Instrument Analysis Of The Rorschach Test

Personality is a complex area of Psychology, which has been studied for many years, by many experts in the field. Each having their own ideas about how to understand, study and evaluate it. Here I will introduce personality briefly, looking at the theories behind it. Then explain the need for testing. As there are many test that are available to use, for the purpose of this essay I will look at The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) and discuss the reliability and validity of some studies around these tests.

many, the word Rorschach is quite unknown and to others it is simply known as the inkblot test and even then, the real meaning of the Rorschach test is never acknowledged. The Rorschach inkblot test is a psychological projective test of personality in which a subject’s interpretation of ten standard abstract designs are analyzed as measure of emotional and intellectual functioning and combination. Also, like other projective techniques, “it is based on the principle that subjects viewing neutral, ambiguous stimuli will project their own personalities onto them, thereby revealing a variety of unconscious conflicts and motivations.” (Aronow; p 25)

Dispositional personality theories are quite different from biological personality theories. The two will be compared and dissected in this article. The Big Five Personality Test will also be analyzed and how it is used to study personality will be examined.

The Rorschach inkblot test is one of the most widely known psychological projective test of personality, and the most controversial. In general, projective tests are psychoanalytically based tools that assist clients to reveal their unconscious conflicts via responses towards ambiguous stimuli, and can also help psychologists to determine psychological disorders. Specifically, the Rorschach allows individuals to interpret a series of abstract inkblots based on their emotional and cognitive function, as well as interaction (Barlow & Durand, 2009).

This paper introduces the overview of personality assessment approaches in use currently in society. It proceeds to review the big five personality measures, its validity in prediction of personality types (Archer, 2011). The topic on MIPS questionnaires use in personality measurements and scoring methods used by the system is reviewed. Aspects on the social desirability trait and the distortion produced in responses to evaluation questionnaires, being a significant part of the problems in personality assessment is examined. Social desirability does not have an influence on the predictive validity of personality assessments. It is not related to performance in the job. Various strategies used for reduction of social desirability have been studied. The various tools used in assessments are recapitulated including some methodological aspects (Weiner, 2009). Cultural aspects in evaluation of personality discussed are touched upon. Two case studies are used to show the real life situation of personality assessment.

Bornstein, R. F. (2007). Toward a process-based framework for classifying personality tests [Peer comments on the journal article “Advancing personality assessment terminology: time to retire ”objective“ and ”projective“ as personality test descriptors” by G. J. Meyer, & J. E. Kurtz. Journal of personality assessment, 2 (89), 202-207.

The next Rorschach test is used to determine the psychological traits of personality. The test originally was created in 1920 to determine thought disorder. It was developed from the observation that schizophrenia patients often interpret ambiguous images in very unusual ways. During the test, the participant is shown a series of inkblot cards and directed to respond to each with what the inkblot looks like.

Did you ever ask yourself who you really are? The Rorschach test tries to answer to this question. The Rorschach test is a projective test which means the subjects projects his unconscious mind and thoughts in the image to describe and explain it. There are a lot of different projective tests, but in this case, an inkblot test. In this essay we will discuss whether this test is still valid or not. We are firstly going to present you the creator of this test and what it is all about, after that, we will present you the different inkblots and what they reveal, and finally we will debate on the reasons that pushes this test to be more invalid than valid.

For psychologists, one of the more popular theories espoused is the trait approach to personality, or “the idea that people have consistent personality characteristics that can be measured and studied” (Kalat, 2002, 512). However there are several problems that arise. First, there are significant cross-cultural differences, so one set of personality traits for one culture may differ considerably for another. The next problem would concern the creation of a test that could accurately measure these traits. While psychologists have for the most part addressed these issues, I will focus on the latter of the two. There has been a

The Rorschach is a projective personality test, which measures personality functioning and assess personality structure. This instrument was published originally in 1921 by Rorschach. Although there were inkblot tests existed prior to the Rorschach, this was the first empirically based system. The assessor interprets the client’s responses to 10 bilaterally symmetrical inkblot images (Groth-Marnat, 2009). The images are ambiguous and non-figurative in nature. Some of the images are in black and white and others contain colors. The Rorschach differs from other projective tests such as Thematic Appercepetion test (TAT). The Rorschach is known as a type of associative or structural technique whereas TAT is a type of construction technique (Campos, 2011). The scoring of responses is done according to the location (or the

Triandis (2000b) supports that cross-cultural and indigenous psychologists do not use the same personality tests instead the psychologist constructs an equivalent measure taking into consideration the sensitivity of the culture.

The study of personality traits is beneficial in identifying the many variables that exist from human to human; the combinations of these variables provide us with a true level of individuality and uniqueness. In the field of psychology, trait theory is considered to be a key approach to the study of human personality (Crowne, 2007; Burton, Westen & Kowalski, 2009). This paper aims to identify a number of significant contributors who have played crucial roles in both the development and application of trait theory. This paper then moves focus to these theorists, outlining their theory and analysing both the strengths and weaknesses of those theories. An illustration of the methods used in trait measurement is given and includes the

The historical use of the terms objective and projective to classify a personality test, and the problems with such classification.

Psychological tests and or psychological assessments are an important asset in the field of psychology. These tests are designed to measure people’s characteristics which pertain to behavior. There are a variety of different types of tests that can be used to assess different types of behaviors. According to the specific behavior or behaviors being assessed, tests are categorized into two types, ability tests and personality tests. Ability tests, which encompass achievement, aptitude, and intelligence testing are used to determine capacity or potential by measuring scores based on speed, accuracy, or both. On the other hand, personality tests, which include structured or projective are used to determine behavior traits, that may be overt

Projective tests allow many psychologists to assess unconscious aspects of personality, a great advantage of projective testing is that since the subject doesn't know how can his or her response will be interpreted dues to the fact that there is no grading scale to go by, the subject is not easily led to lie or fake his or her personality traits. On the downside the responder's attitude can easily be influenced by the test setting, also since there is no grading scale the test results tend to lack validity and reliability, since the results may vary by examiners.