of times a person is mentioned as fitting a given description. While it is useful only for identifying the outstanding characteristics of an individual as seen by his associates, it is often quite valuable.  17 Sociometry: A realistic and practical device for estimating social stimulus value is the sociometric scheme developed by Moreno (1934). In typical instances, institutional girls are asked to choose roommates, workers are asked to choose others for work teams, and the like, “who in the group would you like to help you on a personal problem?” “stars” – majority has picked; “isolates” – few or no choices; “one way choice” – individuals who choose someone but is not reciprocated, “mutual choice”, “cliques” – groups of three or more people in a larger group who choose each other. The number of times an individual is chosen indicates his popularity or attraction value; the number of unreciprocated choices made by a person is a rough index of social frustration/repulsion. The pattern of choices and rejections for a given individual is referred to as his social atom. It is clear that such charts give in compact form a great deal of information about the relative social status of different individuals.  18 Errors of Definition. Judgments of personality must be made in terms of trait names, but not all people use the same terms and, even when two individuals use the same descriptive adjective, they may not have the same meaning in mind. Nervousness to one judge is primarily a physical phenomenon, including trembling, jumpiness, tics, and stammering; whereas a second interprets it in terms of mood, depression, worries, and other emotional upsets. The defect can be remedied by providing a uniform list of all terms for all judges, preparing detailed operational definitions for these terms, or having conferences at which the judges agree on definitions. Errors of Distribution. Judges are often found to differ on their concepts of high, low, and average for a given trait. One may be lenient, pulling all his judgments above the theoretical neutral point, while another is severe. One judge uses extreme ratings often, while a second avoids extreme marks. Either deviation will introduce inaccuracies into the ratings.  19 Halo Effect. Perhaps the most persistent and most annoying of all errors in personal judgment is the halo effect. This term relates to the following type of mistake. Because Sam is excellent in schoolwork, his teacher rates him high on character. Because Mohan is rebellious and disobedient, she rates him low on general intelligence. The term “halo” means that from some central fact-friendship, high intelligence, beauty, or some other trait of importance to the judge-an influence radiates out to change the ratings on other traits. Stereotypes. Closely akin to the halo effect is the error resulting from the formation of stereotypes. A person who holds the stereotyped view of Africans as lazy, happy-go-lucky, ignorant, and dirty can scarcely give an accurate rating of an African who has earned a Ph.D. degree in nuclear physics. The judge sees only his mental picture, not the real person. Scientific education in the close resemblances of all groups reduces, although it does not eliminate, this error in rating. Prevention, through primary education which forestalls the formation of these incorrect pictures, is the most hopeful approach for long-range purposes.  20 INVENTORIES  21 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 to break down in combat. The final form of the Woodworth contained 116 questions to which the individual responded “Yes” or “No.” The items were selected from lists of known symptoms of emotional disorders and from the questions asked by psychiatrists in their screening interviews. In effect, the scale was a paper-and-pencil psychiatric interview (Gibby & Zickar, 2008). The Woodworth consisted of questions similar to these: “Do you drink a fifth of whiskey a day?” “Do you wet the bed at night?” “Do you frequently daydream?” “Do you usually feel in good health?” “Do you usually sleep soundly at night?” The Woodworth yielded a single score, providing a global measure of functioning. In this way, the military could concentrate its efforts on the most likely candidates for rejection.  22 The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. (MMPI and MMPI-2) is a true– false self-report questionnaire. Statements are typically of the self-reference type such as “I never have trouble falling asleep.” Subjects mark “True” or “False” for each statement as it applies to themselves. 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 purpose of the revision was to update and expand the norms; revise items that were out of date, awkward, sexist, or problematic; and broaden the item pool to extend the range of constructs that one could evaluate. The heart of the test consists of its validity, clinical, and content scales. Hathaway and McKinley developed special scales called validity scales to measure test-taking attitude and to assess whether the subject took a normal, honest approach to the test. The validity scales provide information about the person’s approach to testing, such as whether an attempt was made either to “fake bad” by endorsing more items of pathological content than any person’s actual problems could justify or to “fake good” by avoiding pathological items.  23 The L or lie scale was designed to detect individuals who attempted to present themselves in an overly favorable way or “fake good”. It is a naive attempt to present oneself in a favorable light. The items reflect personal weaknesses, such as “I never lose control of myself when I drive.” Most people are willing to admit to these weaknesses. People who score high on this scale are unwilling to acknowledge minor flaws. In deriving the K scale, Hathaway and McKinley compared the MMPI scores of non-disturbed 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. It was assumed that pathological groups would produce normal patterns because of defensiveness, a tendency to hide or deny psychological problems. People who score high on this scale are attempting to project an image of self-control and personal effectiveness. Extremely high scores on this scale invalidate the profile. CNS: Although it is referred to as a validity scale, the “cannot say” scale consists simply of the items to which the subject failed to respond either “True” or “False.” If as few as 10% of the items are omitted, then the entire profile is invalid.  24 The F or infrequency scale, which is designed to detect individuals who attempt to “fake bad.” Anyone who marks a lot of these items is taking an unusual approach to the test. Thus, high F scores bring the validity of the whole profile into question. Two additional validity scales, the Variable Response Inconsistency Scale (VRIN) and the True Response Inconsistency Scale (TRIN), are included to evaluate response styles. The VRIN attempts to evaluate random responding. The scale consists of matched pairs of items that have similar content. Each time the pairs are marked in opposite directions, a point is scored on the scale. The TRIN attempts to measure a cquiescence—the tendency to agree or mark “True” regardless of content. This scale consists of matched pairs of items with opposite content. For example, to receive a point on the TRIN Scale, the person might mark “True” to both “I feel good” and “I feel bad.” The MMPI contains content scales, including HEA (health concerns) and TPA, which evaluate for the hard- driving, irritable, impatient Type A personality. Other MMPI-2 content scales include FAM (family problems), which evaluates family disorders and possible child abuse, and WRK (work interference), which examines behaviors or attitudes likely to interfere with work performance.  25 The content scales consist of groups of items that are empirically related to a specific content area. For example, the anger scale contains references to irritability, hotheadedness, and other symptoms of anger or control problems. The clinical scales were designed to identify psychological disorders such as depression and schizophrenia. Like the Woodworth, 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. Administrators must take great care to make sure the individual can read at the appropriate level and has an IQ within normal limits.  26 Hypochondriasis: Patients who suffer from overconcern of bodily symptoms and express conflicts through bodily (somatic) symptoms. Depressives: Patients with depressed mood, loss of appetite, loss of interest, suicidal thoughts, and other depressive symptoms Hysterics: Immature individuals who overdramatize their plight and may exhibit physical symptoms for which no physical cause exists (poor physical health, shyness, cynicism, headaches, neuroticism) Psychopathic Deviates: Individuals who are antisocial and rebellious and exploit others without remorse or anxiety (family deviates, authority figures, alienated by self and society). Paranoids: Individuals who show extreme suspicions, hypersensitivity, and delusions. Psychasthenics: Individuals plagued by excessive self-doubts, obsessive thoughts, anxiety, and low energy. They identify abnormal fears, self criticism, and difficulty in concentration. Schizophrenics: Disorganized, highly disturbed individuals out of contact with reality and having difficulties with communication, interpersonal relations, sensory abnormalities (e.g., hallucinations), or motor abnormalities (e.g., catatonia) Hypomanics: Individuals in a high-energy, agitated state with poor impulse control, inability to sleep, and poor judgment.  27 The MMPI-2 has a large and relatively good representative control sample. In addition, two clinical scales were added: the masculinity-femininity (MF) scale, which contained items differentially endorsed by men and women – how much they abide by the social constructs of masculinity and femininity, and the social- introversion (SI) scale, which measures introversion and extroversion. These two scales plus the eight scales already described constitute the original 10 clinical scales of the MMPI.  28 PROJECTIVE TESTS  29 The Rorschach is one of the best known as well as the most controversial of the projective personality tests (Musewicz, Marczyk, Knauss, & York, 2009). The Rorschach has been vigorously attacked on a variety of scientific and statistical grounds, yet surveys of psychological test usage in the United States consistently find that the Rorschach continues to be one of the most widely used tests in clinical settings. The concept of “projective hypothesis” is usually given to L. K. Frank (1939). 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. When a frightened little boy looks into a dark room and sees a huge shadow that he interprets as a monster, he is projecting his fear onto the shadow. The shadow itself is neutral—neither good nor bad, neither fearsome nor pretty. What the child really sees is a reflection of the inner workings of his mind.  30 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. If, for example, you say that a round figure is a ball, you provide a relatively straightforward interpretation of the stimulus. The stimulus itself has little ambiguity; it is round and shaped like a ball. In viewing this stimulus, a high percentage of people probably see, though not necessarily report, a ball. Theoretically, however, even this simple response can reveal a lot about you. For example, your response may indicate that you accurately perceive simple objects in the external environment and are willing to provide a conventional response. Suppose you said that this same stimulus looked like a square peg in a round hole. Assuming the stimulus is actually round and contains no lines or shapes resembling a square peg, your perception of the stimulus does not conform to its actual property (roundness). Thus, your perceptions in general may not be accurate. Your response may also indicate that you are unwilling to provide the obvious, conventional response. Or it may indicate that you feel out of place, like a square peg in a round hole.  31 Of course, examiners can never draw absolute, definite conclusions from any single response to an ambiguous stimulus. They can only hypothesize what a test response means. A problem with all projective tests is that many factors can influence one’s response to them. For example, a response may reflect a recent experience or an early experience one has forgotten. It may reflect something one has witnessed (a bloody murder) or something one imagines (flunking out of college) rather than something one has actually experienced directly. It may reflect day-to-day problems, such as an argument with a boyfriend or girlfriend. With all of these possible factors influencing a response, it is no wonder that the validity of projective tests has been questioned. The Rorschach has been called everything from a psychological X-ray (Piotrowski, 1980) and “perhaps the most powerful psychometric instrument ever envisioned” (Board of Professional Affairs, 1998, p. 392) to an instrument that “bears a charming resemblance to a party game” (Wood et al., 2003, p. 1) and should be “banned in clinical and forensic settings”.  32 Rorschach constructed each stimulus card by dropping ink onto a piece of paper and folding it. The result was a unique, bilaterally symmetrical form on a white background. After experimenting with thousands of such blots, Rorschach selected 20. However, the test publisher would only pay for 10. Of the 10 finally selected, five were black and gray; two contained black, gray, and red; and three contained pastel colors of various shades. The Rorschach is an individual test. In the administration procedure, each of the 10 cards is presented to the subject with minimum structure. After preliminary remarks concerning the purpose of testing, the examiner hands the first card to the subject and asks something like, “What might this be?” No restriction is placed on the type of response permitted, and no clues are given concerning what is expected. If the subject asks for guidance or clarification, the examiner gives little information. If, for example, the subject asks, “Do I use the whole thing or just part of it?” the examiner replies, “As you like” or “Whatever you choose.” Anxious subjects or individuals who are made uncomfortable by unstructured situations frequently ask questions, attempting to find out as much as possible before committing themselves. The examiner, however, must not give any cues that might reveal the nature of the expected response.  33 Furthermore, in view of the finding that the examiner may inadvertently reveal information or reinforce certain types of responses through facial expressions and other forms of nonverbal communication. Exner (1993) advocated an administration procedure in which the examiner sits next to the subject rather than face- to-face as in Rapaport’s system (Blais, Norman, Quintar, & Herzog, 1995). The examiner is nonspecific and largely vague. This lack of clear structure or direction with regard to demands and expectations is a primary feature of all projective tests. The idea is to provide as much ambiguity as possible so that the subject’s response reflects only the subject. If the examiner inadvertently provides too many guidelines, the response may simply reflect the subject’s tendency to perform as expected or to provide a socially desirable response. Therefore, an administration that provides too much structure is antithetical to the main idea behind projective tests. Each card is administered twice. During the “free-association phase” of the test, the examiner presents the cards one at a time. If the subject gives only one response to the first card, then the examiner may say, “Some people see more than one thing here.” The examiner usually makes this remark only once. If the subject rejects the card—that is, states that he or she sees nothing—then the examiner may reply, “Most people do see something here, just take your time.” The examiner records every word and even every sound made by the subject verbatim. In addition, the examiner records how long it takes a subject to respond to a card (reaction time) and the position of the card when the response is made (upside down, sideways).  34 In the second phase, “the inquiry”, the examiner shows the cards again and scores the subject’s responses. 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 must determine where the subject’s perception is located on the inkblot. To facilitate determining this location, a small picture of each card, known as the location chart, is provided. If necessary, on rare occasions, an examiner may give a subject a pencil and ask the subject to outline the perception on the location chart. In scoring for location, the examiner notes whether the subject used the whole blot (W), a common detail (D), or an unusual detail (Dd).  35 According to such Rorschach proponents as Exner, a summary of a subject’s location choices can be extremely valuable. The examiner may, for example, determine the number and percentage of W, D, and Dd responses. This type of information, in which scoring categories are summarized as a frequency or percentage, is known as the quantitative, structural, or statistical aspect of the Rorschach as opposed to the qualitative aspects, which pertain to the content and sequence of responses. Normal subjects typically produce a balance of W, D, and Dd responses. When a subject’s pattern deviates from the typical balance, the examiner begins to suspect problems. However, no one has been able to demonstrate that a particular deviation is linked to a specific problem. A substantial deviation from what is typical or average may suggest several possibilities. The relative proportion of W, D, and Dd location choices varies with maturational development. Ames, Metraux, and Walker (1971), for example, noted that W responses occur most frequently in the 3- to 4 year-old group. As the child grows older, the frequency of W responses gradually decreases until young adulthood. Theoretically, adult protocols with a preponderance of W responses suggest immaturity or low mental age. The subject may be original or unconventional and thus fail to respond according to the typical pattern. Or the subject may have a perceptual problem associated with certain types of brain damage or severe emotional problems.  36 Having ascertained the location of a response, the examiner must then determine what it was about the inkblot that led the subject to see that particular percept. This factor is known as the determinant. One or more of at least four properties of an inkblot may determine or lead to a response: its form or sha pe, its perceived movement, its color, and its shading. If the subject uses only the form of the blot to determine a response, then the response is scored F and is called a pure form response. Responses are scored for form when the subject justifies or elaborates a response by statements such as “It looks like one,” “It is shaped like one,” or “Here are the head, legs, feet, ears, and wings.” In all of these examples, the response is determined exclusively on the basis of shape. In addition to form, a perception may be based on movement, color, shading, or some combination of these factors. These other determinants can be further subdivided. Movement may be human (M), such as two people hugging; animal (FM), such as two elephants playing; or inanimate (m), such as sparks flying. As you can see, the scoring can become quite complex. Like most Rorschach indicators, however, the meaning of movement is unclear because of disagreements among experts and contradictory or unclear experimental findings. Many experts believe that the movement response is related to motor activity and impulses.  37 Numerous movement responses, for example, may suggest high motor activity or strong impulses. The ratio of M (human movement) to FM (animal movement) responses has been linked by some experts to a person’s control and expression of internal impulses. A special type of movement response is called cooperative movement. Such responses involve positive interaction between two or more humans or animals (Exner, 1999). Exner and colleagues believe that such responses provide information about a subject’s attitude concerning how people interact. One study, for example, reported that individuals who give more than two such responses tended to be rated by others as fun to be with, easy to be around, and trustworthy (Exner & Farber, 1983). The conclusion seemed to be that such responses were positive. Subsequent research, however, could not confirm the initial findings (Shaffer & Erdberg, 1996). In a study of 20 individuals who had committed sexual homicide, 14 gave cooperative movement responses. Clearly, there is no simple or clear-cut approach to Rorschach interpretation (Gacono & Evans, 2007; Gacano & Meloy, 1994). As you think about the inferences that can be drawn from the Rorschach, keep in mind that they are at best hypotheses.  38 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. Some experts argue that if the examiner can also see the percept, then the response has adequate form quality, but if the examiner cannot see it, then the response has poor form quality and is scored F–. Obviously, such a subjective system is grossly inadequate because scoring depends on the intelligence, imagination, skill, and psychological state of the examiner. Rorschach scoring is obviously difficult and complex. Use of the Rorschach requires advanced graduate training. You should not attempt to score or use a Rorschach without formal and didactic graduate instruction and supervised experience. Without this detailed training, you might make serious errors because the procedure is so complex. Confabulatory responses also illustrate the idea behind qualitative interpretations. In this type of response, the subject overgeneralizes from a part to a whole: “It looked like my mother because of the eyes. My mother has large piercing eyes just like these.” Here the subject sees a detail—“large piercing eyes”—and overgeneralizes so that the entire inkblot looks like his or her mother. Although one such response has no clear or specific meaning, experts believe that the more confabulatory responses a subject makes, the more likely that she or he is in a disordered state.  39 I. Location; Definition: Where on the blot was the percept seen (located)? 1. Whole (W). The whole inkblot was used. 2. Common detail (D). A common or well-defined part of the inkblot was used. 3. Unusual detail (Dd). An unusual or poorly defined part of the inkblot was used. II. Determinant; Definition: What feature of the inkblot determined the response? 1. Form (F). The shape or outline of the blot determined the response (“because the inkblot looked like one”). 2. Movement (M, FM, m). Movement was seen (“two animals walking up a hill”). 3. Color (C). Color played a role in determining the response (“a brown bear,” “pink clouds”). 4. Shading (T). Texture or shading features played a role in determining the response (“a furry bear because of the shading”). III. Form quality; Definition: To what extent did the percept match the stimulus properties of the inkblot? 1. F1 or 1. Percept matched stimulus properties of the inkblot in an exceptionally good way. 2. F. Percept matched stimulus properties of the inkblot. 3. F2 or 2. Percept matched the stimulus properties of the inkblot poorly. IV. Content; Definition: What was the percept? 1. Human (H). 2. Animal (A). 3. Nature (N). V. Popular-Original; Definition: How frequently is the percept seen in normative samples? (Popular responses are seen in about one of every three protocols.)  40 Against: 1. Lacks a universally accepted standard of administration, scoring, and interpretation. 2. Evaluations of data are subjective. 3. Results are unstable over time. 4. Is unscientific. 5. Is inadequate by all traditional standards In Favor: 1. Lack of standardized procedures is a historical accident that can be corrected. 2. Test interpretation is an art, not a science; all test interpretation involves a subjective component. 3. A new look at the data reveals that the Rorschach is much more stable than is widely believed. 4. Has a large empirical base. 5. Available evidence is biased and poorly controlled and has therefore failed to provide a fair evaluation.  41 THANK YOU!