Evaluation of Projective Techniques PDF

Preview

Summary

PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING...

Description

Evaluation of Projective Techniques: 1. Rapport and applicability:      

Most projective techniques help effectively in breaking the ice It helps in diverting the individual’s attention away from herself or himself and thus reduces embarrassment and defensiveness It offers no threat to the respondent’s prestige since any response one give is “right” Certain techniques may be useful with young children, illiterates and persons with language difficulties or speech defects Non verbal media would be readily applicable to all these groups Projective techniques for such verbally limited groups may help the test taker to communicate with the examiner. It also helps individuals to clarify some aspects of their own behaviour that they had not verbalised

1. Faking:  



They are less susceptible to faking then self report inventories Even if an individual has some psychological sophistication and is familiar with the general nature of a particular instrument, it is still unlikely that he or she can predict the intricate ways in which the responses will be scored and interpreted. Also the respondent becomes absorbed in the task and hence is less likely to resort to the customary disguises and restraints of interpersonal communication However they cannot be assumed to be completely immune to Faking. Significant differences do occur when respondents are instructed to alter their responses so as to create a favourable or unfavourable impressions or when they are given statements suggesting that certain types of responses are not desirable. There are many evidences that suggest that responses to projective tests can in fact be successfully altered in both fake good and fake bad direction , although the latter may be easier to accomplish. The alert examiner is alert to signs of faking both in terms of the individual responses and response patterns and in inconsistencies with other sources of data about the respondent

1. Examiner and situational variables:  





Projective techniques are inadequately standardised with regards to administration and scoring There is evidence which suggests that subtle differences in phrasing or verbal instructions and in examiner-examinee relationships can alter performance on these tests Even when employing identical instructions, some examiners may be more encouraging or reassuring, others more threatening, owing to their general manner and appearance. Such differences may affect response productivity, defensiveness, stereotypy, imaginativeness and other basic performance characteristics. Therefore administration and testing conditions assume greater significance Also there is lack of objectivity in scoring and interpretation as it depends on the skill and clinical experience of the examiner



Most disturbing aspect is that final interpretation of the projective test responses may reveal more about the theoretical orientation, favourite hypothesis ad personal idiosyncrasies of the examiner than it does about the examinee’s personality dynamics

1. Norms:  





Data maybe completely lacking, grossly inadequate, or based on vaguely described population In absence of adequate objective norms, the clinician fall back on her or his general clinical experience to interpret projective test performance. But this is subject to distortions of memory and are reflections of theoretical bias, preconceptions and other idiosyncrasies of the clinician Also any one clinician’s contacts may have been limited to people of certain level of education, socioeconomic level, sex ratio, age distribution or other characteristics and can lead to produce a misleading picture Interpretation of projective test performance often involves subgroup norms of either subjective or an objective nature. Such norms may lead to faulty interpretations unless the subgroups were equated in other respects. Systematic or constant errors may also operate in the comparison of various psychiatric syndromes

1. Reliability:   



The technique’s remain highly controversial. Scorer reliability becomes an important consideration a proper measure of scorer reliability should not only include the objective and preliminary scoring but also the final integrative and interpretive stages With long intervals, the test should detect genuine personality changes that may occur. With short intervals a retest may show no more than recall of original responses. However there are insignificant correlations found and thus retest reliability has a problem sometimes the scores derived from projective techniques are based on very inadequate response samples

1. Validity: 

 

 

Most of the studies for criterion validation has been done by comparing the performance of contrasted groups such as occupational or diagnostic groups. These groups often differ in other respects such as age or education Procedural deficiencies in either experimental controls or statistical analysis or both have led to validation studies being inconclusive Other common source of spurious validity data is failure to cross-validate. Other form of error is illustrated by stereotype accuracy. For eg certain descriptive statements may apply widely to persons in general, as sampled by particular investigation Agreement between criterion and test data with regard to such statements would therefore yield a spurious impression of validity Another is source of error is illusory validation. This phenomenon may account in part for the continued use of instruments and systems of diagnostic signs for which the empirical validity findings are predominantly negative. We tend to notice and recall whatever fits our expectations and we tend to ignore and forget whatever is contrary to our expectations. This mechanism may actually interfere with the

   

discovery and use of valid diagnostic signs in the course of clinical observation by clinicians who are strongly wedded to a particular diagnostic system Most projective techniques have low validity coefficients Most manuals support research in support of the test and not the research against it which is inappropriate The race and gender of the tester, the mood of the tester while administering the test and what the subject thinks the test is measuring has an effect on the outcome Since these tests measure all aspects of personality, as compared to other techniques that focus on one or couple of aspects, it is fair to say that a test that claims to measures such a wide range could be questioned on its validity and effectiveness

The Projective Hypothesis: 

 







 

 

The traditional assumption for projective techniques is that the individual’s responses to the ambiguous stimuli presented to him/her reflect significant and enduring personality traits However there are other factors also that influence the same as can be seen by retest reliability Direct evidence has shown susceptibility of projective test responses to temporary responses and states such as hunger, sleep deprivation, drugs, anxiety and frustration can markedly affect the response. Similarly responses also found to be affected by the instructional sets, examiner characteristics and the respondent’s perception of the testing situation, verbal ability Due to this, projective test responses can be meaningfully interpreted only when the examiner has extensive information about the circumstances under which they were obtained and the aptitudes and experiential background of the respondent Also there have been questions around using unstructured or ambiguous stimuli. As they are ambiguous for both the examiner and the examinee, they tend to increase ambiguity in interpretation of the examinee’s response With structured stimuli, it is possible to select the relevant stimuli on the characteristics to be assessed and to vary the nature of the stimuli to explore fully a given personality dimension This makes for a clearer interpretation of test performance than is possible in case of unstructured stimuli There is evidence against common assumption of less structured the stimuli, more likely they are to elicit projection and to tap deep layers of personality. Infact, the relation between ambiguity and projection appears to be non-linear with an intermediate degree of ambiguity representing an optimum for purposes of projection The assumption that fantasy reveals covert motivational dispositions is also being questioned Many types of research are doubting the various aspects of projective hypothesis as there is ample evidence that other aspect may account for the individual’s responses to unstructured or ambiguous stimuli

Projective Techniques as Psychometric Instruments:  

Many projective techniques are found to be lacking when evaluated in accordance with test standards However the use of projective techniques, despite the above remains unchanged and is maybe undergoing a growth spurt



Lack of scientific evidence to support them and their continued popularity has been referred to as projective paradox

Projective Techniques as clinical tools:     

 

  

 

Most projective instruments are regarded as clinical tools they may serve as a supplementary qualitative interviewing aid in the hands of a skilled clinician Their value as clinical tools is proportional to the skill of the clinician and hence cannot be assessed independently of the clinician using them Elaborate scoring systems that give quantitative scores are wasteful and misleading The value of these techniques are more likely to have an impact if they are interpreted by qualitative, clinical procedures that when they are quantitatively scored and interpreted as if they were objective psychometric instruments In India, projective techniques re widely used as clinical tools. Clinical psychologists use this tool alongwith interviews, case interviews or historical data Such processes are helpful, provided they are not accepted as final but are constantly tests against information elicited through subsequent inquiry, test responses, reaction to therapy or other behaviour on part of the client Decisions should not be based on any single datum or score obtained from such sources These techniques serve best in sequential decisions, by suggesting leads for further exploration or hypotheses about the individual for subsequent verification Objective psychometric tests characteristically yield a narrow band of information at a high level of dependability. Projective and interviewing techniques provide a much wider range of information of lower dependability. The kinds of data furnished by any one projective technique may vary from individual to individual Lack of uniformity in the kinds of information provided in individual cases helps to explain the low validities found when projective test responses are analysed for any single trait across a group of persons...