Personality Testing: Providing and Exhaustive and Clinically Useful Assessment
Personality is a large and complex psychological concept that is vastly assessed and researched. While many different tests exist, the most widely used and researched measure of personality traits is The Big 5 Personality Traits, comprising openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. However, what these traits are concretely measuring, and how well they measure it has been an important matter of debate in the literature.
Personality traits have historically been defined and assessed in terms of behaviors, but as Pytlik Zilling and colleagues (2002) suggest, they also have important roots and ramifications in terms of affect and cognition. An issue that is currently present in the assessment of personality traits is that many tests and inventories use broad operational definitions of the five personality traits with little regards to the differences between the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) dimensions. This can be a significant problem, as such tests are indeed based on research, but the dissemination and real-world practical implications may often be neglected. For instance, neuroticism is mostly rooted in the affect component, while openness relates more strongly to cognition (Pytlik Zilling et al, 2002). Such findings have important implications in how personality traits should be measured, and which types of questions and items should be predominantly used in tests and questionnaires. Indeed, predictive value and applicability to real-life outcomes are crucial in order for personality tests to be useful and informative.
Moreover, tests assessing the big 5 traits hardly provide an exhaustive account of one’s personality. A central part of it stems from personal story, which is most often not assessed by widely used personality inventories such as the MMPI or the CPI. Goldberg and Crespo (2003) point out the important role the clinician has in assessing personality and personal story in terms of treatment outcomes. Not only will the clinician get to know and understand the patient better, a stronger therapeutic alliance will be built. The patient, through semi-structured interviews will also improve their self-knowledge (Goldberg & Crespo, 2003). The personal-story method is an example of how personality assessment can be useful in significant clinical outcomes, and why traits alone may not be enough. Indeed, a clinician can hardly help a patient without knowing where they are coming from and what they have been through. Personality traits can however become very practical in therapy such as social skills training (SST); for instance, the psychologist can identify low levels of extraversion or openness, or high levels of neuroticism that may be important to address for a patient who needs to improve their social interactions.
Personality assessments and tests should include both measures of traits, and personal narrative. Moreover, concrete outcomes, implications, and usability should be an integrated part of the construction process of any research-based personality assessment. Such tests should also be paired with an action/treatment plan that relates to why the subject or patient’s personality is being assessed. Finally, research on the dissemination and predictive value of the combination of different inventories or clinical interventions in personality is also crucial.
REFERENCES
Goldberg, C. & Crespo, V. R. (2003). The Personal-Story Approach. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 57(3), 337–347.
Pytlik Zilling, L. M., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbier, R. A. (2002). What do We Assess When We Assess a Big 5 Trait? A Content Analysis of the Affective, Behavioral, and Cognitive Processes Represented in Big 5 Personality Inventories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 847–858.
