Personality tests have been used for a long period to evaluate the psychological makeup of individuals. The validity and reliability of the various personality tests has been the subject of protracted debates especially along the lines of objective and projective tests. Objective tests have been thought to be more reliable than projective ones (Gregory, 2007). Overall, personality tests have been criticized because the individual undertaking them can give ambiguous generalizations that could apply to any person. MMPI and the Rorschach Inkblot Technique are among the most prominent personality tests.
Comparison and Contrast
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) test is a self-report measure of psychopathology and the personality structures in adults. The Rorschach Inkblot Technique has also been used to determine an individual's personality traits and their emotional functioning. Both tests are aimed at facilitating the discovery of deviations in the mental processes of patients with the view of determining personality processes (Butcher & Williams, 2009). The tests are undertaken then analyzed scientifically by psychologists whose interpretations have evolved over time owing to the expanding research in the field of psychology.
Another comparison between the two is that they can be susceptible to conscious efforts (by the individuals undertaking the test) to manage the impression they make. For patients undertaking MMPI tests, they must be willing to offer an accurate account of their psychological attributes. However, they might choose not to do so. On the other hand, individuals undertaking the Rorschach test may also knowingly inhibit some kinds of responses especially those with sexual content. Ultimately, because there is no outright way of how the responses from the tests should be analysed, impression management is more likely with Rorschach tests as opposed to MMPI tests. Furthermore, the purposes of each of the tests are parallel. MMPI tests are effective when obtaining an individual's psychological attributes about specific symptoms. On the other hand, Rorschach tests can be instrumental when the aim is to get information about general embedded personality characteristics such as broad mental attributes. The ability of the MMPI to diagnose specific psychological deviations serves as its strength over Rorschach.
The MMPI consists of ten clinical scales, which are aimed at assessing ten main categories of psychological deficiencies. Within each of the ten scales, there are several items, which one is tested on during the process. The items examined add up to five hundred and sixty-seven. It is on top of four validity scales that include the Lie (L) scale, the F scale, the back F scale and the K scale. The validity scales are intended to determine the individual's test taking attitudes. In contrast, the Rorschach technique makes use of ten official inkblots against which the tester analyzes the individual. As a projective technique, it is based on the assumption that patients who view the inkblots, which represent neutral and ambiguous stimuli, will be induced to portray their own personalities (Butcher & Williams, 2009). The aim is to provide information about personality variables.
The other difference between the two approaches is related to what the patient is required to do to complete the test. The MMPI test, which is based on self-assessment, requires the patient to think that the attributes presented to the tester are characteristic of themselves. The Rorschach method, on the other hand, requires that patients sit with their testers. They then have a look at the ten inkblots after which they ought to formulate perceptions based on the stimuli aroused by the inkblot. The individual then makes the decision on whether or not to share with the tester.
The skills required to administer and analyze the two tests are quite different. Despite MMPI being a closed test (that is, it requires a specialist), the skill required is lesser compared to that of Rorschach inkblot. More sophistication is needed to perform the latter test. It requires the examiner to be neutral as well as having the ability to create an inviting atmosphere for the patient. Furthermore, individuals that undertake MMPI tests must have an understanding of the items to be tested on as determined by the true, false validity scale. However, in Rorschach method, the responsibility of decoding the responses lies with the tester as opposed to the subject (Mayer, 1997).
Validity
MMPI draws its validity from its ability to be free of bias and the influence of the examiner’s own beliefs. The Rorschach test in a bid to eliminate the perception of bias, has gone through a standardization process, however it lacks a scoring validity as there is no consistency of results irrespective of the person administering the test (Morgeson, Dipboye, Murphy, & Schmitt, 2007).
Scenario
In the case of a sexually abused nine year-old girl, Rorschach Inkblot may result in a successful diagnosis especially when the patient is placed under the Exner scoring system. Rorschach approach is able to indirectly evaluate a wide range of personality traits which provide a high level of comparable reliability among the various traits (Gregory, 2007). Consequently, the tester may be able to determine differential diagnosis that involves some specific patterns of personality trait functioning. On the downside, no specific cluster of symptoms has been found to be unique to sexually abused girls of nine years. As such, a girl may exhibit externalizing symptoms which may be wrongfully diagnosed using the Rorschach approach as resulting from sexual abuse. It may further disadvantage the child as she will undergo trauma as a result of the misdiagnosis.
Influence of Interview
Consequently, as a result of the scoring reliability, a clinical interview with an examiner who is bias will lead to a positive diagnosis in the first scenario as opposed to the second one that harms the patient. Therefore, the weakness of the Rorschach approach is that it lends itself to probability rather than fact (Mayer, 1997).
Use of Tests across Age
In administering the Rorschach test, it is important for the tester to consider the age of the patient. Special considerations are necessary for an eighty-five old as he faces unique challenges. They include depleted vision, some cognitive impairment and probable hearing loss (Molinari, 1998). As a result, the examiner needs to adequately modify the environment. A sixteen-year old has sharp cognitive and physical abilities which tend to elevate their scores on the test hence may be misdiagnosed for psychopathology. The tester needs to be aware of such variations. For an eight-year old, common psychopathologies are not as prevalent hence precise measures are required that may not be needed in evaluating psychological disorders in adolescents and the old.
Ultimately, the use of either projective or objective personality tests is not meant to conflict each other. In fact, clinicians should be encouraged to use MMPI and Rorschach Inkblot complementarily rather than as diverging personality tests. It is especially the case given that the scope and objectives of the two tests are not similar. Clinicians also ought to be adequately facilitated in terms of training to ensure that they are well versed with how to deal with the various subsets of their subjects in terms of age and the state of psychopathology.
References
Butcher, J. N., & Williams, C. L. (2009). "Personality assessment with the mmpi-2: historical
roots, international adaptations, and current challenges." Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being 1 (1): 105–135.
Gregory, R. (2007). Psychological Testing: History, Principles, and Applications. Boston:
Pearson.
Mayer, G. (1997). On the integration of personality assessment methods: The Rorschach and
MMPI. Journal of personality assessment68 (2) , 297-330. Retrieved from http://psychology.utoledo.edu/images/users/16/Meyer%20%281997,%20JPA%29%20On%20the%20Integration%20of%20Assessment%20Methods.pdf
Molinari, V (1998). What practitioners should know about working with older adults.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 29, No. 5, 413-427
Morgeson, F., Dipboye, R., Murphy, K & Schmitt, N. (2007). Reconsidering the use of
personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60, 683
72. Retrieved from https://msu.edu/~morgeson/morgeson_campion_dipboye_hollenbeck_murphy_schmitt_2007a.pdf
