Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Using Projective Measures in School Based Assessment

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Using Projective Measures in School Based Assessment"— Presentation transcript:

1 Using Projective Measures in School Based Assessment
NASP Annual Conference, San Fransisco, CA February 26th, 2011 Using Projective Measures in School Based Assessment Ashley Montagnese, M.Ed. School Psychology Intern Mahoning County ESC, OH

2 Advanced Organizer Introduce the projective technique
Describe common projective measures Discuss the behavior measured by projectives Give guidelines for scoring and interpretation Explain how to fit projective measures into our evaluations Discuss the limitations of using rating scales alone Tell how to use this information to predict future behavior

3 Introduction to Projective Technique
Personality assessment is limited in school-based assessment Objective measures often preferred to projective measures such as rating scales and interviews Are they covering all the bases needed for a thorough assessment of social emotional functioning? Useful for assessing possible symptoms and conditions but do not tell why these may be occurring (Flanagan, 2007)

4 Why the problem with reliability?
Measuring information that is subject to change over time emotions, feelings, motives Using measures that look different to different people unique perspectives Able to use clinical judgment (Bornstein, 1999)

5 Introduction to Projective Technique
What is measured and how? Use of ambiguous designs Measure hidden issues, perceptions and feelings towards others and their environment, motivations, self concept, internal reactions to stressors, repressed needs, etc

6 Introduction to Commonly Used Projective Measures

7 Rorschach Ink Blot Test

8 Rorschach Ink Blot Test
Ten inkblots printed on separate white cards Free association and inquiry phases Overall goal: assess motivation, cognitive strategies, feelings and emotions, and perceptions (Rorschach,1927)

9 Thematic Apperception Test

10 Thematic Apperception Test
Most widely used of all projective tests Child shown a series of dramatic and provocative pictures and asked to tell a story including: what has led up to the event shown what is happening at the moment what the characters are feeling and thinking the outcome of the story Overall Goal: reveal repressed aspects of personality, motives and needs for achievement, power and intimacy, and problem-solving abilities (Murrary,1943)

11 The Hand Test

12 The Hand Test Consists of 10 cards with pictures of hands in various positions, the child is asked to describe what the hand is doing used to measure behavioral tendencies--particularly acting-out and aggressive behavior Overall Goal: assess how the child interacts with others and the environment and the feelings and motivations underlying the behavioral tendencies (Wagner, 1995)

13 Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank
Consists of three forms for different age groups, with 40 incomplete sentences usually only 1-2 words long such as "I regret ...". The subject is asked to complete the sentence measure of maladjustment with a semi-objective scoring system Overall Goal: assess personality conflicts and motivation (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992)

14 Draw a Person Test Subject asked to draw the best person that they can
Figure drawn often represents self concept Quantitative Scoring System SPED (Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance) Overall Goal: assess perception of self, needs and conflicts, and intelligence (Naglieri, 1988)

15 House Tree Person Test Subject is asked to draw a house, tree, and a person Questions follow each drawing Overall Goal: assess self-perceptions, self concept, and attitudes towards family House taps attitude and perception of family/home life Person taps perception of self Tree taps inner self concept (Buck,1969)

16 House Tree Person Test

17 Kinetic Family Drawing
Subject asked to draw a picture of their entire family including themselves, "doing something." Questions posed such as what is happening and who is in the picture. Evaluate placement of family members, absence of any members, whether figures consistent with reality or altered, and the absence of particular body parts Useful in evaluations of child abuse Overall Goal: Assess child's attitudes toward their family and the overall family dynamics (Burns & Kaufman, 1972)

18 Understanding the Behavior Measured by Projective Measures

19 Unique Perceptions and
Learned Behavior Biological Predispositions Psychological Characteristics Environmental Influences Unique Perceptions and Coping Strategies (Millon,1981)

20 Normal vs. Maladaptive Behavior Styles
Normal Behavior: An ability to cope with environment with flexibility Activities and relationships that are enjoyable and rewarding An avoidance of conflicts with others and within themselves

21 Normal vs. Maladaptive Behavior Styles
Rigid and limited strategies for solving daily problems Behaviors that result in personal dissatisfaction and discomfort A hindered ability to learn and grow from experiences

22 Tapping into Levels of Awareness
Levels of Awareness in all individuals: Private Awareness Other’s Perceptions Shared Awareness Hidden Issues Interviews and rating scales useful for measuring recognized motives a child is willing to reveal Projective measures tap into hidden unconscious motives (Flanagan, 2007)

23 Scoring, Interpretation, and Incorporation into School-Based Assessment

24 General Guidelines for Scoring
List all possible characteristics Identify recurring patterns or themes Eliminate characteristics that do not fit Interpret patterns in relation to objective data Child’s history inside and outside of school Parent and teacher information Data from rating scales and interviews

25 Incorporating Projective Measures into School Based Assessment
Best Practices in Personality Assessment Use ecological/environmental orientation Review the data Developmental and medical information Use multiple sources and methods objective and observable assessment strategies behavior rating scales, personality measures, consultative interview, observations Use problem-solving and hypothesis-testing approach development of hypotheses and predictions (Knoff, 2002)

26 Case example #1 Review of the data: History of physical abuse
Objective Measures: Rating Scales depression, atypicality, somatization, internalizing problems, withdrawal Interviews Refusal to do school work even when punishment is implemented Projective Measures: Tendency for withdrawal from situations which cause emotional difficulty Initial reaction to structure is to control situation in order to cope w/ feelings of insecurity Make Predictions: Student is likely to refuse school work in order to gain control and cope with situations that cause discomfort With encouragement student will gain confidence to attempt new tasks

27 Case Example #2 Review the data: Objective Measures:
History of sexual abuse, stepfather and mother incarcerated, in foster care Objective Measures: Rating Scales Depression, Anxiety, Internalizing Problems Interviews Student is negative, extremely sensitive to criticism, denies that anything is wrong, forms attachments to boys at school Projective Measures: Masking feelings of inadequacy, feels inability to make own decisions, experiencing great deal of stress, unable to move forward b/c of past trauma, seeks safety and reassurance Make Predictions: Student will likely feel unsure of abilities in classroom and will seek reassurance from unsuitable sources

28 Limitations of Using Rating Scales Alone
Only assessing other’s perceptions of the child self report measures and child interviews do not tap into hidden issues that could be contributing to behaviors Data from rating scales should be interpreted in relation to other data There is still a need for a measure that integrates this data to provide a complete picture of functioning (Flanagan, 2007)

29 Predicting Future Behavior
Our goal in social emotional assessment understand the child’s perceptions and coping strategies Predict future behavior by: Pinpointing which stressors contribute to the problem Describing the child’s reactions to these stressors Understanding the causes of learned behavior Develop and implement interventions that target these stressors

30 Conclusion Introduced the projective technique and common projective measures Discussed learned behavior and coping strategies Levels of awareness Gave guidelines for scoring and explored how to fit projective measures into evaluations Discussed the limitations of using rating scales alone and how to use this information to predict future behavior

31 References Bornstein, R.F. (1996). Construct validity of objective and projective dependency tests: A meta-analytic assessment of behavioral prediction. Psychological Assessment, 11, Boyle, G. J., & Saklofske, D. H. (2004). (Eds.), Sage benchmarks in psychology: The psychology of individual differences, Vols London: Sage. Buck, J.N. (1969). The House-Tree-Person Test. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services. Burns RC, Kaufman HS. (1972). Actions, Styles and Symbols in Kinetic Family Drawings (K-D): An Interpretive Manual. New York, Brunner/Mazel, Inc. Flanagan, R. (2007). Comments on the miniseries: Personality assessment in school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 44, Kamphaus, R., & Reynolds, C. (2004). Behavior Assessment System for Children, 2e. MN: AGS Publishing, Circle Pines. Knoff, H. M. (2002). Best practices in personality assessment.  In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology- IV, Volume 2 (pp ).    Bethesda, MD:  National Association of School Psychologists. Lilienfeld, S. O., Wood, J. M., & Garb, H. N. (2000). The scientific status of projective techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 1, 27-66

32 References Millon, T. (1981). Disorders of Personality DSM III: Axis II. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. Murrary, H.A. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test Manual. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Naglieri, J. A. (1988). Draw-a-person: A quantitative scoring system. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation. Naglieri, J. A., McNeish, T. J., & Bardos, A. N. (1991). Draw-a-person: Screening procedure for emotional disturbance. Austin, TX: PRO–ED. Rorschach, H. (1927). Rorschach Test – Psychodiagnostic Plates. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe Publishing Corp. Rotter, J.B., Lah, M.I., & Rafferty, J.E. (1992). Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank Manual. San Antonio, CA: Psychological Corp. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Wagner, E.E. (1995). The Hand Test. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.


Download ppt "Using Projective Measures in School Based Assessment"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google