Selecting and Applying Personality Assessment Techniques

UPI Study › Courses › Psychology of Personality › Free lessons › Lesson 2.10 Free with a free account

Selecting and Applying Personality Assessment Techniques

Psychology of Personality · Chapter 2: Methods and Ethics in Personality ResearchSection 2.10 · lesson 15 of 838 min · free with a free account

← Affective Communication and Charisma in Personality EvaluationNext lesson: Personality Research Design: Validity, Reliability, and Practical Outcomes →

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

The best instrument is the one validated for this purpose, not the most respected one.

  • Name the factors that should drive instrument selection
  • Explain why constraints can outweigh sophistication
  • Match assessment method to context
  • Act correctly when independent methods disagree

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 (980 words). Read along, or search it.

Methods and Ethics in Personality Research

Selecting and Applying Personality Assessment Techniques

There is a reliable way to choose the wrong assessment instrument. Pick the one with the best reputation, and worry about fit afterwards. This section is about the order those two considerations should come in. We will look at what should actually drive selection. Why practical constraints can outweigh theoretical sophistication. How context changes the priorities entirely. And what a careful assessor does when two independent methods disagree.

Start Here

Three Questions Before Any Instrument

Choosing an assessment technique begins with three questions, and none of them is about the instrument. First, what is the purpose of the assessment? What question is it being asked to answer? Second, who is the population involved? Third, what decisions will the results inform? That third question sets how much evidence the instrument has to carry. A screening result that leads to a conversation is one thing. A result that leads to a hiring rejection is another. And the answer follows from those three. The most defensible choice is the instrument with documented evidence of suitability. For that specific purpose, and that specific group. Not the instrument with the strongest reputation in the field generally.

Different Demands

The Same Test Is Not Equally Good Everywhere

A clinical diagnosis, a hiring screen, and a research study are not the same task. They impose different demands on reliability, validity, time and cost. And those four trade against one another constantly. A research study can tolerate a two-hour instrument that a hiring process cannot. A hiring process must clear a fairness bar that a study does not face in the same form. So a technique is never simply good or bad in isolation. It is suited, or unsuited, to a particular use. Which means the use has to be specified before the judgement can even be made. Asking whether a test is good is not yet a well-formed question.

The Sequence

How the Choice Actually Gets Made

The selection process has a shape, and it runs in this order. Purpose. What question is being answered. Population. Who is being assessed, and which norms therefore apply. Decision. What follows from the result once it exists. Feasibility. Time, cost, training, and language. And finally, documented fit. Evidence of suitability for this specific use. Notice that the instrument is chosen last, not first. Reversing that order is the most common way this goes wrong. Because a chosen instrument tends to redefine the question to suit itself.

Constraints

Four Things That Decide What Is Even Possible

Practical constraints also shape selection, and they are not minor. Administration time. The examiner training required to use the instrument properly. Language and cultural appropriateness. And the availability of relevant norms. It is tempting to treat these as compromises, to be apologised for in a limitations section. They are not. An instrument that cannot be administered properly in the conditions available. Will not produce valid scores. Feasibility is part of validity, in practice if not in theory.

The Rule

Prestige Is Not Evidence

Which leads to a rule that people find uncomfortable. A theoretically excellent instrument that lacks norms for the population at hand. May be a poorer choice than a simpler tool that has been properly validated for that group. The reason is straightforward once stated. Without appropriate norms, a score has nothing meaningful to be compared against. A precise number, referenced to the wrong population, is not precision. This is where professional judgement most often bends. The prestigious instrument is easier to defend socially. And harder to defend evidentially. Suitability, not reputation, determines defensible results.

By Context

What Each Setting Prioritises

Different contexts call for different combinations of methods. Clinical settings prioritise diagnostic accuracy. Typically pairing a structured interview with self-report and informant data. Organisational settings emphasise fairness and job relevance. Using validated work measures. Research settings prioritise psychometric strength, with instruments fitted to the hypothesis. Educational settings need appropriate norms, and therefore norm-referenced tools. And forensic settings prioritise defensibility above all. Which means multimethod work, thoroughly documented. Matching method to context strengthens the usefulness of the conclusions. And, just as importantly, their defensibility afterwards.

Triangulate

Independent Sources, Not More of the Same

Across all of these contexts, one principle holds. Multimethod assessment improves accuracy. By triangulating evidence from independent sources. The word independent is carrying the entire argument there. Three self-report inventories are not three sources. They share the same channel, and therefore the same vulnerabilities. Self-presentation among them. Adding a fourth questionnaire increases the volume of evidence, and not its independence.

Reading Results

Agreement Is Confidence, Disagreement Is Information

Once you have several independent methods, their agreement becomes informative. Convergence among methods increases confidence. Independent routes arriving at the same place is evidence about the person. Rather than evidence about any one instrument. Divergence flags the need for caution, and for further inquiry. It is not a result to be averaged away into a tidy summary. It is a signal that something has not yet been understood. The temptation, when methods disagree, is to pick the source you trust more. And to move on with a clean answer. That converts a genuine finding about uncertainty. Into a false finding about the person.

Reporting

Say What the Technique Can Support

Application also includes how results are communicated. Appropriately to the audience receiving them. A clinician, a manager, and a court need different framings of the same finding. And it includes respecting the boundaries of what each technique can legitimately support. Every instrument has a range of claims it is able to carry. Stating a conclusion outside that range is a reporting failure. Even when the score itself was perfectly accurate. The error is in the sentence, not in the number.

Consolidate

The Prestigious Test That Was Wrong for the Child

Close with a decision made well. A school psychologist needs a quick, well-normed screen for a young student. One available instrument is longer, more prestigious, and normed on adults. She chooses the validated brief inventory instead. Because the longer instrument, despite its prestige, lacks appropriate norms for children. Its sophistication cannot substitute for comparison data it does not have. That single decision contains the whole section. The best technique is not the most sophisticated one available. It is the one with documented validity for this purpose, this population, and this decision. Used within a multimethod design that can be checked afterwards.

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 Selecting and Applying Personality Assessment Techniques

How do you choose the right personality assessment?
Choose an assessment by first defining the purpose, the population being assessed, and the decisions the results will inform, then checking feasibility and documented fit; the instrument comes last. The most defensible choice is the one with evidence of suitability for that specific purpose and group, not the one with the strongest reputation. Picking a famous test first tends to reshape the question to fit the instrument.
Why do norms matter when selecting a personality test?
Norms matter because a score means something only when compared with an appropriate reference group. A sophisticated instrument without norms for the population being assessed may be a poorer choice than a simpler tool validated for that group. A school psychologist screening a young student, for example, should prefer a brief inventory normed on children over a longer, more prestigious test normed on adults. A precise number referenced to the wrong population is not real precision.
How do assessment priorities differ in clinical, workplace, and forensic settings?
Each setting prioritizes something different. Clinical assessment emphasizes diagnostic accuracy, often pairing a structured interview with self-report and informant data. Organizational assessment emphasizes fairness and job relevance using validated work measures. Research prioritizes psychometric strength fitted to the hypothesis, and educational settings need norm-referenced tools. Forensic assessment prioritizes defensibility above all, which means thoroughly documented multimethod work. Practical limits such as administration time, examiner training, and language also shape the choice.
What should an assessor do when different assessment methods disagree?
When independent methods disagree, the divergence should be treated as a reason for caution and further inquiry, not averaged away. Multimethod assessment improves accuracy by triangulating independent sources, and agreement among them raises confidence about the person. Three self-report questionnaires are not truly independent, though, because they share the same vulnerabilities, such as self-presentation. Simply picking the more trusted source to get a clean answer turns real uncertainty into a false finding.

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 →