Psychological Tests
Personality assessment
is perhaps more an art form than a science. In an attempt to render it as
objective and standardized as possible, generations of clinicians came up with
psychological tests and structured interviews. These are administered under
similar conditions and use identical stimuli to elicit information from
respondents. Thus, any disparity in the responses of the subjects can and is
attributed to the idiosyncrasies of their personalities.
Moreover, most tests
restrict the repertory of permitted of answers. "True" or
"false" are the only allowed reactions to the questions in the
Minnesota Multi-phasic Personality Inventory II (MMPI-II), for instance.
Scoring or keying the results is also an automatic process wherein all "true"
responses get one or more points on one or more scales and all
"false" responses get none.
This limits the
involvement of the diagnostician to the interpretation of the test results (the
scale scores). Admittedly, interpretation is arguably more important than data
gathering. Thus, inevitably biased human input cannot and is not avoided in the
process of personality assessment and evaluation. But its pernicious effect is
somewhat reined in by the systematic and impartial nature of the underlying instruments
(tests).
Still, rather than
rely on one questionnaire and its interpretation, most practitioners administer
to the same subject a battery of tests and structured interviews. These often
vary in important aspects: their response formats, stimuli, procedures of
administration, and scoring methodology. Moreover, in order to establish a
test's reliability, many diagnosticians administer it repeatedly over time to
the same client. If the interpreted results are more or less the same, the test
is said to be reliable.
The outcomes of
various tests must fit in with each other. Put together, they must provide a
consistent and coherent picture. If one test yields readings that are
constantly at odds with the conclusions of other questionnaires or interviews,
it may not be valid. In other words, it may not be measuring what it claims to
be measuring.
Thus, a test
quantifying one's grandiosity must conform to the scores of tests which measure
reluctance to admit failings or propensity to present a socially desirable and
inflated facade ("False Self"). If a grandiosity test is positively
related to irrelevant, conceptually independent traits, such as intelligence or
depression, it does not render it valid.
Most tests are either
objective or projective. The psychologist George Kelly offered this
tongue-in-cheek definition of both in a 1958 article titled "Man's
construction of his alternatives" (included in the book "The
Assessment of Human Motives", edited by G. Lindzey):
"When the subject
is asked to guess what the examiner is thinking, we call it an objective test;
when the examiner tries to guess what the subject is thinking, we call it a
projective device."
The scoring of
objective tests is computerized (no human input). Examples of such standardized
instruments include the MMPI-II, the California Psychological Inventory (CPI),
and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory II. Of course, a human finally
gleans the meaning of the data gathered by these questionnaires. Interpretation
ultimately depends on the knowledge, training, experience, skills, and natural
gifts of the therapist or diagnostician.
Projective tests are
far less structured and thus a lot more ambiguous. As L. K. Frank observed in a
1939 article titled "Projective methods for the study of personality":
"(The patient's
responses to such tests are projections of his) way of seeing life, his
meanings, signficances,
patterns, and especially his feelings."
In projective tests,
the responses are not constrained and scoring is done exclusively by humans and
involves judgment (and, thus, a modicum of bias). Clinicians rarely agree on
the same interpretation and often use competing methods of scoring, yielding
disparate results. The diagnostician's personality comes into prominent play.
The best known of these "tests" is the Rorschach set of inkblots.
No comments:
Post a Comment