Personality Assessment Types and Uses

Psychological Assessment and Testing
Personality Assessment: Some Basic
Questions
Chapter 11:
Personality
Assessment
BS in Psychology – 3rd Year Code: 1901

What is personality and
personality assessment?

In a rock song in the 1950s titled Personality, Lloyd Price described the subject
with the words, walk , talk, smile, and charm
Personality is often referred to as a series of components of an individual that
can elicit reactions from others
Personality and Personality Assessment

There are dozens of different definitions of personality, some definitions appear to be all-inclusive
● McClelland defined personality as the most adequate conceptualization of a person’s behavior in all its
detail
● Menninger defined it as the individual as a whole, his height and weight, love and hates and blood
pressure and reflexes it is what what and what he is trying to become
● Others view personality as the individual in the context of society, and some focus only on particular
aspects of the individual

Personality
An individual’s unique constellation of psychological traits that is relatively
stable over time
there, are variables on which individuals may differ, such as values, interests,
attitudes, worldview, acculturation, sense of humor, cognitive and behavioral
styles, and personality states.

Personality assessment
may be defined as the measurement and evaluation of
psychological traits, states, values, interests, attitudes,
worldview, acculturation, sense of humor, cognitive and
behavioral styles, and/or related individual characteristics.

Personality traits
Just as no consensus exists regarding the definition of personality,
there is none regarding the definition of trait. Theorists such as Gordon
Allport (1937) have tended to view personality traits as real physical
entities that are “bona fide mental structures in each personality

We view psychological traits as attributions made in an effort to identify
threads of consistency in behavioral patterns.
In this context, a definition of personality trait is
“Any distinguishable, relatively enduring way in which one individual
varies from another.”

The word distinguishable indicates that behaviors labeled with different trait
terms are actually different from one another
A behavior present in one context may be labeled with one trait term, but the
same behavior exhibited in another context may be better described using
another trait term
Friendly vs Friendly

Perfect consistency will never be found and must not be expected
People may be ascendant and submissive, perhaps submissive only towards
those individuals bearing traditional symbols of authority and prestige; and
towards everyone else aggressive and domineering.
The ever-changing environment raises now one trait and now another to a
state of active tension.

personality type as a constellation of traits that is similar in pattern to one
identified category of personality within a taxonomy of personalities
Whereas traits are frequently discussed as if they were characteristics
possessed by an individual, types are more clearly descriptions of people
Personality Type

The latter term has more far-reaching implications regarding characteristic
aspects of the individual, such as the person’s worldview, activity level, capacity
to enjoy life, and level of social interest.
Personality Type

A typology devised by Carl Jung (1923) became the basis for many tests , these
differences in perception and judging result in “corresponding differences in their
reactions, in their interests, values, needs, and motivations, in what they do best, and
in what they like to do.”
Personality Type

A typology devised by Carl Jung (1923) became the basis for many tests , these
differences in perception and judging result in “corresponding differences in their
reactions, in their interests, values, needs, and motivations, in what they do best, and
in what they like to do.”
Personality Type
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers & Briggs, 1943/1962)

Data from the administration of these tests, as with others, are frequently discussed
in terms of the patterns of scores that emerge on the subtests. This pattern is
referred to as a profile.
Profile
is a narrative description, graph, table, or other representation of the extent to which
a person has demonstrated certain targeted characteristics as a result of the
administration or application of tools of assessment.1 In the term personality profile,
the targeted characteristics are typically traits, states, or types.
Profile

Personality states
The word state has been used in at least two distinctly different ways in the
personality assessment literature. In one usage, a personality state is an inferred
psychodynamic disposition designed to convey the dynamic quality of id, ego,
and superego in perpetual conflict
Personality States

refers to the transitory exhibition of some personality trait. Put another way,
the use of the word trait presupposes a relatively enduring behavioral
predisposition, whereas the term state is indicative of a relatively temporary
predisposition
Personality State

1. For what type of employment is a person with this type of personality best
suited?
2. Is this individual sufficiently well adjusted for military service?
3. What emotional and other adjustment-related factors may be responsible
for this student’s level of academic achievement?
4. What pattern of traits and states does this psychotherapy client evince, and
to what extent may this pattern be deemed pathological?
5. How has this patient’s personality been affected by neurological trauma?
Personality Assessment: Some Basic Questions

• Personality assessment is a staple in developmental research,
be it tracking trait development over time or studying some
uniquely human characteristic such as moral judgment.

Military Organizations Health Psychology Corporate World
Personality assessment in the following perspectives:
There are a number of
personality variables (such as
perfectionism, self-criticism,
dependency, and neuroticism)
that have been linked to
physical and psychological
disorders.
Personality assessment
is a key tool of the human
resources department, relied
on to aid in hiring, firing,
promoting, transferring, and
related decisions. Perhaps as
long as there have been tests
to measure people’s
interests, there have been
questions regarding how
those interests relate to
personality.
Leadership is a sought-after
trait, and personality tests
help identify who has it.

In the most general sense, basic research
involving personality assessment helps to
validate or invalidate theories of behavior
and to generate new hypotheses.

Beyond the why of personality assessment are several other questions that must be
addressed in any overview of the enterprise.
WHAT
is being assessed.
HOW
the assessment is
conducted.
WHO
is being assessed.
WHERE
the assessment is
conducted.

Who?
Who is being assessed, and who is doing the
assessing?

Some methods of personality
assessment rely on the
assesse’s own self-report.
By contrast, other methods of
personality assessment rely on
informants other than the person
being assessed to provide
personality-related information.

The self as the
primary referent 01
Another person as
the referent 02
The cultural
background of
assesses
03
• Self-report
• Self-concept
• Self-concept measure
• Self-concept differentiation
• Leniency error or Generosity error
• Severity error
• Halo effect
• Error of Central Tendency
• Cultural Diversity
Who

A process wherein information about
assessees is supplied by the assessees
themselves.
When researchers investigated the
psychometric soundness of the Sexual
Sensation Seeking Scale with a sample of
college students, only the students
themselves could provide the highly
personal information needed.
Self-report
1. The Self as the Primary Referent
In some cases, the information sought by the
assessor is so private that only the individual
assessees themselves are capable of
providing it.
Example:

Self-concept may be defined as one’s
attitudes, beliefs, opinions, and related
thoughts about oneself. Inferences about
an assessee’s self-concept may be
derived from many tools of assessment.
In the Beck Self-Concept Test (BST; Beck
& Stein, 1961), named after senior
author, psychiatrist Aaron T. Beck,
respondents are asked to compare
themselves to other people on
variables such as looks, knowledge, and
the ability to tell jokes.
Self-concept
The Self as the Primary Referent
self-concept measure; that
is, an instrument designed to yield information
relevant to how an individual sees him- or
herself with regard to selected psychological
variables.
Example:

Self-concept measures for children:
Tennessee Self-Concept Scale
● Contains 80 self-statements (such as “I don’t have any friends”) to which
respondents from grades 3 to 12 respond either yes or no as the
statement applies to them.
● Factor analysis has suggested that the items cover six general areas of
self-concept: behavior, intellectual and school status, physical
appearance and attributes, anxiety, popularity, and happiness and
satisfaction.
Piers-Harris Self-Concept Scale.
01
02

Self-concept measures for children:
Beck Youth Inventories–Second Edition (BYI-
II)
● Developed by senior author, psychologist Judith Beck.
● In addition to a self-concept measure, the BYI-II includes inventories to
measures depression, anxiety, anger, and disruptive behavior in children
and adolescents aged 7 to 18 years.
03

Refers to the degree
to which a person has different self-
concepts in different roles (Donahue et al., 1993).
A highly differentiated businessman in
his 40s may perceive himself as
motivated and hard-driving in his role at
work, conforming and people-pleasing in
his role as son, and emotional and
passionate in his role as husband.
Self-concept Differentiation
The Self as the Primary Referent
People characterized as highly differentiated
are likely to perceive themselves quite
differently in various roles.
Example:

According to Donahue et al. (1993), people with low levels of
self-concept differentiation tend to be healthier psychologically,
perhaps because of their more unified and coherent sense of self.

Assuming that assessees have reasonably accurate insight
into their own thinking and behavior, and assuming that they are
motivated to respond to test items honestly, self-report measures can be
extremely valuable. An assessee’s candid and accurate self-report can
illustrate what that individual is thinking, feeling, and doing.

In some situations, the best available
method for the assessment
of personality, behavior, or both involves
reporting by a third party such as a
parent, teacher, peer, supervisor, spouse,
or trained observer.
The assessment of a child
for emotional difficulties. The child may
be unable or unwilling to complete any
measure (self-report, performance, or
otherwise) that will be of value in making
a valid determination concerning that
child’s emotional status.
2. Another Person as the Primary Referent
Example:

Standardized interview of a child’s parent:
Personality Inventory for Children (PIC)
● Although the child is the subject of the test, the respondent is the parent
(usually the mother), guardian, or other adult qualified to respond with
reference to the child’s characteristic behavior.
● The test consists of a series of true–false items designed to be free of
racial and gender bias. The items may be administered by computer or
paper and pencil.
● Test results yield scores that provide clinical information and shed light
on the validity of the test taker’s response patterns.
Personality Inventory for Children II (PIC-2)
01
02

Standardized interview of a child’s parent:
● The system is an approach to the assessment of children and adolescents that
incorporates cognitive and physical assessments of the subject, self-report of the
subject, and ratings by parents and teachers.
● Additionally, performance measures of the child alone, with the family, or in the
classroom may be included.
Multiaxial Empirically Based Assessment system
03

• Raters may vary in the extent to which they are, or strive to be,
scrupulously neutral, favorably generous, or harshly severe in their
ratings.
• Generalized biases to rate in a particular direction are referred to
in terms such as leniency error or generosity error and severity
error.
• Error of central tendency - A general tendency to rate everyone
near the midpoint of a rating scale.

In some situations, a particular set of
circumstances may create a
certain bias.
A teacher might be disposed to judging
one pupil very favorably because that
pupil’s older sister was teacher’s pet in a
prior class. This variety of favorable
response bias is sometimes referred to as
a halo effect.
Another Person as the Primary Referent
Example:

Numerous other factors may contribute to bias in a rater’s ratings.
● The rater may feel competitive with, physically attracted to, or physically repelled by the
subject of the ratings.
● The rater may not have the proper background, experience, and trained eye needed for the
particular task.
● Judgments may be limited by the rater’s general level of conscientiousness and willingness to
devote the time and effort required to do the job properly.
● The rater may harbor biases concerning various stereotypes.
● Subjectivity based on the rater’s own personal preferences and taste may also enter into
judgments.

Different raters may have different perspectives on the individual they
are rating because of the context in which they typically view that person.
● A parent may indicate on a rating scale that a child is hyperactive, whereas the
same child’s teacher may indicate on the same rating scale that the child’s activity
level is within normal limits. Can they both be right?
● Different informants may have different perspectives on the subjects being
evaluated. These different perspectives derive from observing and interacting
with the subjects in different contexts.

Regardless whether the self or another
person is the subject of study, one
element of any evaluation that must be
kept in mind by the assessor is the
cultural context.
3. The Cultural Background of Assessees
Test developers and users have shown
increased sensitivity to issues of cultural
diversity. A number of concerns have been
raised regarding the use of personality
tests and other tools of assessment with
members of culturally and linguistically
diverse populations

How fair or generalizable is a particular instrument or
measurement technique with a member of a particular cultural group?
● How a test was developed, how it is administered, and how scores on it are
interpreted are all questions to be raised when considering the appropriateness of
administering a particular personality test to members of culturally and
linguistically diverse populations.

What?
What is assessed when a personality
assessment is conducted?

Primary Content Area Sampled
01
Testtaker Response Styles
02
Impression Management
03
WHAT

Personality measures are tools used to
gain insight into a wide array of thoughts,
feelings, and behaviors associated with
all aspects of the human experience.
An observational checklist may
concentrate on classroom behaviors
associated with movement in order to
assess a child’s hyperactivity.
1. Primary Content Area Sampled
Some tests are designed to measure
particular traits (such as introversion) or
states (such as test anxiety), whereas
others focus on descriptions of behavior,
usually in particular contexts.
Example:

These measures of response pattern are also
known as
Measures of Response Set or Response
Style.
In addition to scales labeled Introversion
and Extraversion, a test of
introversion/extraversion might contain
other scales. Such additional scales could
be designed to shed light on how
honestly testtakers responded to the
test, how consistently they answered the
questions, and other matters related to
the validity of the test findings.
Many contemporary personality tests,
especially tests that can be scored and
interpreted by computer, are designed to
measure not only some targeted trait or
other personality variable but also some
aspect of the testtaker’s response style.
Example:

Refers to a tendency to respond to a
test item or interview question in
some characteristic manner
regardless of the content of the item
or question.
An individual may be more apt to respond yes
or true than no or false on a short-
answer test. This particular pattern of
responding is characterized as
acquiescent.
Response Style Example:
2. Testtaker Response Styles

A term used to describe the attempt to
manipulate others’ impressions
through “the selective exposure of
some information (it may be false
information) coupled with
suppression of [other] information”
Responding to a personality test in an
inconsistent, contrary, or random
way, or attempting to fake good or
bad, may affect the validity of the
interpretations of the test data.
Impression management
3. Impression Management

Because a response style can affect the
validity of the outcome, one
particular type of response style
measure is referred to as a
validity scale.
We may define a validity scale as a
subscale of a test designed to assist
in judgments regarding how
honestly the testtaker responded
and whether observed responses
were products of response style,
carelessness, deliberate efforts to
deceive, or unintentional
misunderstanding.
Impression management Validity Scale

WHERE?
Where are personality assessment
conducted?

⚪ Schools
⚪ Clinics
⚪ Hospitals
⚪ Academic Research Laboratories
⚪ Employment Counseling
⚪ Vocational Selection Centers
⚪ Offices of Psychologist and Counselors

HOW?
How are personality assessment structured
and conducted?

Scope and Theory Procedures and Format
Frame of Reference
HOW?
01 02
03
04
Scoring and
Interpretation
05
Issues in Personality Test
Development and Use

Scope and Theory
• The scope of an evaluation may be very wide, seeking to take a kind of general
inventory of an individuals personality.
• The California Psychological Inventory (CPI 434) is an example of an instrument
with a relatively wide scope. This test contains 434 true-false items.
• It was originally conceived to measure enduring personality traits across cultural
groups and predict the behavior of generally well functioning people ( Boer et. al.,
2008)
• Locus of Control - Locus ( meaning "place or "site") of control is a persons
perception about the source of things that happen to him or her.
• Internal Locus of Control
• External Locus of Control
01

To what extent is a personality test- theory based or relatively altheoritical?
• Instruments used in personality testing and assessment vary in the extent
to which they are based on a theory of personality.
• An example of a theory based instrument is the Blacky Pictures Test (
Blum, 1950)
• The other side of the theory saturation coin is the personality test that is
relatively altheoretical
• The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ( MMPI) - " the
epitome of an altheoritical" dust bowl empiricism approach to the
development of a tool to measure personality traits.

Procedures and Item Formats
• Personality may be assessed by many different methods, such as face to face
interview, computer administered tests, behavioral observation, paper and pencil
test, evaluation of case history data, evaluation of portfolio data and recording of
psychological responses.
• Measures in personality vary in terms of the degree of structure built into them.
For example, personality may be assessed by means of an interview, but it may also
be assessed by a structured interview.
• Aggressive may be defined in ways ranging from hostile and assaultive( as in the
"aggressive inmate" ) to hold and enterprising ( " aggressive salesperson).
02

Frame of References
• Frame of reference - may be defined as aspects of the focus of exploration such as
the time frame as well as the other contextual issues that involves people, places
and events.
• Q-sort technique - originally developed by Stephenson (1953 ) is an assessment
technique in which the task is to sort a group of statements, usually in perceived
rank order ranging from most descriptive to least descriptive.
• One of the best known application of Q-sort methodology in clinical and
counseling setting was advocate by the personality theorist and psychotherapist
Carl Rogers (1959)
03

Frame of References
• Beyond its application in initial assessment and reevaluation of a therapy client,
the Q-sort technique has also been used extensively in basic research in the area of
personality and other areas.
• Leadership Q-Test ( Cassel, 1958 ) - designed for use in military settings
• Tyler Vocational Classification System ( Tyler, 1961 ) - contains cards on which
occupations are listed.
• Two other item presentation formats: Adjective checklist format and Sentence
completion format.
• Adjective checklist format- used in wide range of research studies to study
assesses perception of themselves or others.
• Sentence completion format- to complete an incomplete sentence.
03

Scoring and Interpretation
• Personality measures differ with respect to the way conclusions are drawn from
the data they provide. For other measures, a computer programmed to apply
highly technical manipulation of the data is required for purposes os scoring and
interpretation.
• Nomothetic approach - assessment is characterized by efforts to learn hown a
limited number of personality traits can be applied to all people.
• Idiographic approach - assessment is characterizer by efforts to learn about each
individuals unique constellation of personality traits, with no attempt to
characterized each person according to any particular set of traits.
• The idiographic approach to personality assessment was describe in detail by
Allport ( 1937; Allport & Odbert 1936 ).
04

Scoring and Interpretation
• Normative approach - a testtakers responses and the presumed strength of a
measured trait are interpreted relative to the strength of that trait in a sample of a
larger population
• Ipsative approach - a testtakers responses, as well as the presumed strength of
measured traits are interpreted relative to the strength of measured traits for that
same individual.
04

Issues in Personality test Development and Use
• Many of the issues inherent in the test development process mirror the basic
questions just discussed about personality asssessment in general.
• As previously noted, personality assessment that relies exclusively on self- report
is a two eyed sword.
• Building validity scales into self- report tests is one way that test developers have
attempted to deal with the potential problems.
• In arguing the case of the inclusion of validity scales, it has been asserted that "
detention of an attempt to provide misleading information is a vital and absolutely
necessary component of the clinical interpretation of test results and that using
any instrument without validity scales runs counter to the baic tenets of clinical
assessment ( Ben-Porath & Waller 1992 ).
05

Developing Instruments to Assess Personality
Chapter 11:
Personality
Assessment

1. Logic and Reason
2. Theory
3. Data Reduction Methods
4. Criterion Groups
Developing Instruments To Assess Personality

Logic and Reason
- Content or content-oriented approach
o Example: True–False Test of Extraversion
“I consider myself an outgoing person”
- Personal Data Sheet
o Robert S. Woodworth (1917)
o Woodworth Psychoneurotic Inventory
o Contained items designed to elicit self-report of fears, sleep disorders, and
other problems deemed symptomatic of a pathological condition referred
to then as psychoneuroticism.
01

Logic and Reason
- Clinically actionable information can be collected in relatively little
time:
o Self-Report Instruments
o Computerized Report
o Psychological Tests – identify conditions of “medical necessity”
- Research
o Typical companion to logic, reason, and intuition in item development
01

Logic and Reason
- Clinical experience
o Helpful in item criterion
- Correspondence with experts on the subject matter of the test
o Aid in the test development process
❑ Experts who have researched and published on the subject matter
❑ Experts who have known to have amassed great clinical experience on
the subject matter
01

Theory
02
- Personality measures differ in the extent to which they rely on a particular
theory of personality in their development as well as their interpretation.

Data Reduction Methods
03
- Include several types of statistical techniques collectively known as factor
analysis or cluster analysis.
- To aid in the identification of the minimum number of variables or factors that
account for the intercorrelations in observed phenomena.

03
- Example: “the most important individual differences in human transactions”
o How many primary factors of personality are there?
▪ Raymond Bernard Cattell (1940s) – 16 factors
▪ Surface traits – personality elements that can be directly observed
▪ Source traits – must be inferred through statistical methods. It is the
building blocks or sources of human personality.
▪ Sixteen Personality Factor (16 PF) Questionnaire - Raymond Cattell
(1949)

03
- Eysenck (1991) – three primary factors
- Church and Burke (1994) – maybe four, five, or six factors
- Waller and Zavala (1993) – seven-factor model
- Costa and McCrae (1992) – five-factor models

03
- The Big Five
o Five-dimension (or factor) model of personality and a total of 30
elements or facets that define each domain.
NEO Personality Inventory
Original version (measurement of
first three domains: Neuroticism,
Extraversion, and Openness)
NEO PI-R
Revised version (measurement of
two additional domains:
Agreeableness and
Conscientiousness)

03
- The Big Five
o Big Five Inventory (BFI) - John, Donahue, and Kentle (1991)
o Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) - Gosling, Rentfrow, and
Swann (2003)
o Five-Factor Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire (FF-NPQ) -
Paunonen, Jackson, and Ashton (2004)

Empirical Criterion Keying
● May be defined as a standard on which
a judgement or decision can be made
● scoring or keying of items has been
demonstrated empirically to differentiate
among groups of test takers.
Criterion Groups

The MMPI
- was the product of collaboration between psychologist Starke R.
Hathway and psychiatrist/neurologist John Charnley McKinley.
- It contained 566 true-false items and was designed as an aid to
psychiatric diagnosis with adolescent and adults 14 years of age and older.
- can be traced to an approach to test development that was based on
logic and resaon.

The Clinical Criterion Groups for MMPI-Scales
Scale Clinical Criterion Group
1. Hypochondriasis (Hs) - Patients who showed exaggerated concerns about
their physical health.
2. Depression (D) – Clinically depressed patients; unhappy pessimistic about their
future.
3. Hysteria (Hy) – Patients with conversion reaction
4. Psychopathic deviate (Pd) - Patients who had histories of delinquency and
other antisocial behavior
5. Masculinity-femininity (Mf) – Minnesota draftees, airline stewardesses, and
male homosexual college students from the University of Minnesota campus
community

Paranoia (Pa) – Patients who exhibited paranoid symptomatology such as ideas pf
reference, suspiciousness, delusions of persecution, and delusions of grandeur
. Psychasthenia (Pt) – Anxious, obsessive-compulsive, guilt ridden and self- doubting
patients
Schizophrenia (Sc) – Patients who were diagnose as schizophrenic (various subtypes)
Hypomania (Ma) – Patients, most diagnosed as manic-depressive, who exhibited manic
symptomatology such as elevated mood, excessive activity, and easy distractibility
Social Introversion (Si) – College students who had scored at the extremes on a test of
introversion/extroversion

L scale (Lie scale)
F Scale (Frequency Scale)
(Infrequenfcy scale)
K - Correlation
Cannot Say Scale- also referred to simply as the ? (question mark) scale.

Welsh codes – referred to as such because they were created
by Welsh (1948-1956)
Example of Welsh code:
6* 78’’’ 1-53/4:2# 90 F’L-/K

- Much of what has already been said about the MMPI in terms of its
general structure, administration, scoring, and interpretation is
applicable to the MMPI-2.
- Approximately 14% of the MMPI items were rewritten to correct
grammatical errors and to make the language more contemporary,
nonsexist, and readable.
- Items thought to be objectionable to some test takers were eliminated.
The MMPI-2

- contains items seldom
endorsed by test takers who
are candid, deliberate, and
diligent in their approach to
the test.
- scale is designed to
identify acquiescent and
non-acquiescent
response pattern. - designed to identify
indiscriminate
response pattern
Back Page Infrequency
Scale
True Response Inconsistency (TRIN)
Variable Response Inconsistency
(VRIN)

James Butcher- developed yet another validity scale after the
publication of that test.
● The S scale is a validity scale designed to detect self-presentation in
a superlative manner.
Another proposed validity scale, this one designed to detect malingerers
in personal injury claims and was proposed by Paul R. Lees-Haley and
his colleagues.
FBS (Faking Bad Scale) - this scale was originally developed as a
means to detect malingerers who submitted bogus personal injury
claims.

James Butcher (1933)
● Senior author of MMPI-2
● Army Infantryman at Outpost Yoke in South Korea in
195
● Earned a Ph.D. at University of North Carolina
● First Teaching Job was at the University of Minnesota

The MMPI-2-RF
- The need to rework the clinical scales of the MMPI-2 was perceived by
Tellegen et al.
- (2003) as arising, at least in part, two basic problems with the structure
of the scale
- One basic problem was overlapping items.
- The method of test development initially to create the MMPI, empirical
criterion keying, practically ensured there would be some develop.

1. Identify the “core components” of each clinical scale
2. Create revised scales to measure these core components (referred to
as each clinical scale)
3. Derive a final set of Revised Clinical (RC) scale using the MMPI-2
item pool.
Restructured clinical (RC) – scales were less intercorrelated than the
original clinical scales, and their convergent and discriminant validity were
greater than those original scales.

Description of a Sampling of MMPI-2-RF Scales
Clinical Scales Group
Scale Name Scale Description
Demoralization (RCd) General malaise, unhappiness, and dissatisfaction
Somatic Complaints (RC1) Diffuse complaints related to physical health
Low Positive Emotions (RC2) A “core” feeling of vulnerability in depression
Cynicism (RC3) Beliefs nonrelated to self that others are generally ill- intentioned and not
to be trusted
Antisocial Behavior (RC4) Acting in violation of societal or social rules

Ideas of Persecution (RC6) Self-referential beliefs that one
is in danger or threatened by others
Dysfunctional Negative Emotions (RC7) Disruptive anxiety,
anger, and irritability
Aberrant Experiences (RC8) Psychotic or Psychotic like
thoughts, perceptions, or experiences
Hypomanic Activation (RC9) Over activation, grandiosity,
impulsivity, or aggression

Validity Scales Group
Variable Response Inconsistency Revised (VRIN-r)
True response inconsistency revised (TRIN-r)
Infrequent Responses Revised (F-r)
Infrequent Psychopathology Responses Revised (Fp-r)
Infrequent Somatic Responses (Fs)
Symptom Validity (aka-Fake Bad Scale-Revised; FBS-r)
Uncommon Virtues (aka Lie Scale-Revised; L-r))
Adjustment Validity (aka Defensiveness Scale- Revised; K-r)

Specific Problem (SP) Scales Group
Suicidal/Death Ideation (SUI)
Helplessness/Hopelessness (HLP)
Self-Doubt (SFD)
Inefficacy (NFC)
Cognitive Complaints (COG)
Juvenile Conduct Problems (JCP)
Substance Abuse (SUB)
Sensitivity/Vulnerability (SNV)
Stress/Worry (STW)
Anxiety (AXY)
Anger Proneness (ANP)
Behavior Restricting Fears (BRF)
Multiple Specific Fears (MSF)
Juvenelle Conduct Problems (JCP)
Aggression (AGG)
Activation (ACT)

Interest Scale Group
Aesthetic Literary Interest (AES)
Mechanical Physical Interest (MEC)
PSY-5 SCALES GROUP
The five Scales are Revised versions of MMPI-2 measures.
● Aggressiveness Revised (AGGR-r)
● Psychoticism-Revised (DISC-r)
● Dis constraint -Revised (DIC-r)
● Negative Emotionally/Neuroticism-Revised (NEGE-r)
● Introversion/Low positive Emotionally Revised (INTR-r

The MMPI-A
● Its developers had recommended the original MMPI for use with adolescents.
● Test users had evinced skepticism of this recommendation through the years.
● Early on it was noticed that adolescents as a group tended to score somewhat
higher on the clinical scales than adults, a finding that left adolescents as a group
in the unenviable position of appearing to suffer from more psychopathology than
adults.
● The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Adolescents (MMPI-A;
BUTCHER et. al., 1992) is a 478-item, true or false test designed for use in
clinical, counseling, and school setting for the purpose of assessing
psychopathology and identifying personal, social, and behavioral problems.
● The MMPI-A contains 16 basic scales, including 1 clinical scales and six validity
scale.

The MMPI and its revision and progeny in perspective
The MMPI burst onto the psychology scene in the 1940s and was
greeted as an innovative, well researched, and highly appealing
instrument by both clinical practitioners and academic researchers.

Personality Assessment and Culture
Chapter 11:
Personality
Assessment

ACCULTURATION - is an ongoing process by which an individual’s thoughts, behavior, values,
worldview, and identity develop in relation to the general thinking, behavior, customs, and values of a
particular cultural group.
❖ The process of Acculturation begins at birth.
❖ Agents of Acculturation - this are the individuals or institutions who serve as source of consumer
information and/or model of Consumption behavior.
Acculturation and Related Consideration

● Describe yourself.
● Describe your family. Who lives at home?
● Describe roles in your family, such as the role of mother, the role of father, the role of
grandmother, the role of child, and so forth.
● What traditions, rituals, or customs were passed down to you by family members?
● What traditions, rituals, or customs do you think it is important to pass to the next generation?
● With regard to your family situation, what obligations do you see yourself as having?
● What obligations does your family have to you?
● What role does your family play in everyday life?
● How does the role of males and females differ from your own cultural perspective?
● What kind of music do you like?
● What kinds of foods do you eat most routinely?
● What do you consider fun things to do? When do you do these things?
● Describe yourself in the way that you think most other people would describe you. How would you
say your own selfdescription would differ from that description?
● Describe yourself in the way that you think most other people would describe you. How would you
say your own selfdescription would differ from that description?
Some sample question to assess Acculturation

● VALUES - are that which an individual prizes or the ideas an individual believes in.
● ROKEACH (1973) - differentiated what he called instrumental from terminal values.
Acculturation and Related Consideration

Example: Happiness is a terminal value where as being ambitious to earn a million dollars is
a way to get happiness for some people.
INSTRUMENTAL VALUE TERMINAL VALUES
Are guiding principles to help one attain
some objectives.
Example: Imagination, ambition, and
cheerfulness
Are guiding principles and a mode of
behavior that is an endpoint.
Example: comfortable life, exciting life,
accomplishment, self-respect.

● Personal Identity - is intimately tied to the concept of Acculturation.
● IDENTITY - is defined as a set of cognitive and behavioral characteristics by which individuals define
themselves as member of a particular group.
● IDENTIFICATION - a process by which an individual assumes a pattern of behavior characteristics
of other people and referred to it as one of the “central issues that ethnic minority groups must deal
with.
● WORLDVIEW - the unique way people interpret and make sense of their perceptions as a
consequence of their learning experience, cultural background, and related variables.

Chapter 11: Personality
Assessment
16
Personality Factor
(16PF)

Objective Personality Test
● Present specific stimuli and involve administering a standard set of
items, each of which is answered using a limited set of response options
(true or false; yes or no; strongly disagree, slightly disagree, slightly
agree, strongly agree)
16 Personality Factors (16PF)

Background and Development of the Test
● Raymond Cattell (1949)
○ Cattell worked with psychologist Charles Spearman, who was known for his
pioneering work in statistics. Cattell would later use the factor analysis techniques
developed by Spearman to create his own personality taxonomy.
○ Cattell reviewed previous research by Allport and Odbert (1936), which suggested
that there were more than 18,000 personality trait names and terms in the English
language. Of these, only about a quarter were “real traits of personality” as many of
these traits are highly similar, making it difficult to distinguish some traits from
others.
○ Cattell analyzed Allport’s list and reduced it to 171 characteristics
○ 36 traits – surface traits (personality elements that can be directly observed)
○ 16 traits – source traits (building blocks or sources of human personality)

● 16 years and older
● Used in variety of settings (clinical/counseling, industrial/organizational, research, and
schools)
● Revisions of the test were published in 1956, 1962, 1968, and 1993. In 2002, the fifth
edition of the test was published with supplemental updated norms

● 16PF Fifth Edition
○ 185 items that comprise 16 primary personality factor scales and the Impression
Management (IM) scale. Each scale contains 10-15 items.
○ Average test-completion time ranges from 35-50 minutes (paper-and-pencil
administration) and 25-35 minutes (computer administration)
○ Internal consistency coefficient alpha reliabilities average .76, with a range from .68
to .87. Test-retest reliabilities average .80 for a 2-week interval and .70 for a 2-month
interval.

FACTOR A - (Warmth) Warm vs Reserved
Factor A addressees the tendency to be warmly involved with people verus the
tendency to be more reserved social and interpersonally
A - (reserved) people tend to be more cautious in involvement and attachments
A+ (Warm) people tend to have more interest in people and to prefer
occupations dealing with people, they tend to be comfortable in situations that
call for closeness with other people

FACTOR B - (Reasoning) Abstract vs Concrete
Factor B is the ability ot solve problems using reasoning, described as a brief
measure of reasoning or intelligence

FACTOR C - (Emotional Stability) Emotionally Stable vs Reactive
Concerns feelings about coping with day-to-day life and its challenges. High
scorers tend to take life in stride and to manage events and emotions in a
balanced, adaptive way. Low scorers feel a certain lack of control over life.
Whereas high scorers make adaptive or proactive choices in managing their
lives

FACTOR E - (Dominance) Dormant vs Deferential
This factor involves the tendency to exert one’s will over others (Dominance)
versus accommodating others’ wishes (Deferene)
Most High scorers tend to be forceful, vocal in expressing their wishes and
opinions even when not invited to do so, and pushy about obtaining what they
want. Low scorers tend to avoid conflict by acquiescing to the wishes of others.
They are willing to set aside their wishes and feelimgs

FACTOR F - (Liveliness) Lively vs Serious
This factor involves the tendency to exert one’s will over others (Dominance)
versus accommodating others’ wishes (Deferene)
High scorers are enthusiastic, spontaneous and attention-seeking; they are
lively and drawn to simulating social situations. Extreme scorers may reflect a
flighty quality that is seen as unreliable or immature. The
Low scorers tend to say that they prefer working on a quiet hobby rather than
attending a lively party.

FACTOR G - (Rule-Consciousness) Rule-Conscious vs Expedient
This factor addresses the extent to which cultural standards of right and wrong
are internalized and used to govern behavior. It has been associated with the
psychoanalytic concept of the superego
High scorers tend to perceive themselves as strict followers of rules, principles,
and manners.
Low scorers ten to eschew rules and regulations, doing so either because they
have a poorly developed sense of right and wrong or they ascribe to values that
are not solely based on conventional mores for their actions

FACTOR H - (Social Boldness) Socially Bold vs Shy
Social Boldness (H+) Shyness (H-)
High scorers consider themselves to be bold and adventurous in social groups,
and show little fear of social situations. They tend to initiate social contacts and
aren’t shy in the face of new social settings.
Low scorers tend to be socially timid, cautious, and shy; they find speaking in
front of a group to be a difficult experience

FACTOR I - (Sensitivity) Sensitive vs Utilitarian
Focuses on people’s sensitivities and sensibilities’ that is high scorers tend do
base judgements on personal tastes and aesthetic values, whereas low scorers
tend to have more utilitarian focus
Sensitive (I+) people rely on empathy and sensitivity in their considerations, (I-)
Utilitarian people evince less sentimentality, attending more to how things
operate or work. At the extreme I+ people may be so focused on the subjective
aspects of situations that they overlook more functional aspects. Low scorers
tend to be concerned with utility and less on feelings and considerations

This factor relates to the tendency to
trust versus being vigilant about
others’ motives and intention.
Trust (L-) is the socially desirable pole
for Factor L.
General Factor Meaning
Factor L (Vigilance): Vigilant versus Trusting
High Scorers (L+)
- May be unable to relax their vigilance
when it might be advantageous to do so.
- At the extreme, mistrust may have an
aspect of animosity .
- Sometimes a vigilant stance is in response
to life circumstances.
Low Scorers (L-)
- Tend to expect fair treatment, loyalty, and
good intentions from others.
- Extremely low scorers may be taken
advantage to because they do not give
enough thought to others’ motives.

Factor M addresses the type of things to
which people give thought and
attention.
Grounded (M-) is more socially
desirable than abstractedness.
Factor M (Abstractedness): Abstracted versus Grounded
High Scorers (M+)
- More oriented to internal mental processes
and ideas rather than to practicalities.
- Often occupied with thinking and often get
lost in thought.
- Extreme scorers have less self-control.
Low Scorers (M-)
- Focus on their senses, observable data,
and the outer realities of their environment
in forming their perceptions.
- may be so overly concrete or literal
- “miss the forest for the trees”

Addresses the tendency to be forthright
and personally open versus being
private and non-disclosing.
Forthrightness (N-) is the socially
desirable pole.
Factor N (Privateness): Private versus Forthright
High Scorers (N+)
- “play their hands close to their chest”
- Tend to be personally guarded.
- At extreme, tend to maintain their privacy
in expense of developing close
relationships with others.
Low Scorers (N-)
- “put all the cards in the table”
- Tend to talk about themselves readily; they
are genuine, self-revealing, and forthright.

Worrying can have positive results, in
that a person can anticipate dangers
in a situation and can see how
actions might have consequences.
Self-assured (O-) response choices are
the socially desirable pole.
Factor O (Apprehension): Apprehensive versus Self-Assured
High Scorers (O+)
- Tend to worry about things and to feel
apprehensive and insecure.
- High scorers can make a poor social
presence.
Low Scorers (N-)
- Tend to be more self-assured, neither
prone to apprehensiveness nor troubled
about their sense of adequacy.
- Confident and self-satisfied.
- At extremes, self-assurance may result
from blocking out awareness of negative
elements of self.

Factors between thinking of ways to
improve things or to prefer things
the traditional ways.
Factor Q1 (Openness to Change): Open to Change versus Traditional
High Scorers (Q1+)
- Enjoy experimenting.
- If they perceive the status as
unsatisfactory or dull, they are inclined to
change it.
Low Scorers (Q1-)
- They don’t question the way things are
done.
- They prefer life to be predictable and
familiar, even if life is not ideal.

This factor tends to be about
maintaining contact with or
proximity to others.
It appears to be more socially
favourable to present oneself as
Group-Oriented (Q2-).
Factor Q2 (Self-Reliance): Self-Reliant versus Group-Oriented
High Scorers (Q2+)
- They enjoy time alone and prefer to make
decisions for themselves.
- They have difficulty in working alongside
with others, and find it hard to ask help
when necessary.
Low Scorers (Q2-)
- They prefer to be around people and like to
do things with others.
- Extreme scorers, may not be optimally
effective in situations where help is
unavailable or where others are providing
poor direction or advice.

Perfectionistic people are likely to be
most comfortable in highly
organized and predictable
situations and may find it hard to
deal with unpredictability.
Perfectionism can have positive results
but is not always desirable.
Factor Q3 (Perfectionism): Perfectionistic versus Tolerates Disorder
High Scorers (Q3+)
- Want to do things right.
- They tend be organized, to keep things in
their proper places, and to plan ahead.
- At the extreme, they may seen as
inflexible.
Low Scorers (Q3-)
- Leave more things to change and tend to
be more comfortable in disorganized
setting.
- They may not able to have a clear
motivation for behaving in planned or
organized ways.

This scale is associated with nervous
tension.
The items are fairly transparent, they
can be presented to as favourable or
unfavourable.
Factor Q4 (Tension): Tense versus Relax
High Scorers (Q4+)
- Tend to have a restless energy and to be
fidgety when made to wait.
- Extremely high tension can lead to
impatience and irritability.
Low Scorers (Q4-)
- Tend to feel relaxed and tranquil.
- Patient and slow to become frustrated.
- In extremes, low level of arousal can make
them unmotivated.

Computer Administration
● The 16PF Fifth Edition can be administered via personal computer
using IPAT OnSite System Software or online using NetAssess or
16PF world.com services.
● These system feature item-by-item test administrations.
ADMINISTRATION

Paper and Pencil Administration
● Testing materials include the Fifth Edition test booklet and the
corresponding answer sheet which may be hand or computer scored.
● Simple and clear instructions for examinees are printed in the test booklet.
● Booklet starting the test, examinees are asked to complete the grids for
name and gender on the left-hand side of the answer sheet.
● During the test, the administration should check that examinees are
making responses appropriately.
● At the conclusion of testing, the administrator should review each
answer sheet to ensure that the name ( or I.D number ) and gender
grids have been completed and that all responses are scorable.
ADMINISTRATION

● GENERAL INTERPRETIVE INFORMATION - the interpretive information that
follows is based on the preliminary body of evidence available for the fifth
edition.
● FACTOR ANALYSIS - The evolution of the 16PF has reflected Cattell’s use of
the factor-analytic approach in identifying the basic structure of human
personality.
Profile Interpretation

Primary Factor Scale Description

● BIPOLAR SCALE - indicates a respondent to balance two different
qualities, defining the relative proportion of those qualities.
● GLOBAL SCALE - in addition to the primary scales, the 16PF contains a set
of five scales that combine related primary scales into global factors of
personality.

Global Factor Scale Description

Sten Distribution
STEN SCALE - the 16PF
“standardized ten” (sten)
score scales.

Interpreting the results of a 16 personality types test is critical to your hiring
decision. There are four main categories that your candidates can fall into:
● Candidates who are introverts vs those who are extroverts.
● Candidates who sense information vs those who augment information with
intuition.
● Candidates who prefer thinking logically vs those who prefer making
decisions based on feeling.
● Candidates who like to make decisions and judge information vs those who
like to perceive new information.
How to Interpret the result of 16PF test

● Extraverted Intuitive Thinking Judging (ENJT) - Natural leaders
● Extraverted Intuitive Thinking Perceiving (ENTP) - Typically smart and
insightful
● Extraverted Intuitive Feeling Judging (ENFJ) - they are constantly learning
new things
● Extraverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving (ENFP) - can come up with
exceptional ideas and share them with others, as they are also keen to get
along with their co-worker.
● Extraverted Sensing Thinking Judging (ESTJ) - they typically abide by the
rules and perform best in work environment with organized team.

● Extraverted Sensing Thinking Perceiving (ESTP) - they typically work best
by combining logic with emotions.
● Extraverted Sensing Feeling Judging - (ESFJ) - they can understand
complex problem, like an ENFP personality type, but will delegate tasks to
help solve them.
● Extraverted Sensing Feeling Perceiving (ESFP) - are outgoing extroverts
who who will enjoy being in the limelight.
● Introverted Sensing Thinking Judging (INTJ) - get their energy from
working independently as oppose to others.

● Introverted Intuitive Thinking Perceiving (INTP) - they think logically, focus on
being creative, and prefer creative work environment.
● Introverted Intuitive Feeling Judging (INFJ) - usually prefers working
independently and gets their energy from working on tasks alone.
● Introverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving (INFP) - they enjoy learning new skills
and work towards bringing positive change to their work environment.
● Introverted Sensing Thinking Judging (ISTJ) - they value the importance of
working hard.
● Introverted Sensing Thinking Perceiving (ISTP) - prefer working in quiet
environments, and can be quiet themselves, but tend to join forces with team
members in time s of need.

● Introverted Sensing Feeling Judging (ISFJ) - will deliver high-quality work and
are both loyal and reliable in professional environments.
● Introverted Sensing Feeling Perceiving (ISFP) - enjoy working in a team despite
being introverts.

Hand Scoring
1. Using the appropriate scoring key, obtain the total raw score of the items in the
scale that have baan completed.
2. Divide the total raw score by the number of items completed.
3. Multiply the quotient obtained in procedure 2 by the total number of items in the
scale.
4. Raound the product obtained in procedure 3 to the nearest whole number, which
becomes the estimated full scale score.
SCORING 16PF

1. Align the left edge of the first scoring key over the answer
sheet, making sure that the stars on the right side of the answer
sheet appear through the corresponding holes on the right side
of the key.
2. Count the marks visible though the holes in the area labeled.
3. Continue scoring the remaining four factors that correspond
with the first key.
STEP 1: Score the Test

1. Determine whether combined-sex or sex-specific norms for
Factor A are more appropriate for testing and appilication.
2. Locate the examinee’s raw score for Factor A in the row that
corresponds to the norms selected.
3. Draw your finger up the column in which the raw score appears.
STEP 2: Convert Raw Scores to Sten
Scores

1. Transfer the examinee’s primary factor sten scores from answer sheet to the
left-hand column labeled “sten” on the individual record form.
2. Begin by scoring Factor A, which is the first row/Multiply examinees’s Factor A
Sten score by the decimal.
3. Repeat procedure.
4. Add the numbers in each pair of vertical columns separately.
5. After you have totaled all the columns, subtract each sum in a shaded box from
the sum in a clear box.
STEP 3: Calculate Global Factor Sten Scores

1. Write the examinee’s primary and global factor sten scores in
the Sten column at left of the profile sheet.
2. In the appropriate spaces on the grid, mark a dot that
corresponds to each rounded global factor sten scoe and to
each personality factor sten score.
3. Connect the dots using a series of short straight lines.
STEP 4: Profile Sten Scores

● Computer scoring and interpretation of the 16pf questionnaire has several
important advantages over hand scoring, such as
1. Quick turnaround of results.
2. Less possibility for error and
3. The ability to report additional administrative indices and other composite scores that
enrich test result.
● 16PF fifth edition answer sheets can also be fixed to IPAT, reports are returned
within minutes
● Also can be administered and scored on personal computers using IPAT Onsite
System software or one of the online services.
Additional information regarding these scoring options can be obtained by calling IPAT
at 800-225-4728
Computer Scoring

Personality Assessment Types and Uses

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Personality Assessment Types and Uses

Semelhante a Personality Assessment Types and Uses (20)

Último

Último (20)

Personality Assessment Types and Uses