Theoretical review of personality tests

Personality Tests: Theories and Common Types Prepared by Merav Hami, Psychologist

 

Personality Theories

There is a distinction between ability tests, which include measurements of intelligence, achievements, skills and neuropsychological functions; and personality tests, which try to measure personality traits, dynamic motivations, personal adaptation, psychiatric symptoms, social skills and attitude characteristics. However, the separation is far from absolute: intellectual ability is partly based on traits such as perseverance and self-control, and therefore ability tests inevitably include measurement of personality traits as well. Personality tests may be saturated with ability factors, for example openness to experiences is positively correlated with intelligence.

What is personality?

There is a debate whether personality exists at all, a debate known as state or trait, STATE VS TRAIT. The trait school defined personality as a fixed pattern of behavior across changing situations. The second school claimed that there is no such thing as a fixed personality, and behavior is flexible and responsive to the different objective situations that life presents to us. In personal experience, there must be personality. We can predict how different people (friends, family) will react to certain situations. Today, we can say that there is a flexible definition that speaks of fixed traits, but since each of us is influenced by situations with different intensities, diverse behavior is created.

It is difficult to define personality, but two of its characteristics can be distinguished: 1. Each person has characteristics that are fixed to some degree. 2. Each person is distinguished from others to some degree. With personality, we explain interpersonal differences in the behavior of different people in the same situation, and the consistency of a particular person's behavior across situations.

Psychoanalytic theories:

Origins: Freud was a neurologist who treated patients with hysteria. He concluded that the causes of the disease were traumatic experiences. In order to heal, these memories must be brought to the surface. Following this experience, Freud built a theory about the unconscious, the keeper of drives and thoughts that are not acceptable to the conscious self, and they are the strongest motivators of the person. As a result, many tests were developed, based on the assumption that unconscious motives are expressed in a person's response to an ambiguous and unstructured stimulus. Several additional tests were built on the concept of defense mechanisms.

Type theories:

The earliest attempt to classify people into types was by Hippocrates (according to body fluids). In the 1940s was the first modern attempt - according to body structure and temperament.

Type A behavior pattern: Friedman and Rosenman (1974) identified a Type A behavior pattern, which is at higher risk for heart disease. This is an aggressive type, trying to achieve more in less time, even against opposition. In contrast, Type B is calm and non-competitive. Type A characteristics: Status insecurity - lack of self-esteem (hidden), constantly comparing to others; Excess aggression - indifference to the feelings and rights of competitors; Unfocused hostility - many things anger him; Time pressure sensation (speed disease) - hurry in daily activities, and doing multiple actions simultaneously. The type can be diagnosed in an interview about work habits, eating, conversation and thinking. Early studies found a strong link between Type A and heart diseases and heart attacks. Later studies found a weak connection. Others found connections to specific traits, such as tendency to anger, time pressure, hostility, cynicism, anger suppression and more.

Type A and B can be viewed as the ends of the same continuum, not as types. The difference between a continuum approach and a type approach is that the type approach says that most people are at the extremes, while the continuum approach says that most are distributed along a continuum.

Trait perceptions:

A trait indicates an ongoing way in which the individual differs from others. The concept developed from the language in which people describe other people on a daily basis, for example matchmaking ads... A personality trait is a consistent pattern in the way an individual behaves, feels and thinks. It allows to summarize a lot of information in one word, to predict behavior, and to explain it.

There is a huge number of theories, each presenting different variables central to personality assessment, but since each theory relies on subjective assumptions, there is no reference point allowing comparison between them.

Cattel's trait theory: The first to do this in an orderly manner was Cattel (1944). Cattel notes that there are surface traits, which are identified in the first stage of factor analysis, and source traits, which are the constant and stable source of behavior. He had subjects rate 35 bipolar scales (on themselves and for their friends) and performed factor analysis on the ratings, reaching 12 significant structures. In a later processing, he presented 16 dimensions by which personality can be rated.

Eysenck's trait dimension theory: Combined the trait approach with dimensions. He identified 2 basic trait-dimensions: 1. Extrovert/introvert. 2. Emotionally stable/unstable (neurotic). Within the dimensions, he identified 32 traits, and positioned them according to direction and intensity in each of the dimensions. For example: Aggressiveness has moderate extroversion and moderate stability. He built Eysenck's personality questionnaire to measure the dimensions and traits.

Five-factor model: In the 1980s, two independent research groups entered the picture looking for personality dimensions using factor analysis: Costa and McCrae (from the National Health Center) and Warren Norman from the University of Michigan with Lewis Goldberg from the University of Oregon. The roots of all the research were different, but led to similar results: most human traits can be included in five personality dimensions, regardless of language or culture. This model is called the Big 5, and includes the OCEAN dimensions. The model became increasingly popular, and has support from factor analysis of trait concepts in spoken language (the basic lexical hypothesis).

Notes on traits: The challenge facing trait theorists is that there are thousands of traits, and they need to be reduced to a small number of basic traits. Until recently, there was no agreement on their quantity, but today there is quite widespread agreement on the five factors. The quantity is arbitrary, it's not a sacred number.

All trait approaches share common problems: 1. Does a trait cause behavior or just describe it economically? 2. Traits have low predictive validity, despite high face validity. There is no consistency of behavior across situations, although a trait predicts that that's what will happen. We're talking about a "personality coefficient" validity of 0.30.

 

There are several possible divisions of personality tests: group versus individual, comprehensive (whole personality) versus tests that measure only one trait, etc. One of the divisions is into projective tests versus self-report tests. Unstructured projective techniques dominated in the early 20th century; structured approaches of self-report and behavioral tests began to flourish in the mid-20th century, and have rapidly gained popularity since.

Structured tests were developed in three ways: based on theory, with factor analysis, and by empirical development (criterion-key). Often considered "objective," as opposed to projective, but it is more accurate to call them "structured," as they have very clear rules for administration, scoring, and interpretation.

The test developer designs the tool around a pre-existing theory. For example, the MBTI- Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: A forced-choice questionnaire, based on Jung's theory, including four theoretical dimensions: extraversion-introversion, sensing-intuition, thinking-feeling, judging-perceiving. The result of the scoring is a typology. For example, someone who scores close to extraversion, intuition, feeling, perception will get a summary of ENFP, and a personality description accordingly.

Type A measurements: There are many questionnaires to measure the type, the most up-to-date is TUPA (time urgency perpetual activation), with excellent psychometric data and helps predict a number of health problems.

16PF- 16 personality factors: The tool is built on the basis of 16 factors that Cattel found in factor analysis, 16 source traits, and 4 scales of second-order traits, based on the first 16 factors. The result is 20 bipolar scales. The endpoint scores have been established in many studies over the years. The main use of the questionnaire is in career counseling and occupational screening, and is very common mainly because the answer sheet can be scanned into a computer, and get a very detailed computerized narrative report.

NEO-PI-R: Based on decades of research and the five-factor model. In 1992, Costa & McCrae developed the NEO questionnaire (named after the first three factors). Instead of adjectives, they built sentences that are supposed to reflect the nuances of each of the dimensions. Theoretically, the dimensions represent factors independent of each other, but factor analyses showed that some of the scales do overlap. Although there is no universal agreement on the structure of the questionnaire, it is the most popular questionnaire among objective tools for measuring personality.

Items enter a certain scale if and only if they distinguish between well-defined criterion groups.

MMPI-2- Minnesota multiphasic Personality Inventory: First published in 1943, and included 566 'true-false' items, aimed at diagnosing psychiatric disorders. Allows assessment of disorders and also description of normal personality. Found in the widest use. After several years, it became clear that the test needed refreshing. The new test was published in 1989. The original items were developed by contrasting responses between different psychiatric groups to a normal control group.

CPI- California Personality Inventory: Similar to the MMPI, but was designed from the outset to diagnose normal personality. Includes 462 'true-false' items, about 200 of them borrowed directly from the MMPI.

Projective tests

The projection assumption holds that personal interpretations of ambiguous stimuli necessarily reflect the unconscious needs, motives, and conflicts of the examinee. The challenge is to decipher the personality processes underlying each examinee's unique and subjective responses. Every perception is a kind of projection (perception of an object, taste, pain sensation, etc.). A person's response to a stimulus is constant and not random, meaning it stems from internal motives. The observed behavior is not just an example of the person's behavior, but reflects their inner personality and a wider range of behaviors. The indirect approach of the tests ensures spontaneous and representative responses. The less structured the stimulus, the less likely it is to elicit defensive responses from the respondent.

There are five categories, based on the nature of the responses required from the subject.

1. Arrangement or selection of pictures

This type is ancient and outdated and is almost never used.

2. Associations (to ink blots or words):

Rorschach: 10 ink blots developed by Rorschach in the early 20th century, of which 5 are colorful and 5 are black and white. The examiner asks for each card "What does this remind you of?"

3. Completion of sentences or stories:

Rotter test: A sentence completion test, in which the subject is presented with a series of sentence beginnings, and has to provide an ending.

Rosenzweig test: Examination of frustration in pictures. Partial projection, because the subject is asked to give a verbal response to a very structured stimulus of a clear picture + text.

4. Construction of stories or sequences:

TAT: 30 pictures, of a variety of themes and subjects, in black and white, and one blank card. Each card contains one or more people. The examinee is asked to tell a story about the picture - what happened before? What now? What in the future? Thoughts and feelings of characters... Developed by Henry Murray to assess the system of needs and pressures he developed.

5. Expression through drawing or play:

Draw-a-Person: Goodenough (1926) developed it as a tool for assessing intelligence, but the test was adopted for personality assessment. The examinee is asked to draw a person. Then a person of the opposite sex. In the end - to tell a story about each.

House-Tree-Person drawing HTP: The subject is asked to freely draw all of the above, once in pencil and once in colors. After the drawing, there is a clarification phase, in which the subject answers 60 questions about the drawings. Originally developed to measure intelligence, and adopted for personality assessment.

The projective paradox:

How can the popularity of the tools be explained in view of the deficient reliability and validity?

1. Illusion of validity - tend to stick to stereotypes, and ignore the facts. Only notice cases that match the projection hypothesis, and not those that contradict it.

2. The use is sometimes made as part of therapy, not for diagnosis. Following the test, the therapist raises hypotheses, and rejects most of them later during the treatment, but it's a help tool for therapeutic thinking.

 

What is graphology?

The term graphology is composed of two Greek words: grapho (=writing), logy (=doctrine). Handwriting serves as a means of communication for transferring information, which is made possible by the agreed use of the formal standard of the alphabet, as learned in school. The formal standard serves as a basis, in comparison to which one can note the differences and unique characteristics in the specific handwriting. Graphology is not considered a "test", but a "diagnosis", because a test is conducted on the basis of a scale of "truth" versus "error", while in handwriting, each person deviates from the formal standard at different intensities determined by their personality. This deviation is not an "error" but a personality characterization.

Graphology aims to interpret handwriting and infer from handwriting about a person's traits and characteristics. The rationale for this: handwriting is an expression of a certain form of behavior - writing. It is an expressive movement that expresses in some way the writer's personality, traits and skills, as do other projective techniques (such as drawing test, Bender). Some think that this is the "brain's" writing, which helps express personality traits and thoughts and that it combines a motor and projective expression.

The use of graphology is common in Israel and European countries, and less so in the USA (similar to other projection techniques).

Approaches to graphological analysis

1. Analytical/atomistic approach - diagnosis based on signs in writing. Objective measurement of specific signs in handwriting (such as the height of the letter or its slope), and linking these signs to certain personality traits.

2. Holistic/gestalt approach - diagnosis from a general impression of his handwriting. A more intuitive approach, referring to the whole handwriting, beyond its individual components.

3. Combined/eclectic approach - use of elements taken from both approaches. The most common method. Basic assumption: graphological diagnosis must be based on all components of handwriting and on the interactions between its signs. Do not interpret any writing sign in isolation! It is essential to combine analytical diagnosis with holistic diagnosis.

Advantages of graphology as a screening tool

? High face validity - the deciphering of handwriting is perceived as fundamentally possible.

? Simple, fast and inexpensive administration.

? The technique does not require special effort from the subject, and is perceived as less threatening than other tests.

? Handwriting is a natural action of the person, and it is very difficult to fake it. Moreover, candidates find it difficult to know exactly what they are looking for in their writing, thus reducing the effect of social desirability and impression management.

The main disadvantage: the issue of the scientific basis of the method.

Reliability: There is variance in the findings (wide range of reliabilities).

Validity: The validity findings are not uniform! Most findings indicated low-to-medium validity of graphological diagnosis. Meta-analytic analyses that were done pointed to correlations ranging from 0.14 to 0.20. However, most studies suffered from methodological problems, such as: using a single graphologist; range restriction; insufficient training of graphologists; insufficient familiarity of graphologists with the criterion; use of handwritings whose content reveals the writer's traits; the studies test the graphologists and not graphology, meaning they did not test graphological hypotheses, but results of graphologists!!

 

Conclusion:

There is no scientific justification for using graphology as an exclusive screening tool, but perhaps there is room to incorporate it as a decision-supporting tool. Is it worth investing in this? No - handwriting is disappearing. If there is no practice in it, it will not indicate personality; The marginal benefit is small. It's exactly the same contribution as Bender-drawing tests, etc., but they are more standard; Validity data are not high enough.