Projective-Inventory: An Indigenous Approach to Personality Assessment

Abstract

The paper aims to present a theoretical model of projective-inventory (P-I) method of personality assessment and provide empirical findings in the area. This method integrates the positive psychometric aspects of both projective and self-report inventories to achieve scoring objectivity and greater reliability and validity of trait scales (Puhan, 1982). Accordingly, real-life episodes are presented to the subjects as structured projective stimulus situations with three or four interacting characters who may be placed at differentpoints on the trait continuum . Each episode is followed by a number of statements relating to the activities of the characters which are "Agreed" or "Disagreed" by the subjects to ensure objectivity in scoring. The P-I method is satisfactorily evaluated against the requirements of convergent and discriminant validity and has been used to develop a nu mber of personality scales. The paper also presents data of several empirical studies indicating minimal influence of social desirability on projective-inventory scores. The P-I method is described as a trait-in-state approach to personality assessment as it samples situations from a wide range of possibilities and accommodates the trait-state controversies in the area. Besides, it is argued that the utilisation of real-life episodes in the P-I method brings the context back to the testing situation through its narratives to which Indians are quite accustomed. Considering its origin from an Indian anecdote and su itabilityfor India npop ulatio n where social desirabilityposes fargreater challenges for inventory scores, the P-I is described as an indigenous method of personality assessment. Thepaper also calls for the development of scales to measure different contemporary Indian traits utilising the P-I method.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.