Reflection Task

Core Learning Outcome 1

Explain the concept of personality, and discuss the difference between a personality
state and trait.

‘Personality’ refers to individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling

and behaving. The study of personality focuses on two broad areas: One is
understanding individual differences in particular personality characteristics, such as
sociability or irritability. The other is understanding how the various parts of a person
come together as a whole (American Psychological Association). Notably, this includes
some important things to remember: personality is a construct, it has many theories of
personality, and different tests have different purposes.

Some definitions include: personality (an individual’s unique constellation of

psychological traits that is relatively stable over time), personality assessment (the
measurement and evaluation of psychological traits, states, values, interests, attitudes,
worldview, acculturation, sense of humour, cognitive and behavioural styles, and/or
related individual characteristics), personality type (constellation of traits that is similar
in pattern to one identified category of personality within a taxonomy of personalities),
personality trait (any distinguishable, relatively enduring way in which one individual
varies from another), and personality state (unlike traits that are relatively enduring,
states are more transitory, and will depend upon a person’s situation and/motives at a
particular time).

More specifically, personality types include: ‘Holland codes’ which categorise people as
one of six personality types (artistic, enterprising, investigative, social, Realistic, or
conventional). This helped developed the Self‐Directed Search (SDS) test which is a self‐
administered and self‐scored aid to offer vocational assistance. Alternatively,
cardiologists Meyer Friedman and Ray Rosenman developed a two‐category personality
typology, which describe ’type A’ (a personality type characterised by competitiveness,
haste, restlessness, impatience, feelings of being time‐pressured, and strong needs for
achievement and dominance), ’type B’, (A personality type that is completely opposite
of type A personality, characterised as being mellow or laid‐back), ‘type C’ (Passive,
calm, unable to help self and focusses on others. Difficulty experiencing emotion), and
‘type D’ (which includes negative affectivity, such as worry and irritability, and social
inhibition). Finally, this includes the ‘Myers Briggs Type Indicator’ is broadly based on
Jung’s theory. This includes 16 types based on combinations of scales:
introversion/extraversion, sensing/intuition, thinking/feeling, judging/perceiving.
On the other hand, personality types include traits that are relatively transitory or
situation‐specific. This can be used to generate personality profile (a narrative
description of the extent to which a person has demonstrated certain personality traits,
states, or types0. This includes: the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
(MMPI) is frequently discussed in terms of the patterns of scores that emerge, referred
to as a profile.

Core Learning Outcome 2

Outline some of the possible uses and/or applications of personality testing.

Aspects of personality could be explored in: why we assess personality (identifying

determinants of knowledge about health, categorising different types of commitment in
intimate relationships, determining peer response to a team’s weakest link, the service
of national defence to identify those prone to terrorism, tracking trait development over
time, and studying some uniquely human characteristic such as moral judgment), and
where are they conducted (traditional sites include schools, clinics, hospitals, academic
research laboratories, employment counselling, vocational selection centres, and the
offices of psychologists and counsellors. Personality assessors can also be found
observing behaviour and making assessments in natural settings), who is being assessed
(some methods of personality assessment rely on the assessee’s own self‐report.
Assesses may respond to interview questions, answer questionnaires in writing or on a
computer. Some forms of personality assessment rely on informants such as parents,
teachers, or peers).

Personality may be assessed by many different methods, such as face‐to‐face

interviews, computer‐ administered tests, behavioural observation, paper‐ and‐pencil
tests, evaluation of case history data, evaluation of portfolio data, and recording of
physiological responses. Measures of personality vary in terms of their structure, with
some measures being very structured and others being relatively unstructured.

Core Learning Outcome 3

Explain the strengths and weaknesses of self-report versus informant based methods
of assessing personality.

In some situations, the best available method for assessment of personality and/or
behaviour involves a third party (e.g., a parent, teacher, or spouse). It is necessary to
proceed with caution when using a third‐party referent for personality assessment.
Knowledge of the context of the evaluation and the dynamic of the relationship
between the rater and the assessee is important. Raters may vary in the extent to which
they are neutral.
Some weaknesses include the presence of certain response characteristics: response
style (which is a tendency to respond to a test item or interview question in some
characteristic manner regardless of the content of the item or question), and impression
management (which is the attempt to manipulate others’ impressions through the
selective exposure of some information coupled with suppression of other information).
Here, response styles can affect the validity of the outcome and can be countered
through the use of a validity scale (which is a sub-scale of a test designed to assist in
judgments regarding how honestly the test-taker responded and whether responses
were products of response style, carelessness, deception, or misunderstanding).

Core Learning Outcome 4

Identify and explain what is assessed when a personality test is conducted.

Self‐report methods are very common when exploring an assessee’s self‐concept (that
is, one’s attitudes, beliefs, opinions, and related thoughts about oneself. Some self‐
concept measures are based on the notion that states and traits related to self‐concept
are to a large degree context‐dependent). Here, self‐concept differentiation is the
degree to which a person has different self‐concepts in different roles.

Core Learning Outcome 5

Explain the difference between nomothetic, idiographic, normative, and ipsative
approaches to personality testing.

Personality measures differ with respect to the way conclusions are drawn from the
data they provide. These include: nomothetic approach (characterized by efforts to
learn how a limited number of personality traits can be applied to all people),
idiographic approach (characterised by efforts to learn about each individual’s unique
constellation of personality traits), normative approach (a test-taker’s 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), and ipsitive approach (a test-taker’s responses
and the presumed strength of measured traits are interpreted relative to the strength of
measured traits for that same individual).

Core Learning Outcome 6

Outline the most common methods of developing instruments to assess personality.

Instruments used in personality 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). Other tests are atheoretical, such as the MMPI‐2.
Logic and reason may dictate what content is covered by the items on a personality test.
The use of logic and reason in the development of test items is sometimes referred to as
the content or content‐oriented approach to test development. A review of the
literature on the aspect of personality that test items are designed to tap will frequently
be very helpful to test developers.

Data reduction methods are another class of widely used tool on contemporary test
development. Such methods are used to aid in the identification of the minimum
number of variables or factors that account for the intercorrelations in observed
phenomena. Data reduction methods: A well‐known use of such methods was
employed by Cattell in the 1940’s, in which he reduced a list of more than 18,000
personality trait names (produced by Allport and Odbert in 1936) to only 16 “primary”
factors of personality. Whether the 16 PF measures 16 distinct factors is still debated,
with some arguing that there are more than 16 factors while others claim there are
fewer. The Big Five Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) is a measure of five
major dimensions of personality and 30 facets that define each dimension (extraversion,
neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness).

Where criterion is a standard on which a judgment or decision can be made, criterion

group is a reference group of test-takers who share specific characteristics and whose
responses to test items serve as a standard according to which items will be included or
discarded from the final version of a scale. Empirical criterion keying is the process of
using criterion groups to develop test items. Specifically, this process includes: creation
of a large preliminary pool of test items from which the final form of the test will be
selected, administration of the preliminary pool to at least two groups of people: (1) a
criterion group of people known to possess the measured trait; and (2) a random
sample, conduct an item analysis to select items indicative of membership in the
criterion group, and final obtain data on test performance from a standardisation
sample of test-takers who are representative of the population from which future test-
takers will come.

Core Learning Outcome 7

Explain the some of the key cultural considerations in personality assessment.

Before any tool of personality assessment can be employed, and before data is imbued
with meaning, the assessor must consider important issues with regard to individual
characteristics (such as cultural background) of the assessee. Acculturation: an ongoing
process by which an individual’s thoughts, behaviours, values, worldview, and identity
develop in relation to the thinking, behaviour, customs, and values of a particular
cultural group. Notably, acculturation begins at birth and proceeds throughout
development

These include: instrumental values (guiding principles to help one attain some objective,
such as honesty and ambition), and terminal values (guiding principles and a mode of
behaviour that is an endpoint objective, such as a comfortable life and a sense of
accomplishment). Kluckhohn conceived of values as answers to key questions with
which civilizations must grapple. For example, in one culture, collectivism is the ideal; in
another, individualism and personal striving is emphasised. Overall, an assessee’s
worldview must be considered when examining personality, their unique way of
interpreting their perceptions as a result of their experiences, cultural background, and
related variables.

Core Learning Outcome 8

Identify and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of objective versus projective
testing methods.

Objective methods of personality assessment typically administered by paper‐and‐pencil

or computer and contain short‐answer items for which the assessee’s task is to select
one response from those provided (e.g., “yes” “no”; “true” “false”; “very true”
“sometimes true” “never true” “can’t say”). The term “objective” in relation to
personality measures must be considered cautiously as personality tests rarely contain
one correct answer, and must consider as well on its reliance on self‐report measures
Projective tests include certain hypothesis, such as the idea that an individual supplies
structure to unstructured stimuli in a manner consistent with the individual’s own
unique pattern of conscious and unconscious needs, fears, desires, impulses, conflicts,
and ways of perceiving and responding. Projective techniques are indirect methods of
personality assessment. They include: Rorschach ink blot, thematic apperception tests
(TAT), and some other measures (see screenshot). Weaknesses: projective tests do not
provide incremental validity above more structured methods, problems with norms,
lack of suitability across cultures, lack of internal consistency, poor inter‐rater reliability,
and poor validity. Strengths: can reveal interesting clinical information, may assist with
building rapport, and may assist in understanding cognitive abilities in children.

Core Learning Outcome 9

Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the MMPI-2, the NEO-PI and the Rorschach.

MMPI‐2/MMPI‐2 RF
Type of test: Objective
Method of development: Criterion keying
Descriptors: Code types most common
Uses: Primarily clinical and forensic settings, in and outpatient
Reliability: Moderate to highValidity: Extensive, generally good
Normative data: Large, but not representative

Strengths: strong research base, thus good reliability and validity data available, good
clinical utility, is widely used, improvements through development, and built it validity
scales.
Weaknesses: focus on psychopathology, high level of training needed, large number of
items (participant fatigue), and ross‐cultural issues.

Rorschach
Type of test: Projective
Method of development: Atheoretical, but interpretation couched in psychodynamic
approach. Originally designed as a test to diagnose schizophrenia.
Descriptors: Organisational Activity, Colour, Complexity, Form Quality, and Human
Figure responses. Patterns of response, recurring themes, and interrelationships among
the different categories are all considered in the final description
Uses: Detect person's personality characteristics and emotional functioning, and
diagnosesReliability: Questionable
Validity: Questionable
Normative data: Questionable

Strengths: hard to fake, may be useful with guarded patients, may give hints of diagnosis
via language used, and May tap unconscious or difficult to access processes.
Weaknesses: questionable reliability, validity, and normative information, cross‐cultural
issues, difficult and complex scoring systems, and time consuming.
NEO‐PI/R/3
Type of test: Objective
Method of development: Data reduction
Descriptors: personal strengths and weaknesses. Big 5 personality traits ‐openness to
experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism). Also
explores “facets” of each trait.
Uses: Originally developed to explore normal personality, expanded and used widely.
Reliability: Good. Internal consistency and test‐ retest reliability high.
Validity: Evidence provided for convergent and discriminant validity and criterion
related validity.
Normative data: Reasonably good. Large samples, somewhat representative.

Strengths: identification of normal personality traits, utility for assisting client

understand, good psychometric properties, and growing research base.
Weaknesses: Questions about appropriateness of development method, cross‐cultural
issues, and social desirability can be an issue.