Dairy Queen Miracle Treat Day August 7

Start making room in your tummy now: Miracle Treat Day comes to thousands of Dairy Queens across North America on Thursday, August 7.

The way this works: the proceeds from every DQ Blizzard sold that day go to the Children's Miracle Network, which helps families cover their expenses when their kids get sick.

Please try to take time out and grab a blizzard this Thursday and do what you can to spread the word around!

The Human Brain: The Miracle of Reading

I found this fascinating. It is amazing how the human mind works.

The American Psychological Association: Ethics Code

Just like in school districts and work places, the field of Psychology has a code of ethics. A code of ethics is a set of rules which holds higher standards and maintains the integrity in the field of psychological testing. The American Psychological Association identifies nine areas in the ethics code in regards to psychological testing. By going through each of the nine areas which include competence, informed consent, knowledge of results, confidentiality, test security, test construction and publication, automated scoring/interpretation systems, qualified persons, and test user qualifications, one will grasp reasons why higher standards and a code of ethics is instituted in the field of Psychology with respect to psychological testing.

The first area in the ethics code dealing with psychological testing is identified by the APA as competence. In order to administer and employ tests correctly, one has to be competent, according to Hogan, in the “assessment concepts” and “methodology” (590). Hogan goes on to state that the concepts a psychologist must be familiar with are “norms, reliability, validity, and “test construction,” and in regards to methodology “administration, scoring, and technical characteristics” (590). Psychologists who administer psychological tests must always stay current on their understanding and expertise concerning psychological tests.

The second area of the ethics code recognized is informed consent. This basically means that a subject’s participation in testing must be voluntary. In order for it to be voluntary, a person has to be informed in words they will understand exactly what they are agreeing to by consenting to take part in the testing. The participant must also be informed according to Hogan that they may “withdraw consent at any time” (591). For example, if an individual is taking a test on racial ethnicity and after page three feels uncomfortable with a concept he/she is being questioned on, the test taker has the right to withdraw their consent and opt to stop the testing.

In addition to competence and informed consent, another area of the ethics code is knowledge of results. A person that participates in a test has the right to know their results. These results should be easy to comprehend for the participant and above all they should walk away knowing exactly what their results meant.

The next area of the ethics code is confidentiality. Only under extreme circumstances is confidentiality broken without consent. Otherwise a psychologist should keep the results and information gained from the testing completely confidential. This confidentiality also carries over, as stated by Hogan, into “record keeping” (592). The records should be safe and secure at all times unless consent is given by the test taker to have the results released to another professional.

Then, test security is the fifth area of the ethics code. None of the secrets of how the material is scored and interpreted should be released to anyone. There are exceptions to this oath such as in training new psychologists on how to use the instrument. Other than that, however, the oath to preserve the integrity of the psychological testing methods should be kept within the profession of Psychology.

Additionally, test construction and publication plays an important role in the ethics code. As explained by Hogan, test developers “must maintain high standards in developing tests and refrain from making unwarranted claims about the quality of their products” (592). These developers must be knowledgeable in their field and understand the relevance of their test. Hogan points out that the test developer should also be extremely familiar with the concepts of “reliability, validity, and norms” and apply that knowledge when constructing their own tests (592-593).

Another point in the ethics code is automated scoring/interpretation systems. The advances in technology within the psychology field have now created computer programs that can interpret the tests. Nevertheless, psychologists are still responsible for the correct interpretation of the results. As part of the code of ethics, psychologists can not transfer the blame of invalid test interpretation to the software’s creator.

Furthermore, under the code of ethics, Hogan goes on to explain that psychologists are responsible to make sure that unqualified people that are connected to them do not have any part in the testing process. Unqualified people are not allowed to administer the test nor interpret the results. Psychologists have to again take care to preserve the integrity of the tests and only allow trained professionals to assist them in their testing should they need assistance (593).

And lastly, test user qualifications are a very important aspect in the code of ethics. Test users have to have specific qualifications to order and administer tests. According to Hogan, Standards established a three-tier system to define test users credentials; tier one is called Level A which requires “minimal training,” “reading simple directions” (594). Level B calls for “some knowledge of technical characteristics of tests” and Level C “wants advanced training in test theory” (594).

So after reviewing the nine factors that make up the American Psychological Association’s code of ethics, one can see the need for such rules within the field of Psychological testing. In my opinion, the ethics code is vital to the field of Psychology. With each rule, psychologists aspire to keep the integrity of psychological tests. So as one notices, the ethics code is an important part in the field of Psychology.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory versus the Beck Depression Inventory

Within the realm of Psychology, psychological testing plays an important role in finding out the mental status of a client. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is a comprehensive inventory that has a great deal to offer in the world of Psychology. Also, within the specific domain personality tests, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) also is a very powerful tool for Psychologists nowadays. By taking a closer look at the key features of the MMPI and the BDI along with the benefits and the disadvantages of the tests, one will note that the disadvantages are minor and that these tests are the vital in today’s society.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) was first developed in the year 1942. However, the test that is used today is actually the second revision which was instituted in 1989 and is known as the MMPI-2. According to Hogan, the MMPI-2 requires anywhere from 60 to 90 minutes to finish and has a whopping 567 test items to complete (487). Furthermore, the MMPI-2 is the “most frequently used, most widely researched, and most often referenced tests” explains Hogan (487). The MMPI initially had two main features which were (1) “validity indexes were explicitly used” and (2) “the test used criterion-keying to develop nine clinical scales” which was later changed to a total of ten scales (487). Hogan goes on to state that with the revision of the MMPI of 1989, the MMPI-2 removed all of it’s gender specific references, it used clinical scales instead of diagnostic categories, it developed entirely new norms, and it’s original T-score changed from 70 to 65 (488).

Next, the Beck Depression Inventory offered a new technique for diagnosis of those suffering from any spectrum of depression. The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) is not as predominately ranked in use as the MMPI-2, however, it ranks in at a close second. The BDI-II is a tool in Psychology for measuring the severity of depression. According to Hogan, this test is administered to both adolescents and adults and determines by responses on a four point scale if there is a “major problem” or if it is “not a problem” (501). The BDI-II consists of only 21 items and takes only five to ten minutes to complete entirely. The 21 items constructs a score between 0-63; 0-13 is considered minimal depression; 14-19 is considered mild depression; 20-28 is moderate depression; and 29-53 is considered severe depression (501).

With regard to the MMPI-2, while it is has many benefits to the field of Psychology, it also has a few disadvantages. First off, the MMPI-2 is a very time consuming test. While an average person can finish the test in 60 to 90 minutes, a person with a lower reading ability can take up to two or more hours to complete. Furthermore, Hogan points out that the MMPI-2 only measures a total of four underlying dimensions, two of them being “psychotic mentation” and “neurotic tendencies” (495). However, with the BDI-II compared to the MMPI-2, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. The BDI is a majorly useful tool for figuring out the severity of depression which is also considered the common cold of psychological ailments. Almost everyone in their lives will suffer at least one bout of depression. Using the BDI-II, it is quick and efficient to find out the severity of a person’s depression. The test again only takes five to ten minutes and all the questions are straightforward, simple, and at a sixth grade reading level.

Although it seems that the BDI-II is a little more progressed, user friendly, and less time consuming, the MMPI-2 offers a variety of benefits. It says a lot that it is ranked number one as the most used test. However, I believe that with more future revisions, the MMPI-2 will become more like the BDI-II. In my opinion, I think that both are useful for measuring different aspects in a person. Even though the MMPI-2 is more time consuming, I think that I would fall into the mainstream in believing that the MMPI-2 will be my number one used test when I earn my PH.D or PSY.D. So, while there are some advantages and some disadvantages to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (2) and the Beck Depression Inventory (2), it is clear that both are vital in the field of Psychology. They are a pertinent tool for Psychologists and both the comprehensive inventory known as the MMPI-2 and the specific domain personality test known as the BDI-II are extremely vital in today’s society.

Projective Personality Techniques

Projective techniques are quite controversial in today’s society. While being a staple in the field of Psychology for many years, projective techniques are a very enthralling subject. Personality tests such as the Rorschach have made their way into movies, cartoons, and the media with some guest appearances. Some people think that these types of projective tests are pointless, while others see them as a window into a person’s soul. When examining the characteristics, uses, and forewarnings, one will be more informed on the projective personality techniques and exactly what projective techniques are doing in the field of Psychology.

As noted by Hogan, projective tests embody two main characteristics. First off, the test items are usually somewhat ambiguous. By saying that the test’s questions are ambiguous, it is meant that it is hard to tell what the test’s items are exactly trying to measure. The second characteristic of personality techniques is that they are in a constructed-response format. These two characteristics relate to the projective hypothesis because “if the stimulus for a response is ambiguous, then the response itself will be determined by the examinee’s personality dynamics” according to Hogan (521). Furthermore, with the constructed-response format, the test taker’s “response[s] will be formulated in terms of the person’s desires, fantasies, inclinations, fears, and motives” (521).

In regards to the uses of projective techniques, there are core two uses. Projective techniques are used for “assessment of individual cases in clinical, counseling, and school psychology.” Besides being used in clinical, counseling, and school psychology, projective techniques are also utilized in research. There are certain indicators that prompt the use of personality tests. For example, if a child or adult has a low reading ability, a projective test is usually preferred to written test. A projective test would not require any reading since most personality tests are verbal. Also, it is harder to “fake good” or “fake bad” with personality tests because of the ambiguity of the stimuli. And thirdly, projective tests may be beneficial for a therapist in judging a client’s initial basis (524).

Furthermore, for example, with an intelligence test, there is a specific set of rules that must be followed by a psychologist when administering a personality test to a patient or client. So, when someone else looks at the results of a non-personality test like an Intelligence test for example, they have a good idea of what was asked on the test, that the entire test was completed, and that the test was scored properly. With a personality test such at the Thematic Apperception Test, not every single card is used and instruction for the test’s administration is very simplistic. So unlike an intelligence test, it would be hard for someone who did not administer the test to exactly know the results and what was done within the test period. The same goes for the Rorschach inkblot test with the numerous numbers of cards and only a few being selected for the patient.

Personally, I am one that believes in projective personality techniques. I think that the free-response format allows a psychologist to truly understand a person. Knowing whether a person views a neutral picture of a situation as evil and making up a story behind it, there is no other test that can create that connection and deep expression of what they are thinking and feeling. When I am done with graduate school and receive my PSY.D or PH.D, I know that these are definitely tools that I am going to utilize in my therapy practices.

So in conclusion, after going through the characteristics, uses, and forewarnings of projective personality techniques, I have come to the conclusion that they are an important asset to any Psychologist for school, clinical, and counseling. While the test questions are ambiguous, I still feel that the personality test will give me a better understanding of my patient than a written test. Especially if I am counseling children, I think that a personality test would be more appropriate to start off and get to know my client better. Even though a test like the Rorschach is not being taught in schools as a valuable tool, I believe that the uses are as important as the Thematic Apperception Test. Ambiguously open-ended tests (like the Rorschach and Thematic Apperception Test) let a client splash their personality all over the pages and let the words flow from their subconscious. I am glad a facility like Roosevelt contains some psychology staff members that still find it pertinent to teach tests such as the Rorschach to future generations of Psychologist.

Personality Tests: Content, Criterion-Keying, Factor Analysis, and Theory Driven

An individual’s personality is as complex and personal as a fingerprint; yet there are personality tests out there nowadays that allow insight into an individual’s personality and / or emotional depths. In regards to personality, there are four major types of methods that a test developer can choose from when deciding what type of test he / she would like to construct. The tests options consist of content method, criterion-keying, factor analysis, and theory driven with each test having its own strengths and weaknesses.

First off, content method is a popular form of personality tests. An example of a content method personality test that might be given to patients during their therapy session is the Woodworth Personal Data Sheet. For example, if a person is using a content method test that is supposed to be measuring introversion, then the set of questions within the test would be dealing with how the individual relates to others. By the way a person answers his / her questions, the individual’s score can give an insight into his / her personality and tell if one of his / her traits is introversion or extraversion. On the plus side, the content method is simple and defines clearly what the test is seeking to evaluate. It is also easy to generate items using this approach and has good validity. However, some of the weaknesses of using the content method are that the responses are subject to distortion and, according to Hogan, one is able to “fake good” or “fake bad” when an individual taking the test knows what is being gauged (459).

Another test that is used in measuring personality is called criterion-keying. Criterion-keying uses the approach of “discrimination” (459). Two examples of this approach are the MMPI and the Strong Interest Inventory. Two well defined groups are used in the criterion-keying method; one group is deemed the “normal” group and the other is deemed the “criterion” group. The criterion group is distinctly defined as having a specific condition. Like the content method, the criterion-keying approach’s strength is that it is direct and simplistic. Another plus is that this approach also promotes the possibility of fresh research applications. On the other hand, according to Hogan, three of the test’s drawbacks are (a) “it’s extreme atheoretical orientation limits the generalizability of score interpretation,” (b) criterion-keying can only be used when well-defined criterion groups are present, (c) interpretation can be inaccurate (461).

Besides content method and criterion-keying, there is another personality test type that is known as factor analysis; this type of personality test, according to Hogan, “bring[s] order to an undifferentiated mass of items and responses” (462). Also like the criterion-keying approach, factor analysis also produces a hefty amount of research. Conversely, the first weakness of factor analysis is that much of the test’s validity is based on the original “pool of items” (462). In addition to the items, there are numerous disputes among professionals about the correctness of the diverse methodologies. Then there is the point that most of the final results of factor analysis tests are fluid versus definitive. A great example of factor analysis is the NEO Personality Inventory.

And lastly, the fourth and final major personality test is known as theory-driven. Hogan explains that “the test developer adopts a particular theory about the human personality, the build test items to reflect [his / her] theory” (463). This theory can be broad or can be narrow depending on the test developer and how much he / she wants to cover within his / her theory. One advantage of the theory-driven approach is that it supplies an “operational definition” which encourages further research on the matter which can lead to better development of the test (463). Two core shortcomings of the theory-driven approach are the theory’s validity and how soundly the test mirrors the test developer’s theory.

All in all, by taking a look at content method, criterion-keying, factor analysis, and theory-driven personality tests, it is noted that each test has its own strengths and weaknesses. When designing a test, a test developer must choose which personality test method is right for them. In my opinion, there is not one correct or an incorrect method to choose. Each method, whether it is content method, criterion-keying, factor analysis, or theory-driven, has its own benefits and detriments. A test developer would just have to choose the method that would work best with his / her ideas and aspirations for what he / she envisions their test being.

Accountability and Standards-based Education

Within the confines of a classroom, it is the teacher’s responsibility to present material to better the education of his/her students. Whether it is English, mathematics, history, or a foreign language, a student needs to leave the classroom with a certain amount of information that will help them in advancing to the next stage of their educational goals. In the 1960s, a movement emerged that forced teachers to be responsible for their student’s progress within the educational system; this was known as the accountability movement. By taking a closer look at the origins of the accountability movement, reasons behind it, and the role of achievement tests, one can truly grasp the impact that the accountability movement had on the United States.

Before the 1960s and the materialization of the accountability movement, teachers did not have a specific curriculum to abide by. For example, there was no particular set of information that a student had to master before moving from sophomore year of high school to senior year of high school. The accountability movement which originated in the 1960s has evolved into what is now known as standards-based education. According to Hogan, the standards-based education requires (a) “clear identification of content for students to learn,” (b) “specification of required levels of performance,” and (c) “assurance that students have the opportunity to learn the material” (422).

So, why did the United States decide that education was an important aspect that needed more emphasis and revamping? There are three main causes that Hogan identifies for the emergence of the accountability movement include Russia’s launching of Sputnik, a remarkable swell in financial support for education, and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) (422). In the 1950s, the launch of Sputnik made Americans realize that they were not the world’s leader in science, technology, and education which required Americans to step up their game to keep their reputation. The launch of Sputnik lead to an increase in funding for education, which in turn lead to the ESEA which contributed to educational efforts by
incorporating federal funding.

Furthermore, a student’s learning can be gauged by the use of achievement batteries. An achievement test is a standardized test that measures an individual's knowledge in a particular subject area. Unlike an aptitude test which measures someone’s potential, an achievement test measures what an individual has already been taught. Most schools measure their accountability by how their students score on these achievement tests. By paying attention to the results, faculty and teachers can distinguish where their efforts are lacking, where their efforts are succeeding, and can reevaluate their current approaches to the curriculum.

Therefore, since the 1960s, teachers have been forced to be held liable for their student’s educational progress and ability to learn inside the classroom. This radical change in responsibility was started in the 1950s due to Sputnik, more funding, and ESEA. This ultimately resulted in the accountability movement which lead up to what is nowadays the standards-based education. By using achievement tests in schools, teachers can measure their progress as educators and see their strengths and weaknesses in their methods.