Compare and contrast Structured Personality Tests and Projective Tests in general in terms of validity,

reliability, and clinical utility. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the said types of tests?

Structured Personality Tests

These are types of tests where the subjects are asked to respond to an objective or written

statement that is designed to minimize ambiguity (Ainsworth, 2020). Since these types of tests are

designed to elicit a set of specific answers from people, they are useful in predicting behavior. Also, they

have good concurrent validity which means they ensure what they intend to assess. In terms of

reliability, structured personality tests have questions and scoring criteria that remain consistent which

generally means that it also has a high test-retest reliability. These types of tests are used in clinical

settings to highlight the areas of concerns and strengths of a patient’s personality which can aid with

diagnosis and treatment.

Structured personality tests have many strengths which is why it is still in use in modern

psychology. Compared to projective tests, they are straightforward to administer and score. The data

gathered from them are also objective. However, we also have to consider the limitations of said tests

when using them especially in the clinical setting. Structured personality tests have limited depth and

may not provide a full understanding of an individual’s personality. There may also be biases especially if

the test we use was formed considering a different population.

Projective Tests

Projective tests commonly employ ambiguous stimuli to elicit responses that may show a part of

the subject’s personality through unconscious feelings, thoughts, and desires onto their interpretations

of these stimuli (Mcleod, 2023). Compared to structured personality tests, these types of tests rely on

the administrator’s interpretation of the responses which makes it challenging to determine validity.

Unlike personality tests, responses taken from projective tests may vary over time resulting in a lower
test-retest reliability. In the clinical setting, projective testing is important since it’s a way to explore and

understand deeper, unconscious aspects of a person’s personality.

Like all tests, projective testing has its strengths and weaknesses. Since these types of tests allow

for qualitative data to be gathered, administrators are provided with a more profound understanding of

an individual’s personality and emotions. They also provide a way to uncover things from the

unconscious that may be useful for therapy. Despite this, there are still limitations to what these tests

can provide. Since projective testing relies on the clinician’s interpretation, some may find the results

subjective (Cherry,2023). It is also time consuming compared to structured personality tests.

Examine the impact of cultural factors on projective testing. How do different cultural backgrounds

and experiences influence responses to projective tests, and what steps can be taken to ensure the

cultural sensitivity and appropriateness of these instruments in our local setting?

Projective testing is a type of test that came from the psychoanalytic school of thought that

focuses on people’s unconscious thoughts and urges. However, it is important to recognize the part

cultural factors play in how people respond do these types of assessments. In Psychology, people are

represented through their culture (Cheung, 2012). This means that people from different cultural

background will respond differently since they have different norms.

When we consider the culture of the Philippines, we have to take into account that they have a

collectivist society which emphasized the needs of the family rather than the individual’s. Filipinos also

show a high degree of respect towards elders and authority figures. These should be considered when

assessing Filipinos since the answers will align with the cultural norms and expectations. This highlights

the need to consider specific context of each culture when interpreting projective tests. To ensure the

cultural sensitivity and appropriateness of these instruments we have to make sure that translations are

ensured to be appropriate by ensuring that the purpose is still preserved. We also have to ensure that

local norms and standards are established. Also, we have to consider the test administrators. Having
knowledge of the cultural background and possible biases to the results will help them interpret the test

with sensitivity in mind. Lastly, pilot testing should be considered to help strengthen the use of the test

in the local setting. Doing so can provide better understanding of possible biases and areas for

improvement.

Choose one population (ex. children, adolescents, disaster survivors, etc.) of interest and identify

common psychological concerns. What do you think would be the advantages of using Projective

Drawings for the said population of choice? How will you design a full test battery when dealing with

the chosen population? (indicate other tests and procedures you will include)

Adolescence is a crucial phase since it’s a time where physical, emotional and social changes

happen. This is a period where exposure to negative experiences can make adolescents vulnerable to

mental health problems such anxiety and depression. Projective Drawings can be a valuable tool for

assessing and understanding this population, especially since adolescents may find it easier to express

their feelings through drawings rather than talking directly to the administrators. To conduct a full

battery test, I would consider using the house-tree-person test to measure their personality. I would also

use the Sacks Sentence Completion Test to get a more rounded picture of their personality. I would also

use the Beck Youth Inventories to check for symptoms of depression, anxiety, anger, disruptive behavior,

and self-concept. To add, I would also interview the client, their family and friends to understand how

they are outside of what I evaluated through testing. Getting a full picture of their academic

performance, social relationships and well-being will help provide a better evaluation and create proper

intervention if necessary.