Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
strengths and weaknesses of projective tests
sigmund freud theory on unconscious mind
sigmund freud theory on unconscious mind
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: strengths and weaknesses of projective tests
Projective tests are a measure for analyzing personality. They are established in the idea of Sigmund Freud’s theory of unconscious processes. Projective techniques were first sought out as a means for people to unconsciously project their personality on to obscure or vague stimuli, possibly revealing the patient’s internal conflicts and hidden emotions. Projective testing has been found to significantly differ from other objective psychological tests through the range of possible responses making them difficult to standardize and evaluate (Trull, 2005). Projective techniques are used in multiple tests. The most widely used tests according to Lubin, Larsen, and Matarrazzo (1984), who surveyed psychologists and psychiatrists in many different fields, are the Rorschach Inkblot Test, Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), Draw a Person Test, and Sentence Completion Methods. Although projective testing has always been popular, it has faced scientific evidence controversy, referred to as the “projective paradox” (Cordon, 2005), throughout history when reviewing the problems and benefits of this style of testing. Criticisms of projective tests include the heavy reliance on clinical judgement and raise questions regarding (a) the reliability of the test results; (b) the validity and method; (c) contextual influences; (d) range of the tests. Projective tests also provide benefits in their unique results, wide range of results, and potential usefulness. Examining the historical progression of projective testing over the past decade shows a continual movement towards understanding unconscious processes and formulating empirical methods for testing personality.
History
Francis Galton started the field of modern personality assessment ...
... middle of paper ...
...(2004). Masters of the mind: Exploring the story of mental illness from ancient times to the new millennium. N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Morgan, W. G. (1995). Origin and History of the Thematic Apperception Test Images. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 237-254.
Murstein, B. I. (1965). Handbook of projective techniques. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
Scott, L. (1981). Measuring intelligence with the goodenough-harris drawing test. Psychological bulletin, 89(3), 483-505.
Thorne, B. M., & Thorne, T. B. (Eds.). (2005). Connections in the history and systems of psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Trull, T. (Ed.). (2005). Personality assessment. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, Inc.
Weiner, I. B., & Greene, R. L. (n.d.). Handbook of personality assessment. (Original work published 2008) Retrieved from http://books.google.com/.
Madness: A History, a film by the Films Media Group, is the final installment of a five part series, Kill or Cure: A History of Medical Treatment. It presents a history of the medical science community and it’s relationship with those who suffer from mental illness. The program uses original manuscripts, photos, testimonials, and video footage from medical archives, detailing the historical progression of doctors and scientists’ understanding and treatment of mental illness. The film compares and contrasts the techniques utilized today, with the methods of the past. The film offers an often grim and disturbing recounting of the road we’ve taken from madness to illness.
Leupo, Kimberly. "The History of Mental Illness." The History of Mental Illness. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.
Stone, D. (2011, May 8). Psychological Musings: Historical Perspectives of Abnormal Psychology. Retrieved April 23, 2014, from http://psychological-musings.blogspot.com/2011/05/historical-perspectives-of-abnormal.html
"The History of Mental Illness: From "Skull Drills" to "Happy Pills"" RSS. Web. 09 Apr. 2014. .
Archeologists speculate that treatment for mental illnesses dates back to the Neolithic era, where a hole would be chipped into the skull by a sharp object to relieve the patient of an evil spirit. The diagnosis and acknowledgment of particular types of mental illness date back to the 5th century BC in Greece (Harris). Since then, the classification of different mental illnesses has varied immensely. Some classification methods included a handful of diagnostic categories while others included thousands (“History of the DSM”). However, recent Western diagnoses of mental illnesses stem from Sigmund Freud in the mid-to-late 1800s (McLeod). Currently, mental illness is defined as a group of mental disorders that causes severe disturbances in thinking, feeling, and relating
Tasca, Cecilia. "Women And Hysteria In The History Of Mental Health."National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, 19 Oct. 2012. Web. 27 Apr. 2014.
"Module 2: A Brief History of Mental Illness and the U.S. Mental Health Care System." Unite for Sight. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Oct. 2015.
Tasca, Cecilia , Mariangela Rapetti, Mauro Giovanni Carta, and Bianca Fadda. "Women and Hysteria In The History of Mental Health." U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health. N.p., 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 19 Apr. 2014. .
History shows that signs of mental illness and abnormal behavior have been documented as far back as the early Greeks however, it was not viewed the same as it is today. The mentally ill were previously referred to as mad, insane, lunatics, or maniacs. W.B. Maher and B.A. Maher (1985) note how many of the terms use had roots in old English words that meant emotionally deranged, hurt, unhealthy, or diseased. Although early explanations were not accurate, the characteristics of the mentally ill have remained the same and these characteristics are used to diagnose disorders to date. Cultural norms have always been used to assess and define abnormal behavior. Currently, we have a decent understanding of the correlates and influences of mental illness. Although we do not have complete knowledge, psychopathologists have better resources, technology, and overall research skills than those in ancient times.
I found the results of my self-assessments to be a very insightful and accurate description of myself. The results of the learning styles test and the Keirsey Temperament Sorter II are very valuable for examining my personality traits and learning style and making improvements as needed.
Perceptions of mental health have changed dramatically since the 1800s and will continue to advance as more is learned about the human mind. Significant advancements have been made in this field, but there is still much room for progress to be made as more is learned. From barbaric assumptions about the mentally ill in the 1800s, to what is now known about mental illness and the human brain, these accomplishments can definitely be described as “one giant leap for mankind.”
For psychologists, one of the more popular theories espoused is the trait approach to personality, or “the idea that people have consistent personality characteristics that can be measured and studied” (Kalat, 2002, 512). However there are several problems that arise. First, there are significant cross-cultural differences, so one set of personality traits for one culture may differ considerably for another. The next problem would concern the creation of a test that could accurately measure these traits. While psychologists have for the most part addressed these issues, I will focus on the latter of the two. There has been a number of multiple personality tests put to use such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), the Rorschach Inkblots and others. In our class we were instructed to take the 16 PF personality test in which we would judge for ourselves how accurate the test was based on our own personal experiences. In judging the usefulness of this test we took into consideration its reliability and validity. For a test to be reliable it must be able to accurately reflect consistent results for various people that can be agreed upon by researchers and therapists alike. Reliability in turn relates to validity. To be valid a test must be dependable producing data that can be used to detect a mental illness or otherwise certain personality dimensions within psychologically healthy individuals. Furthermore personality tests must be standardized, having data capable of being “interpreted in a prescribed fashion” (Kalat, 2002, 528). These standards are based on a comparison of a large number of people who have taken the test, one group with a particular disorder and another group who consist of the normal range. These allow researchers to identify people who score within a certain range to be more typical of a particular disorder. While the 16 PF personality test meets these criteria, whether or not the test is accurate remains to be explored. Within the next couple of pages I will describe the results of the test and discuss whether or not the data is an accurate reflection of my own personality.
Personality tests tell a person a lot about why a person is who they have become. I believe that these test if taken truthfully can identify deficiencies that individuals can work on to benefit not only themselves but others in the organizations that they work in. Some models state that it is in human nature and chemicals that decided how a person acts but I believe it is based on life experiences and a personality can change as long as a person knows the deficiencies and works to change them.
Taking any type of personality test can lead to a lot of thought and reflection on yourself,
The development of personality has long been an area of extreme interest to psychologists and psychoanalysts alike and many different theories of personality have developed over the years. From Sigmund Freud to B.F. Skinner, everyone seems to have not only an opinion of what personality is and how it develops but also an idea as to what is the best way to measure and report their findings. In order to test their theories, it was necessary to formulate methods of research that were effective, ethical and would provide a solid foundation for future personality research.Although both the clinical and experimental methods of personality research have lent themselves to our present day understanding of the human psyche and personality, each has done so in vastly different ways. Freud and his colleagues, who pioneered the clinical research method, chose to observe their clients in an up close and personal fashion.