Historical and Contemporary Approaches to Personality Assessment

UPI Study › Courses › Psychology of Personality › Free lessons › Lesson 2.3 Free with a free account

Historical and Contemporary Approaches to Personality Assessment

Psychology of Personality · Chapter 2: Methods and Ethics in Personality ResearchSection 2.3 · lesson 8 of 838 min · free with a free account

← Bias, Practical Application, and Research Integrity in Personality StudiesNext lesson: Trait Assessment, OCEAN Model, and Fundamental Attribution Error →

Earn 3 college credits for Psychology of PersonalityRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Psychology 300 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Psychology of Personality · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

Methods survived because they were checkable, not because they felt insightful.

  • Explain why physiognomy and phrenology failed
  • Describe empirical keying and what it displaced
  • Contrast interpretive richness with replicability
  • Explain how standardisation supports fairness

Free study notes

Get this lesson's notes by email

The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.

One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

Transcript

Everything said in the video, section by section (1,059 words). Read along, or search it.

Methods and Ethics in Personality Research

Historical and Contemporary Approaches to Personality Assessment

For most of its history, personality assessment meant an expert looking at you and forming a view. The story of this section is how that stopped being good enough. We will trace assessment from physiognomy through to multi-source measurement. We will look at empirical keying, which changed what an item had to justify. We will weigh interpretive richness against replicability, honestly, because both are real. And we will see why standardisation turns out to be a fairness question, not just a precision one.

The Arc

From Reading Faces to Reporting Error

Personality assessment has evolved from intuitive, observational practices. Toward systematic, evidence-based measurement. Early approaches relied on physiognomy and phrenology. These inferred character from physical features. The face, and the shape of the skull. And they lacked empirical support. Phrenology in particular was elaborate, confident, and entirely wrong. Notice the reason they were abandoned, because it is the theme of the whole section. Not because they were distasteful, or old-fashioned. They were abandoned because they did not work when anyone checked. Methods survived, in the end, not because they felt insightful. But because they demonstrated reliability and validity, across examiners and across populations.

Milestones

Five Periods, One Direction of Travel

The development falls into five recognisable periods. Before nineteen hundred, physiognomy and phrenology. Inference from appearance. From nineteen hundred to nineteen thirty, early self-report. The first structured inventories. From nineteen forty to nineteen sixty, empirical keying. Items chosen by data. From nineteen eighty to two thousand, multitrait models. Validated trait structures. And from two thousand onward, multi-source integration, with quantified measurement error. Read across those five and the direction is consistent. Each period asks the method to justify itself in a way the previous one did not.

First Shift

Procedures Another Examiner Could Repeat

The first real shift came in the early twentieth century. It introduced structured self-report inventories, and projective techniques. What made this an advance was not accuracy. It was standardisation. These marked a shift toward procedures that could be replicated across examiners. And that changes what is possible to learn. Whether the answer was right becomes a question you can at least ask. A method nobody else can run gives you no way to discover that it is wrong. Replicability is what makes error visible in the first place.

Empirical Keying

Keep the Item That Works, Not the One That Reads Well

The mid-century brought something more radical. Empirically keyed instruments. In these, items were retained only if they statistically distinguished groups. Regardless of their surface meaning. That last clause is the part worth pausing on. An item that appears unrelated to the construct stays in, if it discriminates between groups. And an item that reads as obviously relevant gets dropped, if it does not. The item's job is to sort people correctly. Not to look appropriate. This data-driven philosophy displaced reliance on theoretical intuition alone. The designer's judgement about what an item ought to measure. Stopped being sufficient grounds for keeping it in the test.

The Standard

Prove It Before You Decide With It

Empirical keying left behind an expectation that outlived the specific technique. That assessment tools must demonstrate measurable reliability and validity. Before being trusted for important decisions. Those last two words are doing real work. A method used for casual self-reflection carries a lower burden of proof. Than one used in hiring, in custody proceedings, or in diagnosis. The evidential requirement scales with the consequence for the person being assessed. It does not scale with the confidence of the person doing the assessing. Those two things come apart more often than you would like.

The Old Strength

Rich Interpretation, Inconsistent Conclusions

It would be unfair to dismiss the historical methods, so state their strength plainly. They often prized rich, holistic interpretation by a skilled clinician. That is a genuine strength, and it is why the tradition persisted for so long. But they struggled with consistency. Two examiners could reach different conclusions from the same material. Think about what that implies. If they disagree, at least one of them is wrong. And nothing in the method tells you which one. For a decision that affects someone's life, that is not a small defect. It means the outcome depended in part on which clinician the person happened to see.

The Trade

What Standardisation Costs and What It Buys

Modern methods make a deliberate trade, and it is worth naming both sides. What is given up is some interpretive richness. A fixed inventory cannot follow an unexpected thread the way a skilled interviewer can. What is gained is replicability, and fairness across diverse populations. Through standardisation, normative comparison, and statistical evaluation. The fairness half is the one that gets underrated. Uniform administration and norm-referenced scoring mean two people are compared on the same basis. Rather than through two different examiners' impressions of them. That is not a technical nicety. It is the difference between a decision and a preference.

Contemporary

Four Sources, One Error Estimate

Contemporary assessment increasingly integrates multiple sources of information. Self-report. How the person describes themselves. Informant ratings. How someone who knows them well describes them. Behavioural data. What they actually did. And even digital traces. But the number of sources is not the important part. These are integrated within a framework that quantifies measurement error. Which changes what disagreement between sources means. If self-report and informant rating diverge, that divergence is information. It is not an embarrassment to be smoothed over before publication. A person may genuinely describe themselves in ways their colleagues would not recognise. That gap is often the most interesting thing in the file.

Not Discarded

Judgement Kept, and Made Accountable

One thing the modern approach does not do is discard the earlier insights. It situates them inside a validated structure. So that clinical judgement is informed by psychometric evidence. And accountable to it. Both halves of that phrase are load-bearing. Judgement without evidence is unaccountable, which is where the old methods failed. Evidence without judgement cannot interpret a case the norms do not describe. And such cases arrive regularly. So the history is not really a story about intuition being defeated. It is a story about intuition being given something to answer to.

Consolidate

When Two Clinicians Start Agreeing

Here is the improvement in its most concrete form. A clinic replaces an unstructured intake interview. With a standardised inventory, plus an informant questionnaire. Diagnostic agreement between clinicians rises sharply. Because conclusions now rest on comparable, norm-referenced data. Rather than on two separate impressions of the same conversation. The recipe underneath is unglamorous, and it works. Develop items empirically. Establish norms. And report reliability and validity for every instrument you intend to make decisions with. Consistency across examiners is not a bureaucratic virtue. It is what makes the decision about the person, rather than about the assessor.

About Psychology of Personality at UPI Study

Psychology of Personality (Psychology 300) is a self-paced online course of 83 video lessons in 13 chapters, from Freud, Adler and Jung to biological, behavioral, cognitive, existential and humanistic theories, traits, personality disorders and culture. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.

Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →

Compare: Abnormal Psychology vs Psychology of Personality

Why take it here

Why students take Psychology of Personality with UPI Study

What makes each person who they arePsychology of Personality compares the major explanations of why people differ: psychoanalytic and neo-analytic theories, biology and evolution, learning, cognition, existential and humanistic views, and trait models, plus how personality is measured and studied. It is a common course in psychology degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Where the credit goes

Universities that work with NCCRS

Psychology of Personality carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Thomas Edison State UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks with NCCRS +many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →

Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.

FAQ

Questions students ask us

About Historical and Contemporary Approaches to Personality Assessment

What were phrenology and physiognomy?
Physiognomy and phrenology were early attempts to infer character from physical features, physiognomy from the face and phrenology from the shape of the skull. Both were prominent before 1900 and both lacked empirical support. They were abandoned not because they seemed old-fashioned but because they did not work when anyone checked. Their failure set the standard that assessment methods must demonstrate reliability and validity across examiners and populations before they are trusted.
What is empirical keying in personality testing?
Empirical keying is a test-construction method in which items are kept only if they statistically distinguish between groups, regardless of what the items seem to be about. An item that looks unrelated to the trait stays if it separates the groups, while an obviously relevant item is dropped if it does not. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), first published in the 1940s, is the best-known empirically keyed test. The approach replaced reliance on designers' intuition alone.
Why is standardization important in personality assessment?
Standardization matters because it makes assessment replicable and fair. With uniform administration and norm-referenced scoring, two people are compared on the same basis rather than through different examiners' impressions. Older holistic methods prized a skilled clinician's interpretation, but two examiners could reach different conclusions from the same material, so outcomes depended partly on which clinician a person saw. Standardization trades some interpretive richness for consistency, which matters most in hiring, custody, and diagnosis.
What is multi-source personality assessment?
Multi-source assessment combines several kinds of information, such as self-reports, ratings from informants who know the person well, behavioral data, and digital traces, within a framework that quantifies measurement error. Disagreement between sources is treated as information rather than a flaw; a person may describe themselves differently from how colleagues see them. Clinical judgment still plays a role, but it is informed by, and accountable to, psychometric evidence.

About the Psychology of Personality course

How many college credits is Psychology of Personality?
Psychology of Personality (Psychology 300) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Psychology of Personality cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 83 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. Students who want several courses choose UPI Study PRO instead.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Psychology of Personality take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 83 lessons total about 8 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Psychology of Personality.

83 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.

Enroll in Psychology of Personality →Download the syllabusEvery course with PRO →
Psychology of Personality
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →