Personality Assessment Instruments Comparison
Personality Assessment Instruments Comparison
Psych 506
April 16, 2012
Abstract
This paper will explore the Myers-Briggs, Thematic Apperception Test, and self-help books for validity, comprehensiveness, applicability, and cultural utility. Evidence of reliability, validity, along with strengths and weaknesses of each instrument are also presented. Despite the controversy surrounding these measures, they continue to be among the most popular psychological assessment tools today.
Personality Assessment Instruments Comparison
Personality assessment instruments continue to be widely uses by the public and widely examined by the public. Since the early 20th century a number of personality instruments have been very useful in classifying personality traits, while other test instruments have shown to be antiquated. The Myer-Briggs, Apperception test and self-help books all have confidence that they can deliver a concrete view on differences in personalities. They allow you to know an individual's personality type along with an examination into how these different assessments may be of importance to the everyday person.
As the degree to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure, validity is a difficult property to evaluate in a test. Consider tests of intelligence. Many people are skeptical of the results of these tests. Some people are concerned that the tests measure only book learning and do not test common sense (Anastasi, 1988). Other people feel that intelligence tests have cultural, racial, and gender biases. Therefore, to conclude that a test is a valid measure of intelligence, it must be shown that the test measures intelligence independent of the test subjects education, culture, race, and sex.
The Validity of MBTI- Many studies over the years have proven the validity of the MBTI instrument in three categories: (1) the validity of the four separate preference scales; (2) the validity of the four preference pairs as dichotomies; and
Psych 506
April 16, 2012
Abstract
This paper will explore the Myers-Briggs, Thematic Apperception Test, and self-help books for validity, comprehensiveness, applicability, and cultural utility. Evidence of reliability, validity, along with strengths and weaknesses of each instrument are also presented. Despite the controversy surrounding these measures, they continue to be among the most popular psychological assessment tools today.
Personality Assessment Instruments Comparison
Personality assessment instruments continue to be widely uses by the public and widely examined by the public. Since the early 20th century a number of personality instruments have been very useful in classifying personality traits, while other test instruments have shown to be antiquated. The Myer-Briggs, Apperception test and self-help books all have confidence that they can deliver a concrete view on differences in personalities. They allow you to know an individual's personality type along with an examination into how these different assessments may be of importance to the everyday person.
As the degree to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure, validity is a difficult property to evaluate in a test. Consider tests of intelligence. Many people are skeptical of the results of these tests. Some people are concerned that the tests measure only book learning and do not test common sense (Anastasi, 1988). Other people feel that intelligence tests have cultural, racial, and gender biases. Therefore, to conclude that a test is a valid measure of intelligence, it must be shown that the test measures intelligence independent of the test subjects education, culture, race, and sex.
The Validity of MBTI- Many studies over the years have proven the validity of the MBTI instrument in three categories: (1) the validity of the four separate preference scales; (2) the validity of the four preference pairs as dichotomies; and
References: Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan. Butcher, J.N., & Rouse, S.V. (1996). Personality: Individual differences and clinical assessment. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 87-111. Hiller, J.B., Rosenthal, R., Bornstein, R.F., Berry, D.T., & Brunell-Neuleib, S. (1999). A comparative meta-analysis of Rorschach and MMPI validity. Psychological Assessment, 11, 278-296. Hood, A.B., & Johnson, R.W. (1997). Assessment in counseling: A guide to the use of psychological assessment procedures (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association. Lilienfeld, S.O., Wood, J.M., & Garb, H.N. (2001). What’s wrong with this picture? Scientific American, 284, 80-87. Locraft, C., & Teglasi, H. (1997). Teacher rated empathic behavior and children’s TAT stories. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 217-237. Lundy, A. (1985). The reliability of the Thematic Apperception Test. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 141-149.