1 / 35

Measuring Personality and Individual Differences

Measuring Personality and Individual Differences. Personality through Projection. Rorschach Inkblot (10 Cards) John Exner’s Comprehensive Scoring System based on form, perceived movement, and color. Thematic Apperception Test (TAT, 31 Pictures)

karah
Télécharger la présentation

Measuring Personality and Individual Differences

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Measuring Personality and Individual Differences

  2. Personality through Projection

  3. Rorschach Inkblot (10 Cards) John Exner’s Comprehensive Scoring System based on form, perceived movement, and color

  4. Thematic Apperception Test (TAT, 31 Pictures) Henry Murray & Christina Morgan, Harvard, 1930s

  5. Sentence Completion

  6. Holaday et al. (2000). Sentence completion tests: A review of the literature and results of a survey of members of the Society for Personality Assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74, 371-383. Rotter, J.B. & Rafferty, J.E. (1950). The Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank Manual: College form. New York: Psychological Corporation.

  7. Personality Through Direct Testing Criterion Keying Approach (Clinical Method) • Behavioral descriptions as items • Comparing normal with the mentally ill • Often used in clinical settings • e.g., MMPI

  8. Description of MMPI-2 Content Scales _______________________________________________________ ANX(ANXIETY)23 items FRS(FEARS) 23 items OBS(OBSESSIVE)16 items DEP(DEPRESSION) 33 items HEA(HEALTH CONCERNS)36 items BIZ(BIZARRE MENTATION)24 items ANG(ANGER)16 items CYN(CYNICISM)23 items ASP(ANTISOCIAL PRACTICES)22 items TPA(TYPE A)19 items LSE(LOW SELF-ESTEEM) 24 items SOD(SOCIAL DISCOMFORT) 24 items FAM(FAMILY PROBLEMS)25 items WRK(WORK INTERFERENCE) 33 items TRT(NEGATIVE TREATMENT INDICATORS)26 items

  9. Development of the MMPI in 1930s Began with pool of 1000 items Presented items to criterion and control groups Criterion group: psychiatric inpatients at the UM Hospital Control group:700 relatives and visitors of the patients Validation: Criterion group differed from control group at p<.05.

  10. Personality Through Direct Testing Taxonomic Approach (Dictionary Method) • Single adjectives or phrases as items • Factor analysis • Often used in the normal population e.g., Catell 16PF Eysenck Personality Questionnaire NEO-PI

  11. E O N A C The Big Five and NEO-PI

  12. Theory: The Big Five Neurotism Extraversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousness Trust Ideas Order Values Fantasy Actions Anxiety Activity Feelings Warmth Modesty Altruism Aesthetics Depression Dutifulness Competence Deliberation Compliance Assertiveness Vulnerability Impulsiveness Self-Discipline Gregariousness Angry Hostility Positive Emotions Self-Consciousness Straightforwardness Excitement-Seeking Tender-Mindedness Achievement Striving 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Test: NEO-PI

  13. Pyschometric Properties of NEO-PI Adult norms based on 500 men and 500 women matched to US population on age and race. College norms based on cases from 2 sites Internal consistency for domain scores range from .86-.92; Facet scores with median of .71 A huge amount of validity data based on factor analyses and correlations with other tests and across cultures

  14. The Unhappy Person Neuroticism (1) Anxiety Angry Hostility Depression Self-Consciousness Impulsiveness

  15. The Happy Person Extraversion (2) Warmth Gregariousness Assertiveness Activity Excitement-Seeking Positive Emotion

  16. The Intellectual Openness (3) Fantasy Aesthetics Feelings Actions Ideas Values

  17. The Nice Person Agreeableness (4) Trust Straight-forwardness Altruism Compliance Modesty Tender-mindedness

  18. The High Achiever Conscientiousness (5) Competence Order Dutifulness Achievement-striving Self-discipline

  19. Ren Qing 人情 Harmony 和諧 Flexibility 靈活性 Modernization 現代化 Face 面子 Thrift 節儉 Ah Q 阿Q精神 Chinese Personality: Inter Personal Relatedness

  20. Sample Items Ren Qing 人情 • When dealing with institutions, things can work out more smoothly through the connections of friends working inside. 有些事情要通過關係才可以做 • Though I may be perfectly aware of my friends’ lack of ability, if they ask me to find them a good job, I will do my best to help them. 儘管我知道某個朋友很無能 , 也會幫他引荐工作 • When a friend borrows something from me and does not return it, I often feel uneasy about asking him/ her to give it back. 朋友借東西不還 , 我不好意思要

  21. Sample Items Face面子 • Sometimes I pretend I understand a lot, because I do not want others to look down on me. • 不憧裝懂 , 以免別人笑話 • I feel a loss of face to be turned down by others. • 被別人拒絕 , 感到很沒面子 • Sometimes I will insist on giving a friend a decent gift even if it means borrowing money to buy it. • 就是借錢也得送一份像樣的禮物

  22. Sample Items Thrift 節儉 • 少花錢 , 不浪費 Ah Q 阿Q精神 • 出名的人都是靠別人吹捧 , 沒有真本事 • 不上大學有甚麼關係 , 大學畢業還不是找不到工作

  23. A Comparison of Factor Pattern, Item Means, and Standard Deviations for Chinese Sample with Sample Reported by HARTER (1982)

  24. Performance on mathematics test given at three testing periods (1980, 1984, 1990) for students from Japan ( ), Taiwan( ) and the United States( ) Performance on the reading vocabulary test given at two testing periods (1980, 1990) for students from Japan ( ), Taiwan( ) and the United States( )

  25. Attitudes of Japanese (solid), Chinese (open), and American (hatched) mothers toward children’s academic performance as reflected in ratings on a three-point rating scale. Sample sizes for Japan, Taiwan, and United States, respectively:233, 197, and 214 (1980); 157, 104, and 117 (1984); and 258, 238, and 220 (1990).

  26. Factors influencing academic achievement

  27. Findings on Likert-type scale response tendencies: Very Bad Very Good 1 2 3 4 5 6

  28. Note. Points A and C mark the mean American and Chinese ratings, respectively, on the internal and external attribution scales.

  29. Percentages Agreeing With Responsesto Scenarios in Illinois (n=123) and Hong Kong (n=181)

  30. Percentages Agreeing With Responsesto Scenarios in Illinois (n=123) and Hong Kong (n=181)

More Related