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.