BASICS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS

INTRODUCTION
A psychological assessment is the attempt of a skilled professional, usually a psychologist, to
use the techniques and tools of psychology to learn either general or specific facts about another
individual, either to inform others of how they function now, or to predict their behavior and functioning
in the future. The point of assessment is often diagnosis, management plan, placement in job or
selection of personnel in military etc. Psychological assessment is a broad area which includes
intelligence, personality, projective tests, and neuropsychological assessment. (Singh, 1997)

PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST: DEFINITION

“A psychological test is a standardized instrument to measure objectively any one or more
aspects of a total personality by means of samples of verbal or non-verbal responses or by means of
other behaviour” (Freeman ,1965). A psychological (or an educational) test is a standardized procedure
to measure quantitatively or qualitatively one or more than one aspect of trait by means of a sample of
verbal and non-verbal behavior( Singh,1997). A test is “an organized succession of stimuli designed to
measure quantitatively or to evaluate qualitatively some mental process,trait or characteristics” (Bean,
1953).

HISTORICAL VIEW
The progress of psychology and psychological test started with Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) who
established the first psychological laboratory in 1879, in Leipzig, Germany. In 1905 Binet and Simon
invent the first modern intelligence test. Stern introduced the concept of IQ, or Intelligence quotient in
1914. In 1917 Robert Woodworth develops the personal data sheet, the first personality test. These are
few milestones in the field of psychological assessment. Psychological assessment has its extensive
history within the field of mental health also. Psychological testing in its modern form originated little
more than one hundred years ago in laboratory studies of sensory discrimination, motor skills and
reaction time. History of psychological testing is a captivating story that has a substantial relevance to
present day practice.
(Appendix I)

NEED OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST

There are six major uses of psychological tests (Gregory, 2004)-
1. Classification: It encompasses a variety of procedures:
a) Assigning a person to one category rather than other.
b) Placement and screening. Placement is sorting of people into different programs according to
their needs or skills. Screening refers to quick and simple test procedure
2. Diagnosis and treatment planning : Diagnosis consists of task of determining the nature and
source of person’s abnormal behaviour and classifying the behaviour pattern within an accepted
diagnosis system for best choice of treatment.
3. Self knowledge: Psychological tests can be a potent source of self knowledge.
4. Program evaluation: Another use of psychological test is the systematic evaluation of educational
and social programmes.
5. Research: It plays a major role in the both applied and theoretical branches of behavioural research.
6. Rehabilitation: Psychological testing has a major role in rehabilitation. It is the process of assisting
someone to improve and recover lost function after an event, illness or injury that has caused
functional limitations.

The more common and evident contributions of psychological assessment in clinical field can be
organized into four general categories (Maruish, 1999).
1. Problem Identification- Problem Identification is the most common use of psychological
assessment.
2. Problem Clarification- Psychological assessment can often assist in the clarification of three most
important types of information, the severity of the problem, complexity of the problem & degree to
which the problem impairs the patient’s ability to function in one or more life roles.
3. Identification of important patient characteristics - Identifying patient characteristics reveals the
strengths and weaknesses of the patient that helps in achieving the therapeutic goals.
4. Monitoring of progress - The information from repeated assessment during the treatment process
can help the clinician to determine, if the treatment plan is appropriate for the patient at a given point
of time.

BASIC PROCEDURES AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST:

A psychological test requires few basic procedures to be followed for administration. These
procedures make the test scientifically sound. (Gregory2004)

 Essential component of individual testing is that examiner must be familiar with the material and
directions before the administration of test.
 Examiners are urged to establish rapport. In testing rapport is a comfortable warm atmosphere that
serves to motivate examinees and elicit cooperation.
 Another important ingredient of valid testing is sensitivity to disabilities in the examinee.
Technical Aspect in Psychological Testing:
1. Standardization- Standardization refers to uniformity of procedures in administering and scoring the
test (Anastasi, 1997). Thus a test is said to be standardized if test administration procedures,
materials, instructions, recording and scoring are as constant as possible at all times(Korchin,1999).
2. Norms- Norms refer to the average performance of a representative sample on a given test. Test
developers are advised to publish norms describing the frequency distribution of scores, obtained in
as broad sample as possible of the relevant population (APA, 1974).
3. Objectivity- A test is said to be objective when the administration, scoring, and interpretation are
independent of the subjective judgment of the particular examiner. It means that the assessment
must be free from subjective element so that there is complete interpersonal agreement among
experts regarding the meaning of the items and scoring of the test. (Anastasi, 1997).
4. Reliability- The reliability of an assessment refers to its degree of stability, consistency,
predictability, and accuracy (Groth & Marnat, 2003). It refers to self correlation of the assessment
which shows the extent to which the results obtained are consistent when it is administered once or
more than once on the same sample with a reasonable time gap. There are four types of reliability:
 Split Half Reliability is known to be the best technique in which the test is given only once. The
items are split in half, and the two halves are correlated. To determine it, the test is often split on
the basis of odd and even items. The reliability coefficient is the correlation of scores obtains by
same person on the two halves (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
 Interscorer Reliability is one which is obtained by scoring of a test by more than one expert of a
single client
(Groth & Marnat, 2003).
 Test-Retest Reliability which is determined by administering the test and then repeating it on a
second condition. The reliability coefficient is the correlation of scores obtains by same person
on the two different administrations (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
 Alternate Forms Reliability is determined by administering the parallel forms of the test on a
person. The reliability coefficient is the correlation of scores obtains by same person on the two
parallel forms (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
5. Validity- Validity indicates the extent to which the test measures what it intended to measure and
should also produce information useful to clinician (Groth & Marnat, 2003). The degree of validity of
a test depends on the magnitude of the errors present in the measures obtained from it. Some
indication of the validity of a given test is gained from a study of the correlation between scores on a
given test and scores from other tests designed to measure the same factor. They are of the
following types:

 Content Validity refers to the representativeness and relevance of the assessment instrument to
the construct being measured.
 Criterion Validity also known as Empirical Validity is determined by comparing test scores with
some sort of performance on an outside measure. It is further divided into Concurrent Validity
and Predictive Validity.
 Concurrent Validity refers to measurements taken at the same, or approximately the same time
of the test administration (Groth & Marnat, 2003).To determine concurrent validity, test scores
and criterion are obtained simultaneously (Gregory, 2004).
 Predictive Validity refers to outside measurements that were taken some time after the test score
were derived (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
 Construct Validity refers to the extent of measurement to which the test measures a theoretical
construct or trait (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
 Descriptive Validity requires that the characteristics or variable being measured is unique to the
condition that they are supposed to define.

Psychological Assessment in Different Setup

Psychological referrals are meant to understand the unique problems and demands encountered in
different settings. Psychological tests are generally applied by qualified persons. Few issues that can
affect psychological assessment are:
 In the hand of unqualified persons, psychological tests can harm.
 The selection process is rendered invalid for persons who preview test questions.
 Leakage of item content to the general public completely destroys the efficiency of a test.
The setups where psychological referrals are frequent are following:
i) Psychiatric Setting: -
Psychological assessments are required in very specific conditions in a psychiatric setting. When
there is a diagnostic dilemma, assessment involving pertinent tools can provide appropriate information.
A psychological assessment is also required as an aid to psychotherapy (short term and problem
oriented) in which understanding the patient and the problem must be accomplished very quickly
(Kaplan & Sadock, 2007). It can be used in pretreatment planning, assessing the progress of a therapy,
evaluating its effectiveness and further provide information about the person’s inner life, conflicts,
hidden desires. Current level of functioning, including the intellectual functioning is another aspect for
which a referral can be made.
ii) General medical Setting:-
It has been seen that as many as two-thirds of patients have primarily psychosocial difficulties. In
disorders such as coronary heart disease, asthma, allergies, rheumatoid arthritis, ulcers and
headaches, (Groth-Marnat, et al, 2003; Pruit, et al, 1999) psychological referral can be made in order to
understand the underlying psychological cause, possible emotional factors and to make treatment plan.
The typical areas of assessment focus primarily on the presence of possible intellectual
deterioration such as memory, sequencing, abstract reasoning, spatial organization, or executive
abilities (Groth-Marnat, 2003). Psychological test profile also helps to asses various disorders like
malingering, conversion disorder, hypochondriasis, organic brain syndrome, or depression with pseudo-
neurological features.
iii) Legal context: -
The use of psychological evaluation in legal settings is being accepted as relevant information.
Psychologists in legal settings are called most frequently when there is a possibility of deception and
malingering. According to American Board of Forensic Psychology, psychological assessment is mostly
used in child custody cases, competency of a person to dispose of property, juvenile commitment and
personal injury suits, in which the psychologist documents the nature and extent of the litigant’s
suffering or disability (stress, anxiety, and cognitive deficit). In contrast, mental health professionals are
more likely to be called for assessing a person’s competency to stand trial, degree of criminal
responsibility and the presence of mental defectiveness (Groth-Marnat, 2003).
iv) Educational Context:-
Psychologists are frequently called on to assess children who are having difficulty in, or may
need special placement in the school system. The most important areas of evaluation are learning
difficulties, measuring intellectual strengths and weaknesses, assessing behavioural difficulties,
creating an educational plan, estimating a child’s responsiveness to intervention, and recommending
changes in a child’s program or placement (Sattler, 2001)
v) Psychological clinic:-
Psychologist often works as consultant to people who are aware of the field of clinical
psychology. Since the referrals made here are volunteered by the patients themselves, psychologist
can acts as the decision maker and proceeds with psychological interventions best suited for the client.

CLASSIFICATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

These were the main types of psychological test according to Gregory (2004). On the basis of
the criterion of administrative conditions tests are of two types-Individual and Group tests. On the basis
of criteria of scoring the tests are classified into Objective and Subjective tests. Where, Intelligence
test measures individuals’ ability in relatively global spheres. Aptitude test measures the capabilities for
a relatively specific task or type of skill. Achievement test measures a person’s degree of learning
success and accomplishments in a subject or task. Creativity tests assess novel original thinking.
Personality tests measure the trait, qualities and behaviors. Interest inventory measures individuals’
preference for certain activity or topics. Neuropsychological tests measure cognitive, sensory,
perceptual and motor performance (Gregory, 2004). On the basis of criterion of time limit in producing
the response are the power and speed test. Power tests are those that have generous time limits so
that most examinees are able to attempt every item. Speed tests are those that have severe time limits
(Appendix-II and III).

Brief description of commonly used psychological tests in clinical setting

I. Personality II Intelligence III Neuropsychological
Assessment assessment assessment

TESTS OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS

The personality assessment measures trait, temperament, values and many other facets of
personality which determines the overall adjustment of the person. There are three most common tools
or methods of personality assessment. They are following nature:
A. Objective Test B. Projective Techniques C. Observational
 Methods

A. Objective Test ( – It is commonly known as personality inventories or paper pencil tests in which the
individual describes his/her own feelings, environment, and reaction of others towards him/her.
Objectivity referred to be fairly clearly structured tests for which scoring would be identical if performed
by competent persons.Objectivity to an approach to personality testing, disclaimed use of the term but
believed what is meant is two- fold:
(1) Minimization of errors of observing and recording
(2) Minimization of variability in the task conditions on separate occasion. It is form of the personality
inventory, the check-list, and the rating scale. Most of these inventories or assessment techniques
measures traits present in an individual. It may even be administered on a computer. The important
tests are as follows:

1. Eysenck’s Personality Questionnairre (EPQ):

It was developed by Eysenck and Eysenck (1975) to measures 3 dimensions and contains 19 items.
These are:
1. Extraversion and Introversion (E),
2. Neuroticism and Stability (N),
3. Psychoticism and Super ego function (P) of a person.

2. Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III):

It was developed by Theodore Millon in 1977.It is designed for adult 18 year and older. It focuses on
personality disorder along with symptoms that are frequently associated with the disorders. The
current version is MCMI-III is composed of 175 items and 28 scales divided into the categories of:

Modifying Clinical Severe Clinical Severe

Indices, Personality Personality Syndromes Syndromes
Patterns, Pathology,

3. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-II (MMPI-II) –

It is developed by Hathaway and McKinley in 1940. It measures the surface traits of an individual.
Its re-standardization was done at University of Minnesota Press in 1989 and known as MMPI-II
(Graham, 2000).The validity scales of MMPI-II are VRIN, TRIN, F, FB, FP, L, K and S. Clinical
scales are
1) Hypochondriasis 6) Schizophrenia
(H), (Sc),

2) Hysteria (Hs), 7) Psychesthenia

(Pt),

3) Depression (D), 8)Social

introversion(Si),

4) Hypomania (Ma), 9)Psychopathic

deviate (Pd),

5) Paranoia (P), 10)Masculinity-

 Feminity (Mf).

Two coding type namely Hathaway and Welsh are there. It has been widely used for detection of
malingering, personality disorders, aggression etc. The reasons of revision are inadequacy of
sample, item content, language, poor grammar and punctuation and in order to enhance the validity
of this tool & new validity scales have been added in MMPI-II.

4. Multiphasic Personality Questionnaire (MPQ):

This test is adapted by H.N. Murthy in 1964 for Indian population. It contains 100 items which are
divided into 9 scales namely Hysteria, Anxiety, Depression, Mania, Psychopathic Deviate,
Schizophrenia, K- scale, Repression- Sensitization, Paranoia (Murthy, 1975).

5. Cattell’s 16pf test:

It is developed by Raymond B. Cattell in 1949, to measure 16 source traits which are also called 16
personality factors. The test provides scores on 16 primary personality scales and 5 global personality
scales. This test is used to generate personality profile of the individual and is often used to evaluate
employees and to help people select a career.
It has 5 forms i.e.Forms A,B,C,D,andE
􀂾A,B and C,D are parallel form
􀂾A,B have 187 item(graduation+)
􀂾C,D have 105 item (high school)
􀂾E has 128 items(illiterate)

6. Neo-PI-Revised:
This test has been developed by Costa & Mc Crae in the year 1992. Initially it was designed for use
by adults, revised in the year 1992 and made usable for people as young as 10 years. It contains
240 items that assess 30 specific traits (or facets), 6 for each personality dimension:

1) Neuroticism 2) Extraversion 3) Openness to 4) Agreeableness 5)Conscientiousness

(N), (E), Experience (O), (A), (C).

The items are answered in a 5- point Likert scale, ranging from strongly agreeable to strongly
disagreeable. There are two forms: parallel self report (Form S) and observer rating (Form R).

7. Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) :

It is developed by Robert Clonninger et al in 1994. It is based on biosocial model of personality.
It has four temperament dimensions:

1.Novelty 2.Harm 3.Reward 4.Persistence

Seeking, Avoidance Dependence
,

Three character dimensions:

1. Self- 2.Self – 3.Cooperativeness
Directedness, Transcendence

Four validity scales: Runs, Rarity, True and Like- unlike and alternate versions of self report, informant
ratings and interviewer’s ratings are there (Clonninger et al, 1994).
B. Projective Techniques
The term “Projective test” was popularized by L. K. Frank (1939). In this, the person whose traits
are to be studied is asked to describe an unstructured stimulus or situation and through his responses,
his needs, drives, motives, fears, etc, are revealed.

According to Lindzey (1961):

 Association techniques: The subject is asked to tell or write the association generated by any
verbal, visual or auditory stimulus. e.g., Word association Test, Rorschach.
 Construction techniques: The subject is required to construct any specific thing for which the test
provides a framework. For example, in Thematic Apperception Test, the subject is asked to write
a story on a given picture.
 Completion techniques: Here the subject is supposed to complete a sentence or give a response
to complete a conversation. For e.g., Sentence Completion Tests, Rosenzweig Picture
Frustration Study.
 Choice or ordering technique: Requires the subjects to arrange materials according to their
choice.
Examples are - Tomkins – Horn Picture Arrangement Test, Szondi Test.
 Expressive techniques: Subjects are required to draw something or performs something. With
these creative or artistic works, subjects are considered to be expressing themselves. e.g.,
Draw- A – Person Test, Psycho drama

1. Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) :

It was developed by Henry Murray and his co-worker Christiana Morgan in 1943.It consists of 31
achromatic pictures (one card is a blank card), typically showing individuals of both sexes and of
different age groups involved in various activities. The test requires the subject to tell a story for
each card. The administration of the cards depends upon the age, sex and the condition of the
person to be assessed. Responses are interpreted under categories like the hero, needs, press,
outcome, conflicts, emotions etc. Many different scoring and interpretation system like Murray’s
need - press system, and Bellak’s main theme are available. It can assess a person’s cognitive
style, imaginative processes, family dynamics, defensive structure, significant people, general
intelligence, sexual adjustments and many more (Ackerman et al, 1999).Various adaptations of TAT
exist, including Indian adaptation by Uma Chowdhury (1960).
Test administration The subject is asked to write short stories on the events or situations depicted on
the cards. The story should contain few things. For example,
o What happened in past that has led to the present condition.
o What is happening now
o Who is/are this/these person/people?
o What is/are he/she/they doing?
o What are the predominant emotions?
o What is he thinking?
 o What will happen in future?
o The subject is asked to be spontaneous and write the stories as fast as possible.
Test interpretation
Following are the basic interpretive points
• Hero: Hero is the central character of the story. Hero can be male or female.
• Needs: Those internal forces of the person which play important role in determination of behaviour
(e.g., need for achievement, need for nurturance, need for sex, need for affiliation etc.).
• Press: External forces (environmental factors) that have significant impact on behaviour.
• Emotions: Predominant emotions.
• Defense mechanism: Defenses used by the individual.
• Need-press interaction: How the needs and presses of the individual are interacting
• Outcome: The outcome of the story is happy or sad. It is also important to note that the outcome is
vague or clear.
• Thema: The basic theme of the story (Need-press-outcome combination).

2. Rorschach Inkblot Test:

It is the most used projective test in clinical setting. It is an associative test, was developed by Swiss
psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach in 1921.
The test consists of 10 symmetrical, ambiguous inkblots in which card numbers 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7
are completely achromatic, card number 2 and 3 are partially chromatic and card number 8, 9 and
10 are completely chromatic. The test requires the subject to report what the inkblot looks like to
him. The test is divided into three parts- administration, scoring and interpretation. Administration
consists of introduction, instruction, response and inquiry, the scoring refers to the classification of
responses into categories which revolve around the location of the blot in which the percept was
seen (example: whole, detail etc); the qualitative aspects of the perception (called determinants)
which include shape, color, shading etc and content of what was perceived (animals, human
anatomy etc). Interpretation is aimed to assess the structure of personality with an emphasis on how
individuals construct their experiences (cognitive structuring) and assign meanings to their
perceptual experiences. The interpretation provide information on certain variables within specific
clusters namely control and stress tolerance, Situation related stress, affective features, self
perception, information processing, mediation, ideation and interpersonal perception. Rorschach
died shortly after the publication of “Psychodiagnotik” (1921). His work was continued by his
colleagues and now six different scoring and interpretation systems are available namely Beck,
Hertz, Piotrowski, Klopfer, Rapaport and Exner for the Rorschach test (Exner, 2002).
Procedure of administration:
The seating arrangement should be side-by-side. Prepare the subject for overall assessment
process. Cards should be stacked in face-down position. Location sheet should not be visible during
the free association phase.

Instruction: Give the first card in the subject’s hand and ask “what might this be?” (This is the basic
instruction and nothing should be added). If the subject responds by saying that “this is an ink-blot”,
acknowledge it and further say “that is right. This is ink-blot test, and I want you to tell me what it
might be.” On the first card, before giving any response or after giving one response, if the subject
asks “How many things should I find” the standard answer is “If you take your own time, I am sure
you will find more than one.” If after giving more than one response the subject asks “How many
should I see?” the standard response is “It is up to you.” If the subject gives more than 6 responses
on card number one, the card should be taken back. Same procedure should be followed if on other
cards the number of responses is more than 5. However, if on card number 1, the subject has given
less than 6 responses and on other cards he is giving more than 5 responses, he should be allowed
to do so. Verbatim of all the responses should be recorded. Position of card should be noted.
Inquiry phase: In this phase examiner should read the responses. The instruction in the inquiry phase
should be “Show me where it is and what there is that makes it to look like that.”

Location:

W Whole The entire blot is used in the response

D Common detail Frequently identified area
Dd Uncommon detail Infrequently identified area
S Space response White space area is used in the response

Developmental Quality
+ Synthesized More than one percept. At least one percept has
definite form demand
V/+ Synthesized None of the percept has any form demand
O Ordinary One percept with definite form demand
V Vague One percept without any form demand
Determinants
1.Form F 6.Shading dimension V
FV
VF
2.Movement M 7.Shading diffused Y
FM YF
m FY
3.Chromatic Colour C 8.Form Dimension FD
CF FC Cn
4.Achromatic Colour C’ 9.Pairs and reflections (2)
C’F rF
F’C Fr
5.Shading texture T
TF
FT
 Blends
• Form quality: +, O, U, -
• Content
• Special scores
􀀹Unusual verbalizations
1. Deviant verbalization

a. Neologism b.Redundancy

2. Deviant response
a.Inappropriate b.Circumustantial
phrases response

􀀹Inappropriate combinations
1.Incongruous 2. Fabulized 3. Contamination
combinations combinations
 􀀹Inappropriate logic
􀀹Perseveration

1.within card 2. content 3. Mechanical

perseveration perseveration perseveration

􀀹Confabulation
􀀹Special content characteristics

1. Aggressive 2. Morbid content 3.Personalized

movement content

􀀹Special colour phenomenon

1. Colour projection

4. The Sentence Completion Test-:

In this test individuals are required to complete a number of incomplete sentence stems, presented
to them. Test usage surveys consistently find that sentence completion tests are the most popular
personality instruments used by practitioners (Holaday et al, 2000).Rotter’s Incomplete Sentence
Blanks are the commonly used completion techniques (Gregory, 2004).

5. The Draw A Person Test (DAPT) :

It is an expressive technique developed by Karen Machover. It requires a person to ‘draw a person’
that assess the psychodynamic aspects of personality involved with the self image and body
images. The interpretation of DAPT is essentially qualitative where a particular ‘body sign’ is
associated with certain personality characteristics (Gregory, 2004).

Personality tests for Children:

1. Children Personality Questionnaire (CPQ) :
It is developed by Raymond B. Cattell and Rutherford B. Porter (1968) for age range 8 to12 years
having two part A and B each of 70 items. It measures 14 Primary Factors and 4 Secondary factors
(Cattell & Porter, 1968).

2. Children Self Report and Projective Inventory(CSRPI) :

It was developed by Robert L Ziffer and Lawrence E Shapiro(1992) in which sentence completion,
projective story cards, drawing task, critical items are there to assess the conflict areas of a
child(Ziffer & Shapiro, 1992).

3. Children’s Apprerception Test (CAT) :

It is a direct extension of the TAT, given by Leopard Bellak and Sonya Sorel Bellak in 1961. It
consists of 10 pictures, suitable for children 3 to 10 years of age. The preferred version for younger
children (CAT-A) depicts animals in unmistakably human social setting. A human figure version
(CAT-H) is available for older children (Bellak & Bellak, 1994).

C. Observational Methods
In Observational Method, the person whose personality traits are to be observed are put either in
structured or unstructured situations and observations are made by the observers (Groth & Marnat,
2003).
1. Interview:
 Interview is a face to face interpersonal situation which has a clear sequence and relevant themes
that helps the interviewer to achieve the defined goals (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
2. Rating Scale:
A rating scale is defined as a technique through which the observer or ratter categorized the
objects, events or persons on a continuum, represented by a series of continuous numerals. Some
commonly used rating scale in clinical practice are Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale(BPRS), Positive
and Negative Syndrome Scale(PANSS),Young Mania Rating Scale(YMRS),Hamilton Rating Scale
For Depression(HAM-D),Beck Depression Inventory(BDI),Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale
(Y-BOCS) etc.

Observational method and rating scales for Chidren:

1. Conner’s Rating Scale-Revised:
An instrument devised by C. Keith Conners, which uses observer ratings and self-report ratings to
assess attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and evaluate problem behavior in children and
adolescents. The instrument offers versions for parents, teachers, and adolescents (Maruish, 1999).

2. The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) :

The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) given by Thomas M. Achenbach (1991) is a device by which
parents or other individuals who know the child well, rate a child's problem behaviors and
competencies. It gives profiles for scoring parent’s report on the Child Behaviour Checklist for ages
4-18yrs., teachers’ reports on the Teacher’s Report Form for ages 5-18yrs., and self-reports on the
Youth Self –Report for Ages 11-18yrs (Maruish, 1999).

3. The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) :

The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) was initially developed by Schopler, Reicher and
Renner in 1971 to enable clinicians to help in a more objective diagnosis of autism in a more readily
usable form. It is a 15- item behavioral rating scale developed to identify children with autism, and to
distinguish them from developmentally handicapped children without the autism syndrome (Schopler
et al, 1971).

II. Intelligence Tests

Robert Sternberg (1985) defined intelligence in terms of three characteristics:
1. the possession of knowledge
2. the ability to efficiently use knowledge to reason about the world
3. the ability to employ that reasoning adaptively in different environments

Developmental Quotient (DQ), Intelligence Quotient (IQ), Performance quotient (PQ) and
assessment of adaptive functioning in terms of Social Quotient (SQ) are widely used concepts in
intelligence.

Intelligent Quotient (IQ) - The term Intelligence Quotient (IQ) was devised in 1912 by William Stern. It
is an expression of an individual’s ability level at a given point of time, in relation to the available age
norms. IQ=MA/CA X 100 (Anastasi, 1997).
Basal Level-A level for tests in which subtest items are ranked from easiest to hardest and below
which the examinee would almost certainly answer all questions correctly ( Gregory, 2004).
Ceiling Level-A level for tests in which subtest items are ranked from easiest to hardest and above
which the examinee would almost certainly fail all remaining questions (Gregory, 2004).
Mental Level- The child’s score on the test can be expressed as mental level corresponding to the age
of normal children whose performance he or she equaled (Anastasi, 1997). It is also called Mental Age
(MA).
Chronological Age- The age from birth to the time of testing is called chronological age. The mental
age does not increase in a rapid orderly fashion after middle teens (Morgan et al, 1993). Therefore
even for adults the chronological age mostly taken to be 16 while calculating the IQ ratio.

General intellectual functioning is determined by the used of standardized tests of intelligence, and the
term significantly sub-average is defined as an intelligence quotient (IQ) of approximately 70 or below
or two standard deviations below the mean for the particular test. Adaptive functioning can be
measured by using a standardized scale.

Classification of Intelligence of IQ IQ Range

Range Classification

Profound mental retardation (MR)a Below 20 or

25

Severe MRa 20-25 to 35-40

Moderate MRa 35-40 to 50-55

Mild MRa 50-55 to about

70
Borderline 70-79
Dull normal 80 to 90
Bright normal 110 to 120
Superior 120 to 130
Very superior 130 and above

aAccording to the fourth edition of Diagnostic an Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM-IV)

The most commonly used intelligence tests may be classified into three types:
A. Schedules of develoment and B. Verbal C. Non verbal and
socioadaptive functioning Tests Performance tests
Developmental Schedules for infants and preschool children:
These are most useful as screening instruments for assessing the developmental level
of children up to five years of age.
1. Developmental Screening Test (DST):
The Developmental Screening Test by Bharat Raj (1977) is designed to measure
mental development of children from birth to 15 years of age by a semi-structured
interview with the child and a parent or a person well acquainted with the child.
There are 88 items distributed according to the age scales. It provides
Developmental Age, DA and Developmental Quotient, DQ (Bharat Raj, 1977).

2. Gesell Developmental Schedule (GDS):

It is developed by Arnold Gesell (1880-1961) represents a standardized procedure
for observing and evaluating the course of development in child’s daily life. It
assesses maturity in infants and preschool children in four major developmental
areas namely Motor development, Adaptive behavior, Language development and
Personal social behavior. It provides an estimate of Developmental Age (DA) and
Developmental Quotient (DQ) and can be used for the age range of 1-72months

3. Stanford -Binet test for Intelligence:

Since the inception of the Stanford-Binet, it has been revised several times.
Currently it is in its fifth edition assesses intelligence and cognitive abilities in
children and adults aged 2 to 23 years. It assesses four areas: verbal reasoning,
quantitative reasoning, abstract/visual reasoning, and short-term memory which are
covered by 15 subtests. An initial vocabulary test, along with the subject's age,
determines the number and level of subtests to be administered.Total testing time is
45-90 minutes, depending on the subject's age and the number of subtests given
Hindi adaptation of the third revision by Santosh Kumar Kulshrestha (1971) is having
the age norms of 2 years 6 months to 18 years.
Types of Reasoning
1. Verbal reasoning - Vocabulary absurdities
2. Quantitative – Quantitative Test Number series
3. Abstract Visual – Paper folding copying
4. Short Term Memory – Memory for sentence, order in which familiar objects
4. Wechsler Intelligence Scale:
The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) is the best standardized and most
widely used intelligence test in clinical practice today. It was constructed by David
Wechsler at New York University Medical Centre and Bellevue Psychiatric Hospital,
in 1939. The original WAIS has gone through several revisions.
There are 11 separate subtests, which include the Verbal scale (6 subtests) and the
Performance scale (5 subtests). Verbal IQ score and performance IQ score together
comprise a full-scale IQ score. The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC)
was originally developed as a downward extension of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence
Scale, for ages of 6 and 16 in 1949. A revised edition WISC-R came in 1974, and the
third edition, the WISC-III in 1991. The current version, the WISC-IV, was produced
in 2003(Gregory, 2004). The Verbal part of WAIS has been adopted for Indian
population by Prasad and Verma for age range 20-69 years known as Verbal Adult
Intelligence Scale (VAIS) in 1988 and the performance part of WAIS has been
adapted for Indian population in 1974. Current version is Wechsler Adult Intelligence
Scale revised in 1997 by Verma.
WAIS Scales
• Verbal WAIS scales
1. Information: 29 questions - a measure of general knowledge.
2. Digit Span: Subjects are given sets of digits to repeat initially forwards then
backwards. This is a test of immediate auditory recall and freedom from
distraction.
3. Vocabulary: Define 35 words. It is a measure of expressive word knowledge. It
correlates very highly with Full Scale IQ

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 13
 4. Arithmetic: 14 mental arithmetic brief story type problems. Test distractibility as
well as numerical reasoning.
5. Comprehension: 16 questions which focus on issues of social awareness.
6. Similarities: A measure of concept formation. Subjects are asked to say how two
seemingly dissimilar items might in fact be similar.
• Performance WAIS scales
7. Picture Completion: 20 small pictures that all have one vital detail missing.A test
of attention to fine detail.
8. Picture Arrangement: 10 sets of small pictures, where the subject is required to
arrange them into a logical sequence.
9. Block Design: Involves putting sets of blocks together to match patterns on cards.
10. Digit Symbol: Involves copying a coding pattern.
11. Object Assembly: Four small jig-saw type puzzles.
WECHSLER ADULT PERFORMANCE INTELLIGENCE SCALE AND VERBAL
INTELLIGENCE SCALE
• Performance part of WAIS has been adopted for Indian population by
Prabharamalinga Swamy in 1974
• Verbal part of WAIS has been adopted for Indian population by Prasad and Verma
(age range 20-69 years)
Performance Verbal
Picture completion Information
Digit symbol Comprehension
Block design Arithmetic
Picture arrangement Digit span
Object assembly
IMPORTANT POINTS:

 If the difference between VQ and PQ > 20 points – Brain dysfunction indicated

 Learning Disability- Picture competition, object assembly ,vocabulary arithmetic,

information

 Weschler Scale – 4 factor

 Verbal – I, S.V.C

 Perceptual organization - PC, PA, BD, OA

 Freedom from distractibility - A, DS

 Processing speed - coding

5. Malin’s Intelligence Scale for Indian Children (MISIC):
Malin’s Intelligence Scale for Indian Children is an Indian adaptation for WISC
constructed by Dr. Arthur J. Malin in 1969, for age range is 6-15.11yrs.The scale
comprises 12 sub tests divided into Verbal and Performance groups. In verbal part,
Information, Comprehension, Arithmetic, Similarities, Vocabulary and Digit Span and
in Performance part, Picture Completion, Picture Arrangement, Block Design, Object
Assembly, Coding, Mazes are there. It also provides the child with a full scale IQ
(Malin, 1969).

Non Verbal and Performance Test:

Performance tests require the subjects to express their answers in the form of drawing,
gestures, activities such as arranging block and puzzles, matching designs and placing
pictures meaningfully.
1. Bhatia’s Performance Test of Intelligence:
The test is developed by C.M. Bhatia in 1955.This test consist of five sub tests –
1. Block Design – 10 cards

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 14
 2. Pass Along Test (Originally by Alexander) 8 patterns
3. Pattern Drawing Test - (8 patterns)
4. Immediate Memory of Sounds/digits
5. Picture Construction Test – 5 item
The test can be administered on persons of 11 years of the age and above. All five
sub tests are administered in a sequence as given above. The obtained raw score
are converted into mental age (MA) which can be used to calculate I.Q. (Intelligence
Quotient) of a person. This test is not to be use on mentally retarded persons
(Bhatia, 1971).

2. Gesell Drawing Test:

The test developed by Arnold Gesell (1880-1961) has norms for children as young
as 16 months and a ceiling of 7 yrs. There are 5 primary shapes corresponding to
assigned ages, in which the individuals are instructed to copy the shapes.
Draw them one by one 3 trials given

3 yrs.

4 yrs

5 yrs

6 yrs.

7yrs

3. Seguin Form Board Test (SFB):

The test given by O. Edward Seguin (1812-1880) is used as a quick measure of
general intelligence in children between 3-11 yrs. In this test the individual is
required to insert ten variously shaped blocks into the corresponding recesses as
quickly as possible (Gregory, 2004).

4. The Vineland Social Maturity Scale (VSMS):

It is developed by Edgar A. Doll in 1935, and has been revised several times since its
first publication. The scale was designed to assess the social competence of individuals
of ages from birth to 25 years and above. The Indian adaptation of VSMS, by A.J.
Malin, has an age range of birth to 15 years. There are eight domains with 89 items,
grouped age wise.Scoring of the items gives the information on social age from which
the social quotient could be calculated (Malin, 1992).

5. Behavioural Assessment Scale for Indian Children with Mental Retardation

(BASIC-MR):
This scale, developed by Peshawaria and Venkatesan (1992), is divided into two
parts. Part A which has seven domains with 280 items, deals with skill behaviours,
and Part B which deals with problem behaviours, consisting of 10 domains with 75
items .The information on the scale is collected through direct observation of the
child and by interviewing parents.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 15
III. Neuropsychological Assessment
Neuropsychological assessment as began in the 1950s is a well defined
discipline with the work of Halstead, Reitan, and Goldstein in the United States, Ray in
France, and Luria of the Soviet Union. It is used for screening and assessing the
presence of possible neuropsychological impairment.
1. Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test (BVMGT) :
It is developed by Lauretta Bender in 1938. It cannot be used with the children below
age 3 years. There are total nine cards in which card A is the orientation card. It
assesses visual acuity and motor functioning. There are several scoring methods
available in which Pascal and Hain’s are most commonly used. In Hain’s method
(1964) of scoring which was followed by Bhargava and Sadhu (1987), the protocol
must be scored on the basis of 15 signs. In this the maximum score is 34. The
score of 9 and above shows severe dysfunction.

2. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) :

It is developed by David A. Grant, and Esta A. Berg, in the year 1948 to assess
reasoning ability, set shifting, ability to use feedback and inhibitory control of
influence. In this test there are 4 stimulus cards and 128 total cards which are
divided into two sets of 64. The sorting works on three principles Form, Number
and Colour and one more principle of other. Four shapes are there of triangle,
star, cross and circle. The age range for this test is 6 and ½ to 89 years (Heaton
et al, 1993) .Common scoring points are-
1. Number of sets completed
2. Number of errors
3. Number of perseverative responses
4. Number of perseverative errors
5. Number of nonperseverative errors
6. Conceptual level responses

3. Post Graduate Institute Battery of Brain Dysfunction (PGIBBD):

The test is developed by Dwarka Pershad and Santosh Kumar Verma (1990). It
consists of
1. PGI Memory scale,
2. Revised Bhatia’s Short Battery of Performance test of intelligence,
3. Verbal Adult Intelligence Scale,
4. Nahor Benson Test,
5. Bender Gestalt Test.
This test can be use on anyone within the age range of 20-45 irrespective of their
education and sex (Pershad & Verma, 1990).

4. Wechsler Memory Scale –3rd edition (WMS-III) :

It is given by David Wechsler (1948). The second revision is done in 1987, WMS-R
and now it is in its third revision (1998). It assesses learning, memory, and working
memory in the age range of 16-89 years. This edition retains the index score
configuration of the WMS-R, but scale content, administration and scoring
procedures have been changed. It requires strict and discreet timing for certain
subtests (Wechsler, 1998).
􀀹This third edition updates the WMS-R and provides subtest and composite
scores that assess memory and attention functions using both auditory
and visual stimuli.
􀀹There are now eight Primary Indexes (Auditory Immediate (was Verbal),
Visual Immediate (was Visual), Immediate Memory (new), Auditory
Delayed (new), Visual Delayed (new), Auditory Reception Delayed (new),
General Memory (only delayed subtest scores), and Working Memory),
which constitute Immediate Memory, General (Delayed) Memory, and
Working Memory (was Attention/Concentration).
􀀹This edition retains the index score configuration of the WMS-R, but scale
content, administration and scoring procedures have been changed.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 16
 􀀹There is one slight change to the optional Information and Orientation
subtest and one item has been deleted and six items added to the Mental
Control subtest.
􀀹The Figural Memory, Visual Paired Associated, and card B of Visual
Reproduction subtests have been dropped.
􀀹There are slight wording and administration changes in Logical Memory,
and added subtests help to assess various aspects of visual memory.
􀀹Requires strict and discreet timing for certain subtests

5. The Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB) :

On the basis of the concept given by A.R. Luria, Anne Lise Christensen developed
this battery which was further adapted in the United States by Charles J. Golden,
Thomas A. Hammeke, and Arnold D. Purisch, in the year 1985. It was designed to
assess neurologically impaired patients for ages 15 and over. It has two forms in
which form I has 269 items and form II has 279 items. It is having 4 scales namely
Clinical, Summary, Localization and Factor.

Clinical Summary Localization Factor

Motor functions Pathognomonic Left frontal Kinsethesis-based Simple phonemic

movement reading

Rhythm Left-hemisphere Left sensorimotor Drawing speed Word repetition

Tactile functions Right Hemisphere Left parietal- Fine-motor speed Reading

occipital polysyllabic words

Visual functions Profile elevation Left temporal Spatial-based Reading complex

movement material

Receptive speech Impairment Right frontal Oral-motor skill Reading simple

material

Expressive speech Right Rhythm and Spelling

sensori pitch
motor
perception

Writing Right Simple Motor writing skill

parietal tactile
-
occipit sensation
al

Reading Arithmetic
Right Streognosis calculation
tempor
al

Arithmetic Visual acuity and naming Number reading

Memory Visual-spatial organization Verbal memory

Intellectual processes Phonemic discrimination Visual and

complex memory

Spelling (Form II only) Relational concepts General verbal

intelligence

Motor writing (Form II only) Concept recognition Complex verbal

arithmetic

Verbal-spatial relationship Simple verbal

arithmetic

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 17
 6. Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) :
CANTAB developed at University of Cambridge, provide an effective method of
cognitive assessment by assessing
1. General memory and learning,
2. Working memory and executive function,
3. Visual memory,
4. Attention and reaction time (RT),
5. Semantic/verbal memory, and decision making and
6. Response control.
This is a language-independent test which has a touch screen technology that
delivers rapid and non invasive cognitive assessment. It contains 19 tests in
which one can run tests individually or can set up a battery of a number of tests.
ASSESSING SPECIAL POPULATION
To assess the special population, who cannot be properly or adequately,
examined with traditional instruments the performance, non language and non verbal
tests are widely used. Mentally Retarded Persons, Person with Physical Disabilities
comes under this group (Anastasi, 1997).Following tests have been developed for these
populations:
1. Assessment of Disability in Persons Suffering from Mental Retardation
(ADPMR):
Individual tests for intelligence and measure for adaptive behavior in everyday life are
widely used to assess the strengths and deficit areas of mentally retarded persons.
ADPMR is a scale for measuring and quantifying disability in person with mental
retardation, developed by A. Nizamie, V.K. Singh and B.N.P. Sinha in 2005. It
comprised of five areas, namely
,
1.Perceptual 2. Self- 3.Communication 4. Social 5. 6.Occupational
-Motor Care Academic

Rating can be done by direct observation and informant’s information.

2. Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale (IDEAS):

It is a scale for measuring and quantifying disability in mental disorders. The scale is
developed by The Rehabilitation Committee of the Indian Psychiatric Society in 2002.A
scale for measuring and quantifying disability in mental disorders. It is best suited for
the purpose of measuring and certifying disability for the mentally ill population
in India. Patients with the following diagnosis are eligible for the disability benefits-
Schizophrenia Bipolar disorder, Dementia, ObsessiveCompulsive
disorder.

The duration of illness at least 2 years - the number of months the patient was
symptomatic in last 2 years should be determined.
3. Assessment for Person with Physical Disabilities:
It is possible to administer verbal tests on the person with hearing impairment; if the
oral questions are typed on cards. Some of the earliest performance scales, such as the
Pintner-Paterson Performance Scale, The Arthur Performance Scale, and the WISC-R
Performance Scale has been the most widely used in this area. For blind persons oral
tests can be most readily adapted while the performance tests are least likely to be
applicable. The Wechsler scales have been adapted for blind persons and widely used
in western scenario. Person with motor impairment found it difficult to work against the
strict time limit or in strange situation, for them there are steps taken by adapting some
tests, like Porteus Maze Test. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test is one which is widely
used in this area. (Anastasi, 1997)The assessment of physically disabled children at
an early age is very important in order to provide appropriate educational experiences
from the outset. This helps to prevent the cumulative learning deficits that would
magnify the effects of the disability on intellectual development.

COMPUTERS AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 18
 Mental health professionals eagerly embraced technology in their quest to
improve the efficiency and accuracy of testing as the scoring of psychological tests by
hand is a tedious, time consuming, and error prone.The umbrella term Computer
Assisted Psychological Assessment (CAPA) refers to the entire range of computer
applications in psychological assessment. Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB)
development was the first step towards this technical revolution in the field of mental
health. By the 1970s, it was realized that computers could be integrated into the entire
process of psychological assessment. By the 1980s, CAPA was so prevalent that
virtually every psychological test in existence could be interpreted by computers.
Computing in mental health has included not only computer assisted assessment but
also computer interviews, computerized diagnosis, computer aided instruction, clinical
consultation and simulated psychiatric interviews. (Groth & Marnat, 2003).For example,
MMPI, WAIS-R, WISC-R, CANTAB and many more psychological tools has computer
versions.

Issues related to the development of Psychological Tests

A psychological test requires few basic procedures to be followed, in order to
make it ready for administration. The following are the main important aspects which
have to be considered:
 Content: - This is the first question; the author of the test must answer. Which
abilities, aptitudes, or personality traits are to be measured? After having
determined this valuable point, the author of the test is required to search for the
scientific work conducted in that particular area. But Test content has often been
an area of criticism. Items in terms of factual and veridical content can always be
challenged.
 Item analysis:-The quality and merits of a test depends upon the individual items of
which it is composed. Item analysis is thus the most integral part of both the
reliability and validity of the test.
 Target Population:- The next step is to identify the target population on whom the
test has been standardized.
 Problems of reliability: - Variation in human performance is an important problem
which may challenge the reliability of a test. Usually it is more evident in personality
tests than as compared to ability test (Groth & Marnat, 2003). Another problem in
establishing reliability results from the imprecise nature of psychological testing
methods. Ideally a test being used for clinical purpose should have reliability of .90
and for research purpose it should not be less than .70 (Anastasi, 1997; Groth-
Marnat, 2003).
 Validity:- Two types of validities required in clinical testing are incremental validity
and conceptual validity. Incremental validity means that the test should be able to
produce the results which are accurate and could be obtained with greater ease and
less expense. Conceptual validity focuses upon the uniqueness of an individual
(Anastasi, 1997) problems with validity.
 Standardization and Norms:- Standardized procedure is an essential procedure in
any psychological test. A test must possess norms or standards. The norm group is
referred to as the standardization sample. Before the administration of the test, the
user must be aware of the population on which the test has been standardized.
Some of the common criticism of psychological tests has come through the Anti-test
Revolt(Anastasi,1997), they are: One of the major criticisms of psychological tests
has been that they foster a rigid, inflexible, and permanent classification of
individuals

Controversial concepts in psychological testing

 Culture fair vs. culture free test
When psychologists began to develop psychological test for cross cultural purpose,
in the first part of the 20 th century, they presumed that it would be theoretically possible
to measure “hereditary intellectual potential” independent of the cultural experiences.
The individual’s behavior was thought to be overlaid with a sort of cultural veneer whose
penetration became the objective of what were called the “culture free tests”.
Subsequent developments laid to demonstration of fallacy of this concept. It was
recognized that hereditary and environmental factors operate jointly at all the stages in
the life of a human being. Since all the behaviour are affected by the cultural milieu in

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 19
which the individual is reared and psychological tests measure the behavioural aspect
of an individual, the performance is bound to be affected due to the cultural impact.
Thus the term culture free was replaced by terms as “culture common”, “culture fair” and
“cross- cultural” (Anastasi, 1997).
 Measures of deterioration and premorbid IQ
The deterioration in cognitive functioning with age can be accessed through the
overall scatter between the scores of the Wechsler subtests. Wechsler (1998) proposed
that the relation of Verbal to performance IQ, and Hold to Don’t Hold tests can measure
the deterioration.
Don’t Hold - Digit Span, Similarities, Digit Symbol, and Block Design are those which
normally decline with age
Hold tests - Vocabulary, Information, Object Assembly, and Picture Completion tend
to remain stable through age (Korchin, 1986).

Deterioration Index (DI) =Hold- Don’t Hold

2
Premorbid IQ provides the information with which it is possible to compare the
current performance level of an individual to the premorbid level of functioning.For
estimating premorbid ability, the performances on hold test are considered as they
found to be more resistant to neurological impairment. It can also be assessed by
demographic variables based regression equation developed by Crawford and Allan
(1997), National Adult Reading Test(NART) developed by Hazel Nelson in the 1980s
and published in 1982 or Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) developed by
Wechsler, 2001(Groth & Marnat, 2003).But, assessing premorbid I.Q is still remaining
an area of controversy.
 Malingering
Malingering is a medical and psychological term that refers to an individual
exaggerating the symptoms of mental or physical disorders for a variety of motives,
including getting financial compensation, avoiding work, obtaining drugs, getting lighter
criminal sentences, trying to get out of going to school, or simply to attract attention or
sympathy. Malingering is a constant concern when conducting a psychological
assessment. The detection of malingering requires clinical acumen as well as sound
psychological assessment (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
Malingering occurs usually in one of the following situation:
1. In criminal cases, when mental illness or mental retardation is fiegned in
order to obtain better or safer living conditions or an environment from which
escape is easier, in order to obtain drugs, to avoid trails, or in hopes of
evading responsibility for the crime with which the offender is charged.
2. In personal injury actions and compensation cases
3. In military service or similar special situation where nervous or mental
disease might afford an escape from hazardous or arduous duty.
So, psychological tests are being used frequently to detect malingering
Source of Error in Test Findings
Examiner being the test administrator may not always remain neutral in the test
administration and knowingly or unknowingly may affect the test findings. Some of the
effects caused by the examiner have been identified which are supposed to be taken
care of are:
 Barnum effect: The tendency of individuals and clinicians to readily accept vague
personality descriptions as though they were valid and specific (Cash, Mikulka, 1989).
 Halo effect: It refers to the tendency on the part of the examiner to be unduly
influenced by a single trait which may color the judgment of the examiner about the
person taking the test. It is a tendency to rate a person high or low on all dimensions
because of a global impression is called hallo effect.
 Leniency effect: It refers to the reluctance of many raters to assign unfavorable
ratings. It leads to the bunching of ratings at the upper end of scale. It is also caused by
extraneous factors such as the attractiveness of the examinee.
 Error of central tendency: It refers to the tendency to place people at the middle of
the scale and to avoid extreme position
 Context Error: It refers to the examiner to assess the person in the context of
others rather than based upon objective performance.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 20
 Other factors caused by the examiner also have been identified that affects
the psychological assessments are:
 Impact of rapport establishment: Rapport establishment is a comfortable, warm
atmosphere that serves to motivate examinees and elicit cooperation. Initiating a
cordial testing milieu is a crucial aspect of valid testing. A tester who fails to establish
rapport may cause a subject to react with anxiety, passive-aggressive
noncooperation, or open hostility. Failure to establish rapport distorts test findings:
ability is underestimated and personality is misjudged.
 Influence of gender, race, and experience in psychological assessment: A wide
body of research has sought to determine whether certain characteristics of the
examiner cause examinee scores to be raised or lowered on psychological
assessment. Interview and interactive testing procedures create ample opportunity
for an examiner’s age, gender, ethnicity or other characteristics to make
respondents feel more or less comfortable and more or less inclined to be
forthcoming. Examiners accordingly need to be alert to instances in which such
personal qualities may be influencing the nature and amount of the data they are
collecting. Most studies find that sex, experience and race of the examiner make
little, if any, difference. In isolated instances, particular examiner characteristics
might very well have a large effect on examinee test scores. (Gregory 2004)
 Background and motivation of the examinee: Examiner not always is at fault,
psychological assessments are also affected by the examinee. Examinee differ not
only in the characteristics that examiner to assess, but also in other extraneous
ways that might confound the test results. There are multiple factors that play an
important role like interest, motivation, test anxiety, malingering, or cultural
background. Test results might be inaccurate if the examinee has reasons to
perform in an inadequate or unrepresentative manner. A motivation to deceive or to
fake will affect the test findings. (Gregory 2004)

Problem in different domains of psychological testing

An inevitable consequence of the expansion and growing complexity of any
scientific endeavor is an increasing specialization of interests and functions among its
practitioner. Each of the area has some merits and certain limitations. It will be
discussed one by one.

i) Issues in intelligence testing:-

IQ tests are excellent predictors of academic achievement, occupational
performance, and are sensitive to the presence of neuropsychological deficit. However,
certain liabilities are also associated with these successes. They are limited in
predicting certain aspects of occupational success and non-academic skills, such as
creativity, motivational level, social acumen, and success in dealing with people.
Furthermore, IQ scores are not measures of an innate, fixed ability, and their use in
classifying minority groups has been questioned. Finally, there has been an
overemphasis on understanding the end product of cognitive functioning and a relative
neglect in appreciating underlying cognitive processes (Groth-Marnat, 2003).
Currently the test of intelligence based upon the psychometric abilities are showing
shift from the g-factor to the multifactor approach. Tests are being developed based on
the neuropsychological processing model. Conceptualization of intellectual functioning
based on a neuropsychological understanding of how various regions of the brain may
function is valuable, especially if the brain is considered responsible for intelligence in
the first place ( Das, et al, 1994). Test such as the Kaufman Assessment Battrey for
Children ( Kaufman & Kaufman, 1993) and Das- Neilgeri Cognitive Assessment System
(Neilgeri and Das, 1997) are based on the neuropsychological model only. There are a
few problems with intelligence tests which must be addressed:
 Testing persons with physical disability: Although steps have been taken to
develop tests to assess the intelligence of those who are physically disabled but the
assessment of intelligence may not be relevant for the simple reason that every
person presents a unique configuration of types and degrees of abilities, disabilities
and personal characteristics
 Ethnic minorities: Intelligence tests have always been criticized for being limited in
assessing the ethnic minorities. For this reason it is often essential to be aware with
the values and beliefs of the client. The more flexible approach in these cases is to

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 21
 apply tests which are least affected by cultural variables. Tests such as Ravens
Progressive Matrices or the performance part of other intelligence tests can be used.
 Flynn effect: Flynn effect is the rise of the average intelligence quotient over
generations. Norm revision in every 10 years is an essential part of intelligence
testing. The exposure of children enhances with the change with time, hence the
children tested on older norms would score higher so the intelligence test becomes
somewhat of little use if the norms are not revised after a period of ten years.

Personality testing and related issues

Measuring personality may utilize the format of objective testing, as in a
personality inventory, or of projective tests such as the Thematic Apperception Test or
the Rorschach Inkblot Test. But these days cognitive psychologists are also focusing
upon the biological determinants of personality. For example, recently efforts have been
laid to study individual difference on thought processes using positron emission
tomography (Posner, et al, 2001).
Valuable assessment shows what is special or different about the person being
assessed. Some of the major advantages and limitation of personality assessment
techniques are:-

a) Self report tests: Straightforward to standardize, easy to administer, reliable,

capture views of self well; but limited in richness, easy to fake, depends on self-
knowledge.
b) Projective: One of the few ways to go beyond the surface and assesses those
aspects which may not self-report, may yield insight for further studies; but often
have significant problems of reliability and validity.
In projective and self report techniques, there are some limitations that question the
reliability and the validity of the psychological assessment. For example, limitations
highlight several issues associated with the Rorschach Inkblot Test. It is one of the most
complex test in current use, error can potentially be introduced from many different
directions, including censorship by the subjects, scoring errors (particularly for
infrequently used scorings), poor handling of the subtleties of interpretation, time
required for scoring and interpretation, limited use with children, extensive time required
for training. Like most projective techniques, TAT theoretically offers access to the
covert and deeper structures of an individual’s personality. It is still rated in the top most
frequently used instruments. There has typically been difficulty establishing adequate
internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Because inadequate normative data are
generally lacking, clinicians often rely on clinical experience when they interpret the
responses. The standardization in respect to administration and scoring is generally
inadequate. Thus, the effectiveness of the technique is often more dependent on the
clinician’s individual skill than on the quality of the test itself.

iii) Issues in neuropsychological assessment

Neuropsychology is a branch of psychology which studies brain-behaviour
relationship. It also focuses upon the neuropsychological assessment and rehabilitation
(Mitrushina et. al 1999).
With the recent advancement in neuroimaging, there have been several queries
regarding the need for neuropsychological assessment. Some of the main ones are:

i) Do we need neuropsychological assessment in the stage of advanced

functional and structural imaging? Neuroimaging today provides precise
information regarding brain functioning. Still neuropsychological assessment retains
its place as an important tool for brain functioning. There are various indicators of
neuropsychological assessment which makes it relevant even today:
 Detailed neuropsychological assessment can help in establishing the baseline
level of cognitive functioning.
 Neuropsychological assessment provides the nature and extent of cognitive
impairment (Groth & Marnat, 2003).
 Also the deficits observed in neuropsychological testing are used for rehabilitation
and planning of treatment.
 Neuropsychological testing is also used in pre and post assessment of cognitive
functioning after neurosurgery (Stringer & Nadolne 2002)

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 22
  At times no abnormality is observed on structural imaging; still the behavioural
changes are observed which may be indicating organicity.
 It is used to assess brain functioning in progressive brain disease.
 It is used to assess the neuropsychological sequel of psychiatric disorders.
ii) Contra-indicators- Neuropsychological findings at times may not be relevant,
even if the assessment prerequisites have been checked. There are several factors
which may render the results of neuropsychological findings as unreliable ( Groth &
Marnat, 2003), some of them are:
 Physical problem may affect the test performance. Also the sensory or motor
difficulties may affect the test findings.
 Current or pre-existing psychiatric disorders or learning disability may affect
psychiatric disorders (Lezak, 1995).
 Congenital & pre-existing neurological conditions including prior brain injury,
insult or epilepsy are also relevant factors that may affect results.
 Language problem may also be an important factor as those who have a different
mother tongue may perform poorly.
 Cultural biasness is observed in some of the test which may affect the test
findings.
 Assessment in sessions may affect the test results for a variety of reasons.

Psychological report writing

Psychological report is the final step in assessment. In general there are few
guidelines to be followed while writing a psychological report. They can be discussed in
the following points:

i) Length: A psychological report along with proper history and behavioral observation
should be around five or seven single spaced pages (Singh 1997). However the
length can substantially vary depending upon the nature of report.
ii) Style: The style of report writing may depend upon the primary training and
orientation of the examiner. The American Psychological Association (1992)
recommends that regardless the form followed in report writing the report should
have accuracy, clarity, integration and readability.
iii) Presenting the test interpretation: There are three ways in which clinician presents
the interpretation of the test. The first one is the hypothesis oriented focuses upon the
referral question. The second one is the domain oriented divided over specific topics
such as abilities, interpersonal relationships, vocational abilities or sexuality. The third
approach is test-by-test interpretation, in which the clinician simply gives relevant
findings according to each test (Tallent, 1992).
iv) Topics: In the case of domain oriented report writing there are a few broad topics
under which the report is written. They are the cognitive function, personality&
interpersonal relationship. Furthermore if the test is for diagnostic clarification then it
must include the diagnostic indicators also.
v) What to include? – The guideline to write a report relates to the needs of the referral
setting, background of the readers, purpose of testing, relative usefulness of the
information, and whether the information describes the unique characteristic of the
person. The clinician should emphasis relative intensity of client’s behaviour. (APA,
1992). And it is very important that the report writer should always try to avoid
technical words in reports means the terminology should be very simple ( Groth &
Marnat, 2003). And there should be some specific rule regarding the length of
information.
vi) Summary and recommendation: This is the final stage of report writing when the
clinician must give an overall summary of the relevant findings in a brief manner
followed by proper recommendations for future assessment and treatment planning.

Ethical issues: related controversies

Ethical issues are of great relevance in psychological assessment. The American
Psychological Association has published certain ethical guidelines called Ethical
Principal of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (APA, 1992). A special series in the
Journal of Personality Assessment (Russ, 2001) also elaborate about the ethical
dilemmas found in training, medical, school and forensic settings. Some of the main
ethical issues to be considered in psychological assessment are:
Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 23
i) Developing a professional relationship:
The relationship between the client and the clinician should be completely
professional and well defined. This means that the nature, purpose and conditions of
relationship are discussed and agreed on.
ii) Invasion of privacy:
APA (1992) specifically states that the information obtained through
psychological assessment should never be shared without the permission of the client.
iii) Confidentiality :
Practitioners have a primary obligation to safeguard the confidentiality of
information, including test results that they obtain from clients in the course of
consultations (APA, 1992a).
iv) Informed consent :
Before testing commences, the test user needs to obtain informed consent from
test takers or their legal representatives. The main purpose is to made examinee aware,
in language that they can understand, of the reason for testing.
v) Labeling :
The clinician should always be sensitive to the potential negative impact resulting
from labeling by outside sources and or by self-labeling as well as the possible limiting
effects which labeling might have.
vi) Competency of the clinician:
Another ethical issue which has been focused upon is the competency of the
clinician in proper administration and interpretation of the testing instrument. The
clinician should have the knowledge of the test and their limitations and should be
willing to accept responsibility for competent test use (Turner et al., 2001).
vii) Communicating test results:
The psychologist should give feedback to the client or the referral source
regarding the results of assessment. The information being provided should be clear
and should ideally be in the everyday language.
viii) Maintenance of test security and assessment information:
This specifically means that any copyright material should not be duplicated.
This means the psychologist should make all possible effort to ensure that the materials
are safe and remain in the possession of safe hands only. The security of assessment
results should also be maintained.

Related Controversies:
Psychological assessment has been criticized for violating ethical issues.
It is often sited that psychological tests lead to invasion of privacy. Although
this problem can logically be related to personality test it is often used against any kind
of test.
 Furthermore the problem of confidentiality is another area for which the
psychological tests have been seen through skepticism.
 The “self-fulfilling prophecy” has often been sighted against testing, as it
affects the individual’s self concept and the behaviour of his associates around
him.

Indian Scenario
In India majority of work has been done on adaptation of tests. Tests such as the
PGI Battery of Brain Dysfunction (Prasad &Verma, 1989), Bhatia Battery of
Performance Test of Intelligence (Bhatia, 1955), WISC-R(Verbal scale was also
translated in Hindi by Sharma in 1997).Stanford- Binet Intelligence Test(Kulshreshtha,
1971),Developmental Screening Test (Raj, 1977), Multiphasic Personality
Questionnaire (Murthy, 1975) have been adapted.There has been effort in Central
Institute of Psychiatry to standardize the norms of several tests such as the construct
validity of Luria Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB),and standardization of
few subtests of Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery
(CANTAB).There is AIIMS Neuropsychological battery which is a Hindi adaptation of
Luria Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB). Moreover National Institute of
Mental Health & Neurosciences (NIMHANS) has published the norms of tests like
Stroop test, Trail Making and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and development of tests in
different areas.Hindi Adaptation of Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children was also
done in Ranchi Institute of Neuro Psychiatry and Allied Sciences (RINPAS). But still,

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 24
Indian Psychologist need to take further efforts in order to develop new psychological
tests as well as to prepare norm for Indian population and revising of existing norms.
Future Direction
Professional, moral, ethical, social and even legal issues have interacted to
produce today’s trends in psychological testing. New tests keep coming out all the time,
with no end in sight. There are hundreds of new tests being publishes each year. But
there is safety in predicting continued controversy and disagreement in the testing field,
which will no doubt produce further change. Disagreement and controversy are second
nature to psychologists; because of disagreement, however, new data are sought,
found, and ultimately produce some clarification of old controversies along with band-
new contradictions and battle lines. As a consequence, change will be constant
characteristics of the fields. Improved technology is currently being applied in the testing
field. Because of advances in computer technology, statistical procedures can be
performed with great ease. This technology thus contributes to the current trend toward
better future. Psychologists continue to be optimistic because of the change as
ultimately resulting in more empirical data, better theories, continuing innovations, and
higher standards (Groth-Marnat, 2003). Ideal approaches for Psychological assessment
should be comprehensive and multi-faceted in techniques and theoretical frameworks.
They should also be flexible and adaptable to the unique needs of each individual. And
the test should be more standardized and the norms should not be out dated.

Appendix-I
Intelligence: An integrate or global capacity of the individual to think rationally, to act
purposefully and deal effectively with the environment.
Inventory: In inventory the individual describes his/her own feelings, environment, and
reaction of others towards him/her.
Personality: Personality is a dynamic organization, inside the person, of
psychophysical systems that create a person’s characteristic patterns of behaviour,
thoughts, and feelings.
Diagnosis: Determining the nature and source of a person’s abnormal behavior, and
classifying the behavior pattern within an accepted diagnostic system
Assessment: Appraising or estimating the level or magnitude of some attribute of a
person; testing is one small part of assessment which also incorporates observations,
interviews, rating scales and checklists.
Psychometrics: Psychometrics is the field of study concerned with the theory and
technique of educational and psychological measurement, which includes the
measurement of knowledge, abilities, attitudes, and personality traits. The field is
primarily concerned with the construction and validation of measurement instruments,
such as questionnaires, tests, and personality assessments.

Appendix-II: Important Landmarks in psychological Testing(Gregory 2004)

1905 Binet and Simon invent the first modern intelligence test.
1914 Stern introduces the IQ, or Intelligence quotient
1916 Lewis Terman revises the Binet-Simon scales, publishes the Stanford-Binet
revisions appears in 1937,1960 and 1986.
1917 Robert Yerkes spearheads the development of the Army Alpha and Beta
examinations
1917 Robert Woodworth develops the personal data sheet , the first personality test
1920 Rorschach Inkblot test published.
1921 Psychological Corporation –the first major test publisher-founded by Catell,
Thorndike and Woodworth.
1939 Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale published. Revisions published in
1955,1981,and 1997.

Appendix III: Classification of psychological assessment: Commonly Used

PERSONALITY INTELLIGENCE NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL CHECKLISTAND
TESTS TESTS TESTS RATING SCALES

CATELL’S 16 PF Developmental Bender Visual Motor Brief Psychiatric

Screening Test Gestalt Test Rating Scale
Multiphasic Gesell Wisconsin Card Sorting Positive and Negative

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 25
 Personality Developmental Test Syndrome Scale
Questionnaire Schedule
(MPQ)-
Neo-PI-Revised Stanford -Binet test Post Graduate Institute Conner’s Rating Scale
Battery of Brain
Dysfunction
Rorschach Inkblot test Wechsler Wechsler Memory Scale – The Child Behavior
Intelligence Scale 3rd edition Checklist
Thematic Apperception Malin’s Intelligence Luria-Nebraska The Childhood Autism
Test Scale for Indian Neuropsychological Battery Rating Scale
Children
The Draw A Person Bhatia’s Cambridge Young Mania Rating
Test Performance Test Neuropsychological Test Scale
Automated Battery
Children Personality Gesell Drawing Test Trail making Hamilton Rating Scale
Questionnaire For Depression
Children Self Report Seguin Form Board Stroop Beck Depression
and Projective Inventory Test Inventory
Children’s The Vineland Social Boston Aphasia test Beck Scale For
Apprerception Test Maturity Scale Suicidal Ideation
Minnesota Multiphasic Behavioural Alcohol Disorder
Personality Inventory -II Assessment Scale Identification Test
for Indian Children
with Mental
Retardation
Millon Clinical Multiaxial Vinland Social CAGE Questionnaire
Inventory- III Maturity Scale
Temperament and Human Figure Yale Brown Obsessive
Character Inventory drawing test Compulsive Scale
Sentence Completion General Health
Test questionnaire
Zung Depression
Scale
Schedule for the
Assessment of
Positive Symptoms
Schedule for the
Assessment of
Negetive Symptoms

Appendix IV: Other tools for psychological assessment

Name of the Test Development Purpose of Assessment
Checklist for Child Joseph Petty, 1990 Child Abuse
Abuse
Evaluation(CCAE)
NEPSY Marit Korkman, Ursula Kirk, Neuropsychological
Sally Kemp, 1998 Development
Eating Disorder David M. Garner, 1984, 1991, Eating Disorder
Inventory-3 (EDI-3) 2004
Slosson Full Range Bob Algozzine, Ronald C. Full range intelligence
Intelligence Test(S- Eaves, Lester Mann, H.
FRIT) Rober t Vance(ed. By Steven.
W. Slosson),1988, 1993
Kaufman Adolescent Alen S. Kaufman, Nadeen L. Intelligence
and Adult Kaufman, 1993
Intelligence
Test(KAAIT)
Test of Memory Tomm N. Tombaugh,1996 Neuropsychological impairment
Malingering(TOMM) & Malingering
NEO PI -R Costa and Mc Crae, 2002. Measure of five domains of
personality
Bayley Scales of Infant Nancy Bayley, 1993 Infant Development
Development
Universal Non Verbal Bruce A. Bracken, R. Steve, Nonverbal Intelligence test
Intelligence Test(UNIT) Mc Callum, 1988
Benton Visual Arthur L. Benton , 1946 (Rev- Visual perception & Visual

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 26
 Retention Test 5 by Abigail Benton Memory
Sivan,1992)
Defence Mechanism N. R. Mrinal & Uma Measure of Defences
Inventory(DMI) Singhal,1984
Dementia Rating Scale- Paul J. Jurica, Christopher L. Dementia
2(DRS-2) Leitten, Mattis, 1988,2001.
Behavioural Barbara A. Wilson, Nick Executive Function
Assessment of the Alderman, Paul W. Burgess,
Dysexecutive Hazel Emslie, Jonathon J.
Syndrome(BADS) Evans, 1996
The Rivermead Barbara A. Wilson, Janet Memory
Behavioural Memory Cockburn, Alan
Test-II Baddeley,1985,2003
Constructive Thinking Seymour Epstein,2001 Constructive Thinking
Inventory(CTI)
Suicidal Ideation William M. Reynolds,1988 Suicidal Ideation
Questionnaire(SIQ)
Amsterdam Short-term Ben Schmand & Jaap Short- term Memory
Memory Test Lindeboom with collaboration
of Thomas Mertin & Scott R.
Millis,2005
Cognitive Distortion John Briere,2000 Cognitive Distortions
Scales(CDS)
Grade Level Jayanthi Narayan, 1999. Learning Problem in Schools
Assessment Device For
Children With Learning
Problems In
School(GLADS)
Autism Diagnostic Ann Le Couteur, Catherine Autism
Interview– Lord, Michael Rutter,2003
Revised(ADI-R)
Nimhans Bhoomika R. Kar, Shobjini Neuropsychological function
Neuropsychological L.Rao, B.A. Chandramouli, K.
Battery For Children Thennaraus,2004
Objects Sorting Test Craig J. Gonsalvez, Ida P. Thought Deviation
(OST) Barnabas, and Marisa L.
Lobo
Raven’s Progressive John C.Ravens.2002 Abstract Reasoning
Matrices
Porteus Maze Test Stanley Portues1952 Non verbal test of intelligence
Preschool Behavior Jaxqueline McGuire and Focusing on children
Checklist Naomi Richman ,1998 need ,parental involvement,
change over time, obtaining
resourses
Behaviour rating GenardA.gioia, K. To assess executive function
inventory of Executive Isquith,L.Kenworthy,2004 behavior
Functioning
Childhood Autism Schoper, Riechler and Identify children with autism
Rating Scale Renner ,1971
Children’s Self Report Ziffer and Shapiro,1992 Understanding the inner world
And Projetive Inventory of the child ,social –emotional
functioning
Universal Nonverbal Bruce A. Bacon and To assess the general
Intelligence Test R.S.McCallum intelligence and cognitive ability
Behavior Rating RuttenBerg,Schien and Evaluate the Status of autistic ,
Instrument For Autistic Wenar,2004 atypical or other low functioning
And other Atypical Children
Children-II
Portage Guide to early Doan,Wollenburg and To assess the domain of
education-II Wilson,1976 impaired behavior in a child

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 27
 Appendix IV: Important findings in different clinical conditions: Kahn and Giffen
(1960)
ORGANIC BRAIN SCHIZOPHRENIA MANIA DEPRESSION ANXIETY Suicidal
PATHOLOGY Ideation
Piotrowski signs on Bender-Gestalt test Rorschach Rorschach Rorschach Rorscha
Rorschach  Complete  Decreased  Less  Average or ch
 Number of deviance from reaction time number of slightly poor  FV
responses less gestalt  More number responses form level
than 15  Complete of responses  Vista  Average
 Response time rotation  Colour responses ≥ number of
greater than 60  Added angles dominated 1 poplar
seconds  Giving new form  FC’+C’F+C’ responses
 Less than two names to the responses >2  High number
human designs  More number  Morbid of texture
movements Rorschach of responses responses > responses (≥
 F+% is less than  Perceptual on chromatic 3 1)
70 disturbances cards as  Form level  High number
 Less than 4  X+%(<70) compared to average or of vista
popular  F+% (<70) achromatic slightly poor responses (≥
responses  X-% (>20) cards 1)
 Persevaration of  Thought  Poor form Thematic
responses at disturbances level (<70)Apperception
least 3 times  special Test
without regard to scores (>4)  Inconclusive
form accuracy (incom,fabcom,alog, ends (I don’t
 Impotence contam, DV, DR) know what
 Perplexity  Perseveration will happen)
 Automatic  Few or no Thematic Usually
phrases that are human Apperception negative
illogical and movement Test outcomes of
irrelevant to the responses  Unorganized the stories
task  Pure colour stories  Indecisivene
responses  Lack of ss (may be
 Rejections coherence a boy or a
 Less number girl)
On Bender-Gestalt of responses  Suicidal
Test Thematic intents
 Serious Apperception Test  Short
disturbance of stories (at
gestalt  Rigidity and times mere
 Modification or refusal to description
substitution of elaborate of pictures)
parts of figure  Negation
 Micrographia or  Déjà vu
macrographia reaction
 Difficulty with  Projection of
angles threatening or
 Partial rotation evil intentions
 Vagueness and and

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 28
 sketchiness homosexual
 Loss of detail and attributes
fragmentation  Prolonged
 Perseveration, reaction time
overlapping etc.  Grossly
The Draw-A-Person disproportion
Test ate emphasis
 Lack of details on relatively
 Erasures unimportant
infrequent details
 Figures may be  Frequent
large perusal of the
 Lines heavy and back of the
simple card
 Proportions poor Draw-a-Person test
 Synthesis weak  Omission of
 Omissions of important
parts parts
 Bizarre
additions
 Grossly
exaggerated
size
 Presence of
sexual
organs in
drawing

Appendix V: Tentative Guidelines for selecting a test for various purposes

The use of specific psychological test is one of the basic skills of the applied
psychologist. In clinical settings, testing is the unique function of the psychologist.
Test user should:
1. Define the purpose of testing and the population to be selected.
2. Appropriate testing enviorment should be considered as per psychological
testing.
3. Should investigate potential useful sources of information, in addition to
test scores.
4. Read the materials provided by the test developers and avoid using tests
which are unclear or incomplete information are provided.
5. Tests should be selected that are appropriate-for the intended test taking
population considering age, sex, education.
6. Provide evidence that the tests meet its intended purpose(s).
7. Avoid being clerical in approach. Should have one’s own perception and
skills in analysis of results. Should have a holistic approach.

Backgrou Behavior History of

Assessment Tests
nd Info al head

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 29
 Observati
injury
on
Personality Not ESDST,BMVGT,MCMI-III/MMPI-
Assesment/diagn
osis
  signific
ant
II,
TAT,SSCT,RORSCHACH(Basic
tests of assessment. But, other
tests can be used depending
upon the situation)
Neuropsychologi ESDST,BMVGT,PGIBBD/
cal
Assessment
   CANTAB/LNBB

Intelligence May/ VSMS,DST/VAIS,WAPIS/

Assessment   Not be
Signific
Standford-Binent,
Battery,Seguin form
Bhatia
board,
ant MISIC,SPM

For therapeutic Past May /Not  BPRS /PANSS/ SANS/ SAPS/

purposes.
According to
history
and
 be
Significant  HAM-D /MADRS/ GDS BDI/
psychiatric premorbid YMRS
Condition personalit  Yale Brown OC Scale
1.Depression y  Any scale relevant to the
2.OCD condition and tools of
3. Anxiety personality assessment (TAT,
4.Substance Rorschach etc) if required
Related
5. Mania

REFERENCES

Major references
Anastasi, A. & Urbina, S. (1997) Psychological testing (7 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-hall
Gregory, R.J. (2004)Psychological Testing: History, Principles, and Applications.4 th
edition. Pearson education.
Groth-Marnat (2003). Current Status and future directions of psychological assessment:
Introduction. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55, 781–785.
Kaplan, M.R. & Saccuzzo, D.P. (1982) Psychological testing: Principles, Applications, and
Issues, 4th edition. IT publication.
Maruish, M.E. (1999) The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and
outcomes assessment. American Psychiatric Publishing. Washington, DC.
Prasad, D. & Verma, S.K. (2002)The comcept and assessment of intelligence. 2 nd edition.
Bhargava book house.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 30
Singh, A.K. (1997) Tests, Measurements and Research Methods in Behavioral Science.
Bharti bhavan publication.

Other references
Achenbach, T.M. (1991). Integrative Guide to the 1991 CBCL/4-18, YSR, and TRF Profiles.
Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychology
Ackerman, S.J., Clemence, A.J. & Weatherill, R. (1999) Use of the TAT in the assessment of
DSM –IV cluster B personality disorder. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73,
422-448.
Adams, L.A., Culberton, L.J. (2000) Personality Assessment: Adults & Children, in
Comprehensive Text Book of Psychiatry, (Eds.), Kaplan & Sadock, Washington,
Lippincott: Williams & Wilkins.
Agioia. G., Isquith, K., Kenworthy, L. (2004) Behavior rating inventory of executive functioning
manual.Psychologiacl assessment resource.
Algozzine, B., Eaves, R.C., Mann, L. & Vance, H.R. (1988, 1993) Slosson full range intelligence
test(S-FRIT). New York: Slosson Educational Publication, Inc.
American Psychological Association (1974) Standards for educational and psychological tests
and manuals. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association (1992) Ethical principles of psychologists code of conduct.
American Psychologist, 49, 677-680.
Bayley, N. (1993). Bayley scales of infant development (2nd ed.): Manual. San Antonio: The
Psychological Corporation.
Bean, K.L. (1953) Construction of Educational and Personnel Tests. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Co.
Bellak, L. & Bellak, S.S. (1994) Children’s apperception test (C.A.T.) (4th ed.). Larchmnot, N.Y.:
C.P.S. CO
Benton, A.S. (1992). Benton visual retention test (5 th ed.). San Antonio: The Psychological
Corporation.
Beutler , L.E. & Clarkin , I.F. (1990) Systematic treatment selection: Toward targeted
therapeutic interventions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Beutler, L.E. & Harwood, T.M. (2000) Prescriptive Psychotherapy : A practical guide to
systematic treatment selection. New York : Oxford University Press.
Beutler, L.E. & Groth–Marnat, G. (2003) Integrative assessment of adult personality (2ndEds.).
New York: Gilford Press.
Beutler, L.E., Engel, D., Mohr, D., Daldrup, R.J., Bergan, J., Merdith, K. & Merry, W. (1999).
Predictors in differential and self directed psychotherapeutic procedures. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 333-340 in The Use of psychological
testing in treatment planning and outcome assessment (2nd ed.) (Eds.), Maurish,
M. E.
Bhatia, R., Verma, S.K, Pradad, D.,et al, (1971) Bhatia Short Battery of Performance test of
intelligence for adults. Psychologiacal cooperation.
Bracken, B.A., Steve, R. & Callum, Mc. (1988) Universal non verbal intelligence test: examiner’s
manual. Illinoise: Riverside Publishing Company.
Briere, J. (2000) Cognitive distortion scales: professionals manual. Florida Avenue:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Briere, J. (2001) Detailed assessment of post traumatic disorder: Professional’s manual. USA:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
CANTAB (2003) Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. Cambridge:
Cambridge Cognition.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 31
Cash, T.F., Mikulka, P.J. & Brown, T.A. (1989) Validity of Millon’s computerized assessment
system for the MCMI: Comment Moreland and Onstad. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 57 (2), 311-312
Cattell, R.B. & Porter, R.B. (1968) Handbook for the children’s personality questionnaire (The
CPQ). New Delhi: The Psycho Centre. By arrangement with Champaign,
Illinoise, U.S.A: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Cattell, R.B., Eber, H.W. and Tatsuoka, M.M. (1970) Handbook for the sixteen personality factor
questionnaire (16 PF). Champaign, III: Institute for Personality and Ability
Testing.
Cesi, S.J. (1990). On Intelligence …more or less: A bio ecological treatise on intellectual
development. Englewood Cliff Prentice Hall
Clonninger, C.R., Przybeck, T.R., Svrakic, et.al, (1994) The temperament and character
inventory (TCI): A guide to its development and use. Washington University, St.
Louis, Missouri: Centre for Psychobiology of Personality.
Cohen, M.J. (1997) Children‘s Memory Scale: Manual. San Antonio: The Psychological
Corporation.
Conner’s, C.K. (1997). Conner’s Rating Scales-Revised. In Maruish, M.E. (1999). Use of
psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment (pp. 467-
495). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Costa, P.T., Jr. & McCrae, R.R. (1992) NEO PI-R professional manual. Odessa, F.L.:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Craig, J.G., Barnabas, P.I., Lobo, M.L. (2003). Object sorting test manual. Psychological
assessment resource. Inc
Das, J.P., Naglieri, J.A. & Kirby, J.R. (1994). Assessment of cognitive processes: The PASS
theory of intelligence. Neeham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon.
Doan, M.A., Wollenburg, K. & Wilson, E. (1998). Portage Guide to early education.Portage
ptoject.
Dorwart, R.A. (1996). Outcome management strategies in mental health: Applications and
implications for clinical practice. In L. I. Sedner & B. Dickey (Eds.), Outcome
assessment in clinical practice (pp 45- 54). Baltimore : Williams & Wilkins.
Epstein, S. (2001). Constructive thinking inventory: Professional’s manual. USA: Psychological
Assessment Resources, Inc.
Exner, J.E. (2002) The Rorschach: A comprehensive system (4th ed.). New York: Willy.
Eysenck, H.J. & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire.
London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Frank, L.K. (1939) Projective methods for the study of personality. Journal of Psychology, 8,
389-413.
Freeman, F.S. (1965) Theory and practice of psychological testing(3rd ed.).New Delhi: Oxford
and IBH Publishing Co. pvt. Ltd.
Garner, D.M. (1984, 1991, 2004). Eating Disorder Inventory-3. Professional’s manual. USA:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Golden, C.J., Purisch, A.D. & Hammeke, T.A. (1991). Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological
Battery. California: Western Psychological Services.
Graham, J.R. (2000). MMPI-2: Assessing personality and psychopathology (3rd ed.). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Greenspan, S. & Driscoll, J. (1997). The role of intelligence in a broad model of personal
competence. In D.P. Flanagan, J.L. Genshaft, P.L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemprary
intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 131-150). New York:
Guilford Press.
Griffin, J.R., Walton, H.N., Christenson & G.N. (2006). Decoding- encoding screener for dyslexia
(DESD): Manual. Los Angeles, California: Western Psychological Services.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 32
Hamilton, M.A., (1960). Rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neursurg Psychiatry. 23: 56-62
Hankes, E. (1946), Handbook for the Strong vocational interest blank. Campbell, D. P.
accessed at http://books.google.co.in/books on 28.06.09.
Heaton, R.K. (1993). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test manual. Odessa: Psychological assessment
resources.
Holaday, M., Smith, D.A. & Alissa, S. (2000) Sentence Completion Test: A Review of the
Literature
Jaxqueline, M.G., Richman, N. (1998). Preschool Behavior checklist Manual.Academic therapy
Publication.
Jurica, P.J., Leitten, C.L. & Mattis, S. (1988, 2001). Dementia rating scale-2:Professional’s
manual. USA: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Kahn, C.T. & Giffen, B.M. (1960), Psychologist and their Test in Psychological Techniques in
Diagnosis and Evaluation ,New York Pergman Press, 8-14.
Kaplan, H.I., & Sadock, V.A. (2007)Synopsis of psychiatry, tenth edition, Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins.
Kar, B.R., Rao, S.L., Chandramouli, B.A. & Thennaraus, K. (2004). Nimhans
neuropsychological battery for children: manual. Bangalore: NIMHANS (Deemed
University).
Kaufman, A.S. & Kaufman, N.L. (1993). Kaufman adolescent and adult intelligence test. USA:
American Guidance Service, Inc.
Kirchner, W.K. (1958). Age difference in short term retention of rapidly changing information.
Journal of experimental Psychology, 352-358.
Korchin, S.J. (1999) Pyschological Testing I, in, Modern clinical psychology. New Delhi: CBS
Publishers & Distributers,194-247.
Korkman, M., Kirk, U. & Kemp, S. (1998). NEPSY: A developmental neuropsychological
assessment. China: PsychCorp.
Krstic, K. (1964). Classics in the History of Psychology .accessed at
psychclassics.yorku.ca/Krstic/marulic.htm on 28.06.09.
Kulshrestha, S.K. (1971) Stanfor–binet intelligence scale: Hindi adaptation of third revision-
Form L-M. Varanasi: Prashad Psycho Corporation.
Lezak, M.D. (1995). Neuropsychological assessment (3 rd ed.) New York: Oxford University
Press.
Lindzey, G. (1961) Projective Techniques and Cross Cultural Research. New York: Appleton –
Century – Crofts.
Malin, A.J. (1969) Malins Intelligence Scale for Children- Manual. Lucknow: Indian
Psychological Corporation.
Malin, A.J. (1992) Vineland Social Maturity Scale and Manual. Indian Adaption. Mysore:
Swayam Sidha Prakashan Mental Retardation, A manual for psychologist.
Secunderabad: National Institute for the Menatally Handicapped.
Millon, T., Millon, C., Davis, R., Grossman, S. (1994). Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III
anual (3rd ed). Minneapolis: NCS Pearson, Inc.
Mitrushina, M.N., Boone, K.B., D’Ella, L.F. (1999). Handbook of normative data for
neuropsychological assessment Oxford: Oxford University Press: 3-9
Morgan, C.T., King, R.A., Weisz, J.R. et al, (1993). What Psychology is Like, in Introduction to
psychology (7th ed.). New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited,
1-34
Morgan, C.T., King, R.A., Weisz, J.R. et al, (1993).Psychological Assessment & Testing, in
Introduction to psychology (7th ed.). New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company Limited, 151-561.
Mrinal, N.R. & Singhal, U. (1984). Manual for defence mechanism inventory (DMI). Agra:
National Psychological Corporation.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 33
Murray, H.A. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test Manual. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Murthy, H.N. (1975) Development of paranoid, depressive, manic and anxiety scale. Bangalore:
Transactions of All India Institute of Mental Health, 50-90.  
Naglieri, J.A. & Das, J.P. (1997). Das- Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System. Itasca, IL :
Riverside.
Narayan, J. (1999). Grade level assessment device for children with learning problems in
schools. Secunderabad: NIMH.
Nizamie, A., Singh, V.K. and Sinha, B.N.P. (2002).Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment
Scale (IDEAS). The Rehabilitation Committee of the Indian Psychiatric Society
Nizamie, A., Singh, V.K. and Sinha, B.N.P. (2005) Assessment of Disability in Person with
Mental Retardation. Jharkhand: Deepshikha Institute for Child Development And
Mental Health.
Owenby, R.L. (1997). Psychological reports: A guide to report writing in professional psychology
(3rd ed.). Brandon, V.T.: Clinical Psychology
Paheswaria, R. & Venkatesan, S. (1992, 1994) Behavioural assessment scales for
Indian children with mental retardation (BASIC-MR). Secunderabad:
National Institute for the Mentally Handicapped with financial assistance
from UNICEF
Pershad, D. & Verma, S.K. (1990). Handbook of PGI battery of brain dysfunction (PGI-BBD).
Agra: National Psychological Corporation.
Petty, J. (1990). Checklist for child abuse evaluation (CCAE): Professional’s manual. USA:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Posner, M.L., Petersen, S., Fox, P. & Raichle, M.E. (2001). Localization of cognitive operations
in the human brain. Science, 240, 1627-1631.
Portues.S.(1952)The Portues test manual,George Howrap & co Ltd.
Pruit, J.A., Kalpow, J.C., Epping-Jordan, J.E., et al, (1999)Moving behavioural medicine to the
frontline : A model for the integration of behavioural and medical science in
primary care. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 230-236.
Raj, B. (1977). The developmental screening test manual. Mysore: Meera Printers.
Ramalingaswamy, P. (1974). Wechsler adult performance intelligence scale, Form-PR: Manual
of Indian adaptation of WAIS- Performance scale. Delhi: Mansayan.
Ravens, J.C. (1936). Ravens Progressive Matrices manual. Oxford press LTD.
Reitan, R.M. (1958). Validity of Trail Making test as an indicator of organic brain damage,
Perception Motor Skills, 271-276
Reuven, B. (2002). Baron Emotional Quotient Inventory: A measure of emotional intelligence.
United States & Canada: Multi Health Systems, Inc.
Reynolds, W.M. (1988). Suicidal ideation questionnaire: Professional’s manual. USA: Psychological
Assessment Resources, Inc.
Russ, S.W. (2001). Tackling ethical dilemmas in personality assessment. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 77, 255-258.
Sattler, J.M. (2001) Assessment of children: cognitive functions (4th Ed.). San Diego, CA :
Author.
Schmand, B. & Lindeboom, J. (2005). Amsterdam short-term memory test: Manual. Leiden:
PITS.
Schopler, E., Reicher, R.J. & Renner, B.R. (1971) The childhood autism rating scale (CARS).
Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Sheidman, E.S. (1947). Manual for the make a picture story method. UCLA: The Society for
Personality Assessment, Inc.
Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 34
Sternberg, R.J. (1997). Intelligence and lifelong learning: What’s new and how can we use it?
American Psychologist, 52, 1134-1139
Stinger, A.Y. & Nadolne, M.J. (2002). Nueropsychological assessment: Context for contemprary
clinical practice. In G. Groth – Marnat (Ed.), Neuropsychological assessment in
clinical practice : A guide to test interpretation and integration (pp.26-47),
NewYork: Willey.
Tallent, N. (1992). The practice of psychological assessment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.
Tallent, N. (1993). Psychological report writing (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Thorndike, R.L., Haegen, E.P., Sattler, J.M. (1986). Stanford- Binet Intelligence Scale (4th ed.)
Itasca, IL : Riverside.
Tombaugh, T.N. (1996). Test of memory malingering (TOMM). New York: Multi- Health Systems
Inc.
Turner, S.M., DeMers, S.T., Fox, H.R. & Reed, G.M. (2001). APA’s guidelines for test user
qualifications. American Psychologist, 56, 1099-1113.
Uma Choudhary (1960) Indian Adaptation of TAT. New Delhi: Manasayan
Wechsler, D. (1998). Wechsler Memory Scale III. Texas: The Psychological Corporation.
Wilson, B.A., Alderman, N., Burgess, P.W., Emslie, H. & Evans, J.J. (1996). Behavioural
assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome (BADS): Manual. UK: Harcourt
Assessment. The Psychological Corporation.
Wilson, B.A., Cockburn, J. & Baddeley, A. (1985, 2003). The rivermead behavioural memory
test-ii: manual (2nd ed.). United kingdom: Harcourt Assessment.
Young, R.C., Biggs, J.T., Ziegler, V.E., Mayer, D.A. (1978). A rating scale for mania; reliability ,
validity & sensitivity. Br. J. Psychiatry.
Ziffer, R.L. & Shapiro, L.E. (1992) Children’s self-report and projective inventory. United States:
Psychological Assessment Services.

****************

Lahiri D., Sayeed N., Mishra J.: Basics of psychological assessment Page 35