14.6: Personality Assessment: Measuring

If psychologists had no way of measuring personality, it wouldn't be helpful.

The promise of detecting individual differences in personality is offered by personality assessment.
It is difficult to develop accurate tools to measure personality.

Personality psychology has long been plagued by a parade of dubious assessment methods.

Traditional beliefs persist that people with encountered elsewhere in the text are sonality traits by measuring the bumps on their heads.

phrenol is related to being less intelligent or cultured than other people.

This claim is similar to virtually all other claims of physiognomy.

Like many incorrect beliefs, physiognomy may have a small kernels of truth.

Observers accurately gauged men's tendencies toward physical aggressiveness by glancing briefly at their faces.

The ratio of the width to the length of the men's faces was highly correlated with the estimates because it reflected the influence of hormones on aggressiveness.

According to William Sheldon, a psychologist, he was able to draw inferences about people's personality from their body types.

He wasn't blind to people's Ruling Out Rival Hypotheses body types when he judged them and may have fallen prey to confirmation bias.

Studies later found that the correlations between body types and personality traits were weak or non-existent (Deabler, explanations for the findings Hartl,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Credibility and validity are two key criteria for evaluating personality tests.

Three major body types are associated with different personality traits.

Research hasn't supported most of the claims.

Confirmation bias may have been the reason for the findings, because Sheldon wasn't blind to body type when rating people's personality traits.

The two major types of personality tests are structured and projective.

The term "objective" tests is sometimes used by psychologists, but it is misleading because responses to structured test items are often still open to interpretation in one of a few fixed ways of examiners.

A personality test consists of questions that respondents answer in one of a few ways.
Structured personality tests have several advantages, including being easy to administer and score, and allowing researchers to collect data from many participants simultaneously.

The MMPI is used by psychologists to detect symptoms of major mental disorders.

The MMPI was revised in the 1980s by James Butcher and his colleagues.
The MMPI-2 consists of 567 true-false items.

The items criterion groups and the MMPI depression scale are used to determine which items differentiate people with and without a mental disorder.

The extent to which respondents can tell what the items are measuring is called face validity.

They assess what they seem to assess by taking the items on "face what the items are measuring value."
Face validity isn't really a form of validity at all.

The answer is a tendency to care for others with a "True" answer and a "False" answer.

Researchers don't know if low face validity is an advantage or not.

Some people think that items with low face validity assess key aspects of personality that are subtle or lie outside respondents' awareness.
It's difficult for respondents to fake such items.
Other researchers think that these items don't add to the MMPI's diagnostic capacity.

It's likely that you're either engaging in impression management or a promising candidate for sainthood if you deny a large number of such faults.

The psychologists plot the 10 basic scales and 3 validity scales of the MMPI-2 in profile form, which shows the pattern of each person's scale scores.

Although many clinicians enjoy interpreting MMPI-2 profiles, research shows that simple statistical formulas that can be programmed into a computer yield interpretations that are equally, if not more, valid than those of experienced clinicians.
The findings of the MMPI-2 seem not to have an impact on clinical practice.

Research supports the reliability of most MMPI-2 scales, as well as their validity for differentiating among mental disorders.

Interviewers often disagree on their impressions.

The validity of the interview tends to be low.
Interviews like this are very valid for inferring personality even if they are mistaken.

Revised edition of Pa - Paranoia Inventory(r)-2 Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation.

Pt Sc Ma Si Si is a trademark owned by the regents of the University of Minnesota.

The MMPI-2 is problematic in many ways.

Several MMPI-2 scales measure the same thing, namely, requires test developers to begin with psychological distress.
In an effort to minimize this flaw, some clear-cut conceptualization of a trait researchers have recently developed a briefer, "restructured," version of the MMPI-2 that and then write items to assess that contains scales that are more independent of this dimensions.

The evidence for the validity of the restructured version of the MMPI-2 is promising, although it's still too early to tell whether this version will be an improvement over the existing version.

High scores on the MMPI-2 scales aren't specific to a single disorder and can't be used by psychologists to make formal diagnoses of mental disorders.

The MMPI was constructed in a similar way.

Unlike the MMPI, the CPI inventories tell us which char is designed for assessing personality traits in the normal range, such as domi acters from books, TV shows, and movies, making it a popular measure in college counseling.

For example, people's CPI scores correlate moderately with how their roommates view them and are related to measures derived from most of the Big Five dimensions.

Some of the parent's weaknesses were passed on to the CPI.
Many of the CPI scales are correlated with each other.

This approach requires test developers to begin with a clear-cut conceptualization of a trait and write items to assess that conceptualization.

Many studies have shown impressive validity with the NEO-PI-R.

The scores on the NEO-PI-R Conscientiousness scale are negatively correlated with measures of risk-taking and the scores on the NEO-PI-R Agreeableness scale are negatively correlated with measures of physical aggressiveness.

We splashed your clothing record of validity.

The MBTI is the most widely administered personality test in the world.
It is used by thousands of the puddle.

After taking a variant of the MBTI, Harry Potter was assigned to his mythical school.

Based on Jung's theory of personality, the MBTI sorts respondents into one of four categories--introversion-extraversion, thinking- feeling, and judging-perceiving--yielding a total of 16 personality types.
Research raises serious doubts about the reliability and validity of the MBTI.
The test has low test-retest reliability because most respondents don't get the same MBTI personality type on retesting only a few months later.
The test has questionable validity due to the fact that it doesn't relate in a consistent way to the Big Five or to measures of job preferences.

You have a sense of what it's like to take a projective test if you've ever looked for them in ambiguous cartoon shapes in clouds.

There are scenarios that may cause hostility.
One adapted item from cartoon bubbles of people engaged in hypothetical conversations is depicted by the projective techniques.

Projective techniques allow respondents considerable latitude in their answers.

Proponents of projective tests think they are the "stealth weapons" of the psycholo.

They offer valuable information about unconscious conflicts by circumventing respondents' defense mechanisms.

It is administered to 6 million people every year.

Examiners score respondents' answers for a number of personality characteristics.

There are four widely used Rorschach Scores and their Interpretation and Sample Responses that reflect them.

Anatomically detailed dolls, also known as "anatomically correct" dolls, are one people who see reflections that are self-centered.

Many interpretations have a certain surface plausibility, which may account for the Rorschach's popularity.

The test-retest reliabilities of many of its scores are un, but the extent to which different people scoring these devices have led to numerous false the test agree with each other is often problematic.

Although psychologists commonly use the children to engage in sexualized doll play Rorschach to assist them in making diagnoses, there's little.

The only exceptions to the low validity of the extent to which a test contributes Rorschach are conditions marked by abnormal thinking.

When we treat the Rorschach as a measure of thinking and examine the extent to which people's responses deviate from reality, it is valid.

There are few correlations between Rorschach scores and personal ity qualities, such as impulsivity, oppositionalism, or anxiety-proneness.

The Rorschach lacks evidence to tell a story in response to ambigu mental validity.

The Rorschach takes a long time to administer and even longer to interpret, so we hope it yields information.
Although widely used, the Rorschach evidence that the Rorschach exhibits incremental validity beyond more easily collected appears not to possess magical data, such as life history information or the MMPI.

Some clinicians attend too much to invalid Rorschach information at the expense of more valid information.

Tell a Tale.

One of these cards is completely blank.
The TAT can be thought of as the "Tell a Tale" test because examinees construct a story based on each card.
Most clinicians interpret the TAT on an "impressionistic" basis, meaning that they inspect the content of the examinee's stories and analyze them using clinical intuition alone.

There is little evidence that impressionistic TAT interpretations generate scores with adequate reliability.

Scores derived from the TAT have failed to differentiate between patients with clinical depression and non- patients.

There is no evidence that TAT scores have validity beyond the MMPI.

One promising scoring system for the TAT uses cards similar to those on the TAT to assess needs for achievement.

Using this system, psychologists score responses to the cards based on the extent to which respondents' stories emphasize achievement-oriented themes such as academic or career success.
TAT measures of achievement have at least some validity, as they correlate positively with occupational success and income, although these associations are low in magnitude.
People's perception of others, such as whether they see others as helpful or harmful.

Respondents are required to draw a person in any way they want.

Many clinicians who administer these measures interpret them on the basis of drawing "signs" Large eyes in drawings indicate suspiciousness, whereas large genitalia in drawings indicate concerns about sexuality.

The correlations between human figure drawing signs and personality traits are low.

There is no evidence that self-proclaimed figure drawing experts are better than the rest of us.
The test developer did worse than chance.
The test-retest reliabilities of these signs are often poor because people produce markedly different drawing characteristics on different occasions.
According to research, scores derived from human figure drawings are not always a good indicator of artistic ability.

Many firms in the United States and abroad use graphology to detect potential of handwriting employees who are prone to dishonest behavior.

Proponents of "graphotherapeutics" claim to cure psychological disorders by altering people's handwriting.

Graphologists assume that certain handwriting features and certain traits go together.

The graphological interpretations have low reliability.

Lewis Goldberg presented graphologists with one person's handwriting but told them that it was created by different people over time.
The graphologists had different interpretations of the handwriting.

Other studies have found no correlation between handwriting signs and job performance.

The studies that suggested that certain handwriting indicators are valid predictors of job success were flawed because they asked participants to write autobiographies.

The representativeness heuristic is used a lot by graphologists.

The presidential candidates' handwriting was analyzed by a professional graphologist.
She concluded that the lack of curves in Donald Trump's letters was due to a desire for power and that the vertical nature of Hillary Clinton's letters was due to a highly controlling and intellectual personality.

To exclude Rival Hypotheses, investigators asked participants to write identical passages.

You just completed a structured personality test as part of a research requirement for your introductory psychology class.

Your hopes and dreams are not realistic.

You have a lot of potential that you haven't maximized.
You value your privacy even though you enjoy being around others.
You don't like being hemmed in by rules and restrictions.
You don't accept others' opinions without strong evidence.
There are times when you have doubts about whether you made the right decision or not.
You are a strong person who others can rely on in times of trouble.

After reading this description, you turn to the research assistant with a mixture of amazement and awe and say, "This description fits me perfectly."

There is a catch.

The research assistant told you that the description was not based on your test results.
All 100 previous participants received the same description.
You were the victim of a hoax.

A flawed method of evaluating a test's validity is the use of subjective judgments of accuracy.

The results of a personality test may fit us to a T, but that doesn't mean the test is valid.

The popularity of astrological horoscopes, palmistry, crystal ball, tea leaf, and tarot card readings can be attributed to the P. T. Barnum effect.

There is no evidence for the validity of all of these methods.
People are more likely to accept P. T. Barnum descriptions that are tailored to them.
This finding may help explain why horoscopes are often so convincing.

Susan Blackmore found that clients couldn't pick out their own tarot card readings from nine other readings.

When tarot card readers gave their readings on a face-to-face basis, clients found them very accurate.
Clients who heard only one reading found it believable because each reading contained general statements that apply to everyone.

The principle applies to astrology.

People can't pick out their horoscope at better-than-chance levels.
When people read their horoscope in the newspaper, they are certain it applies to them.
People tend to only read the horoscope for their own sign but not for others.
Most or even all of the 12 horoscopes fit them equally well if they didn't fall prey to confirmation bias and forced themselves to read them.
The evidence for astrology's claims of being able to divine people's personality traits with nearly perfect accuracy is not very strong.

Adult children of alcoholics have a constellation of personality traits, according to many pop psychologists.

ACOAs are said to be overly protective of others and prone to hiding their feelings.
There were no significant differences between the groups when three researchers administered a questionnaire consisting of presumed ACOA characteristics.
Both groups found a set of P. T. Barnum statements to fit their needs.
The P. T. Barnum effect is thought to have contributed to the common personality profile of the ACOA.

There is a different star sign.

The popularity of tarot card readings, crystal ball readings, palmistry, and other similar techniques probably stems from the P. T. Barnum effect.

The ability to detect personality traits, both normal and abnormal, has been contributed to by personality assessment.

Many personality measures, especially structured personality tests, have been developed by psychologists.
A few projective techniques can achieve satisfactory reliability and validity according to research.
They are associated with delinquency, moral development, and other important characteristics.

They are prone to the same mistakes as the rest of us.

An illusory correlation is a mirage that leads to a relationship that isn't there.

College students were shown a series of fake human figure drawings containing certain physical features and a description of the personality trait of the person who supposedly produced each drawing.

The participants were asked to estimate the extent to which the physical features and personality trait cocurred in the drawings.

Students saw certain drawing features as related to per sonality.

The same drawing features that experienced clinicians think are related to these traits have been shown to be invalid.
Students reported that people who produced drawings with large eyes tended to be paranoid and that people who produced drawings with large genitals tended to be overly concerned with sexuality.

The popularity of this practice may be related to the P. T.

The Silence of the Lambs and popular television shows such as Criminal Minds and Law and Order depict the Barnum effect, a criminal profiling technique.

Criminal profilers at the FBI and other law enforcement agencies claim to draw detailed inferences from the pattern of crimes committed.

It's true that we can often guess certain characteristics at better-than-chance levels.

Criminal profilers suggest that criminal profiling is more art than statistics suggest.
They are typical of science.

A former FBI profiler predicted in 2002 that profilers would not be as paralyzed by random shootings at gas stations and park rates as they are by college students.

In one study, chemistry majors were able to make more accurate profiles of a murderer than experienced homicide persons could.

Research shows that police officers can't determine most important things, there's no evidence that criminal profilers who create fake criminal profiles do better than those who do.

The finding suggests that Criminal profiling may be more of an urban legend than a scientifically proven ability.

The FBI and other crime organizations remain in the full-time business of Smith, & Morgan.

They claim to identify your personality by your facial features, color preferences, and responses to word association tests.

Some people claim to "diagnose" your personality based on your preferences for movies, fictional characters, celebrities, or animals.

Take a look at the photos of the 15 animal species above.

Take no more than 5 minutes to rank them, with 1 being your favorite animal species and 15 being your least favorite.
Don't think about your responses too much.
You need to know about who you real are if you correlate the results of other personality measures.
Five therapists we consulted predicted any kind of meaningful behavior, it would refute the agreed profile of their clients.
The measure is valid for detecting personality according to our test.

There is no evidence that the woman has sex with them.

The high rates of satisfaction among users is remarkable, but the ad doesn't offer a reason to use the Instant Personality Profile.

It's more parsimonious to theorize that you will end up happy, despite whatever personal struggles you are going through.

Therapists' claims that the profile fits the P. T. Barnum effect are more valid than the test's validity.

We don't know how repre Summary sentative these five therapists are.

One can find many personality tests online.

This principle isn't relevant to scenario traits that are complex and multi-dimensional.

When the tests have items that 3, we should be doubtful.

The claim that the test is valid could be faked because our preferences for animals reflect our life.

If we were raised with pets and if so, what independent researchers showed that the test results don't kind of pets, at least as much as our deep-seated personality trait.

The students in the Chapmans' study relied on the repre sentativeness heuristic: Like goes with like.

They were fooled because things that look similar on the surface don't always work out in real life.
The students probably relied on availability heuristic to remember the cases in which drawing signs correspond to personality traits and forgetting the cases in which they don't.
Clinicians, being mere mortals like the rest of us, can easily fall victim to these heuristics, which may explain why some of them are convinced that certain personality tests are more valid than the scientific evidence indicates.

The theme of this book is that personal experience, although useful in generating hypotheses, can be misleading when it comes to testing them.

There's good news here too.

Scientific methods can allow us to decide if we should trust our personal experience or ignore it in favor of evidence.

These methods can help us reduce the risk of error and help us to better measure and understand personality.

A key role for nonshared environment, environment and genetic factors are two major influences on personality, according to radical behaviorists.

Radical behaviorists are not shared environments for adult personality.

Psychoanalytic Theory: The Controversial ists argue that observational learning Legacy of Sigmund Freud and His Followers and a sense of personal control play a key role in personality.

Critics have accused radical behaviorists of going too far in their interactions with id, ego, and superego.

Defense mechanisms are used to cope with threat.
The five psychosexual stages are oral, anal, phallic, latency and role in personality, according to Freud's learning theory.

The core motive shared with Freud is self-actualization.

According to Carl Rogers, the importance of early experience, but placed less emphasis unhealthy behavior results from the imposed conditions of sexuality as a driving force in personality.

Self-actualized individuals are creative and can be helpful in prespontaneous, accepting and prone to peak experiences.

Humanistic models have been attacked for being naive about human nature.

Some, like the MMPI-2 Trait theories, use factor analysis to identify groups of personal, while others, like the NEO ity features, correlate with each other.

The group PI-R were developed rationally.

Big Five predicts many aspects of real-world behavior.

The Big Five Projective tests have ambiguous stimuli that the examinee can't limit as a model of personality structure.
Many of these tests lack adequate levels of relipeople, which may mean they don't have conscious access to all important features ability, validity, and incremental validity.

The P. T. Barnum effect and illusory correlation are two common pitfalls in personality assessment.

His claim of human error was vindicated by research that showed the need for scientific methods as safeguards against levels of accuracy.