Sie sind auf Seite 1von 17


1.Sentence completion 2. Trending psychological tests



In psychology, a projective test is a personality test designed to let a person respond to ambiguous stimuli,
presumably revealing hidden emotions and internal conflicts projected by the person into the test. This is
sometimes contrasted with a so-called "objective test" / "self-report test", which adopt a "structured"
approach as responses are analyzed according to a presumed universal standard (for example, a multiple
choice exam), and are limited to the content of the test. The responses to projective tests are content
analyzed for meaning rather than being based on presuppositions about meaning, as is the case with
objective tests. Projective tests have their origins in psychoanalysis, which argues that humans have
conscious and unconscious attitudes and motivations that are beyond or hidden from conscious awareness.

In 2006 the terms "objective test" and "projective test" came under criticism in the Journal of Personality
Assessment. The more descriptive "rating scale or self-report measures" and "free response measures" are
suggested, rather than the terms "objective tests" and "projective tests," respectively. Additionally, there
are inherent biases implied in the terminology itself. For example, when individuals use the term "objective"
to describe a test, it is assumed that the test possess accuracy and precision. Conversely, when the term
"projective" is used to describe a test, it is assumed that these measures are less accurate. Neither of these
assumptions are fully accurate, and have led researchers to develop alternative terminology to describe
various projective measures. For example, it has been proposed that the Rorschach be labeled as a
"behavioral task" due to its ability to provide an in vivo or real life sample of human behavior. It is easy to
forget that both objective and projective tests are capable of producing objective data, and both require
some form of subjective interpretation from the examiner. Objective testing, such as self-report measures,
like the MMPI-2, require objective responses from the examinee and subjective interpretations from the
examiner. Projective testing, such as the SENTENCE COMPLETION TESTING , requires subjective
responses from the examinee, and can in theory involve objective (actuarial) interpretation.


These tests are a class of semi-structured projective techniques. Sentence completion tests typically provide
respondents with beginnings of sentences, referred to as "stems", and respondents then complete the
sentences in ways that are meaningful to them. The responses are believed to provide indications of
attitudes, beliefs, motivations, or other mental states. Therefore, sentence completion technique, with such
advantage, promotes the respondents to disclose their concealed feelings. Notwithstanding, there is debate
over whether sentence completion tests elicit responses from conscious thought rather than unconscious
states. This debate would affect whether sentence completion tests can be strictly categorized as projective

A sentence completion test form may be relatively short, such as those used to assess responses to
advertisements, or much longer, such as those used to assess personality.
A long sentence completion test is the Forer Sentence Completion Test, which has 100 stems. The tests are
usually administered in booklet form where respondents complete the stems by writing words on paper.

The structures of sentence completion tests vary according to the length and relative generality and wording
of the sentence stems. Structured tests have longer stems that lead respondents to more specific types of
responses; less structured tests provide shorter stems, which produce a wider variety of responses.

Hermann Ebbinghaus is generally credited with developing the first sentence completion test in 1897.
Ebbinghaus's sentence completion test was used as part of an intelligence test. Simultaneously, Carl Jung's
word association test may also have been a precursor to modern sentence completion tests. Moreover, in
recent decades, sentence completion tests have increased in usage, in part because they are easy to develop
and easy to administer. As of the 1980s, sentence completion tests were the eighty-fifth most widely used
personality assessment instruments. Another reason for the increased usage of sentence completion tests is
because of their superiority to other measures in uncovering conflicted

attitudes. Some sentence completion tests were developed as a way to overcome the problems associated
with thematic apperception measures of the same constructs.

Hermann Ebbinghaus invented the method in 1879 to test the mental ability of school children in Germany.
He used is test to study his interest in the development intellectual capacity and reasoning ability in
children (Hersen, 2003). Carl Jung was the first to look at if sentence completion could be used for
personality assessment. He thought the personal meanings of word associations could be used. He
popularized the idea that inner notions could be analyzed through people’s associations of different words.
In his methods, he would say a list of words to the person being tested and with each word, the client would
be asked to say the first thing that came to their mind (Hersen, 2003).

The association method was then formalized in the United States by Grace Kent and Aaron Rosanoff who
created a Free Association test. Their test differed from Jung’s because it used more everyday and vague
words. For example, Jung’s test used mother, father, sex, and work. Kent and Rosanoff’s test used words
like table, dark, music, and man (as opposed to father). The word association technique was developed into
many different versions with many different words all ranging in different levels of aggressive
words (Rhode, 1957).

Over time, assessors decided that single word responses to one-word stimuli was not reaching the full
potential of the method. Something could be done to tap more into an individual’s personality. The method
gradually developed from one word, to brief phrases, to sentences. Contemporary sentence completion
methods began to fully evolve in the late 1920’s (Rhode, 1957).

The beginning of using the formal sentence completion method for personality assessment was in 1928
with Arthur Payne.

Payne used the tests for guidance purposes in asylums and institutions and to assess career-related personal
traits (Schafer, Rotter, Rafferty, 1953). Alexander Tendler used the method to study emotional reactions.
With his tests, all his sentences began with I and revealed something about annoyances, fears, aversions,
like, interests, and attachments. It has never been validated that these tests can be used in emotional contexts
(Schafer et al, 1953).

As opposed to Tendler and Payne, Amanda Rhode decided not to focus on specific aspects of personality
but use the measure to develop a general personality test.

She developed the first validated personality measure of this kind and discussed abroad range of personal
issues and experiences (Rhode, 1957). The purpose of the measure was to “reveal latent needs, sentiments,
feelings, and attitudes which subjects would be unable or unwilling to recognize or to express in direct
communication” (Weiner & Greene, 2008). Most sentence completion methods today were developed from
the basis of Amanda Rhode’s test and theories.

One of the most popular of these tests is the RISB, or Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank. The original
version of the test was developed in 1950 by Rotter and Rafferty. The main objective of the test was to
create a version of the sentence completion method that could be administered and scored easily to permit
a widespread use. They also wanted to provide specific diagnostic criteria so the results of the exam could
be obtained more quickly. However, the test was not intended to give a full view of personality, but more
of a starting point for clinicians to take direction from. The current version of this test has three forms at
different levels including High School, College, and Adult. The test is scored on a seven-point scale with
answers being tagged from a conflict (pessimism, hostility, hopelessness) to neutral (stereotypes,
catchphrases, cliches) to positive (humor, optimism, acceptance) rating. It takes about 15 to 35 minutes to
complete with scoring ranging in time depending on the familiarity with administering the test. This is the
most popular form of the Sentence Completion Method used today (Hersen, 2003).

The uses of sentence completion tests include personality analysis, clinical applications, attitude
assessment, achievement motivation, and measurement of other constructs. They are used in several
disciplines, including psychology, management, education, and marketing.

Sentence completion measures have also been incorporated into non-projective applications, such as
intelligence tests, language comprehension, and language and cognitive development tests.

A good should have:

Validity is the most important characteristic of an evaluation programme, for unless a test is valid it serves
no useful function. Psychologists, educators, guidance counselors use test results for a variety of purposes.
Obviously, no purpose can be fulfilled, even partially, if the tests do not have a sufficiently high degree of
validity. Validity means truth-fullness of a test. It means to what extent the test measures that, what the test
maker intends to measure.

The validity of each sentence completion test must be determined independently, and this depends on the
instructions laid out in the scoring booklet.

Compared to positivist instruments, such as Likert-type scales, sentence completion tests tend to have high
face validity (i.e., the extent to which measurement items accurately reflect the concept being measured).
This is to be expected, because in many cases the sentence stems name or refer to specific objects and the
respondent provides responses specifically focused on such objects.

The Sentence Completion Test is the most valid of all projective techniques.

The meaning of reliability is consistency, depend-ence or trust. So, in measurement reliability is the
consistency with which a test yields the same result in measuring whatever it does measure.

The reliability of sentence completion test is low because it does not yield the same result every time
because change in a person mood or environment effect reliability, so reliability of this test is low.

Any test in which the same test is given in the same manner to all test takers, and graded in the same manner
for everyone, is a standardized test. so sentence completion test is same for all, everyone is given the same
test under same environmental conditions so SCT is standardized test.

Objectivity is an important characteristic of a good test. It affects both validity and reliability of test scores.
Objectivity of a test moans the degree to which different per-sons scoring the answer receipt arrives of at
the same result.

it is highly doubtful that complete objectivity can be achieved with a test designed for free answer responses.
so, sentence completion test has low objectivity.

Test norms consist of data that make it possible to determine the relative standing of an individual who has
taken a test such as scoring method. Norms provide a basis for comparing the individual with a group.

In case of SCT, there is no scoring system and scoring depends upon the responses.

I’ll further explain scoring method in the section of “evaluation of test on the basis of research project.” For
now, we can say that test has no definite norms.

Usability is another important characteristic of a good test. Because practical considerations of the
evaluation test cannot be neglected. The test must have practical value from time, economy, and
administration point of view.

sentence completion is used widely in different settings. from education settings to clinical settings. so
sentence completion test has high usability.


The research project was carried out by "Karyn L. Goodwin-Tribble" in April 2007.

Test used
The Test that is used in this research project is the "Sentence completion test".

The Goodwin Sentence Completion Test (GSCT) was developed as a screening instrument for clinical
depression. This instrument, composed of 25 sentence stems, was designed to indicate the level depression
and to assess the strength of negative perceptions associated with dimensions of the cognitive triad (self,
world, and future). Although the GSCT follows the typical format of most projective sentence completion
tests, an objective scoring method was also constructed to evaluate more reliably individual results. The
tool was administered to 80 adult volunteers ranging in age from 18 to 72 years of age. Volunteers were
randomly selected from a variety of public and private settings and represented diverse cultural, socio-
economic, and educational backgrounds. Participant scores from the GSCT were compared with scores
gleaned from the second edition of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and the Hamilton Rating Scale
for Depression (HDI). Results supported the primary hypothesis, which predicted statistical significance
and a positive correlation between GSCT scores and scores from the BDI-II and HDI tests. As anticipated,
the investigation also highlighted the strength of any negative or depressive attributes related to self-based,
world-based, and future-based perceptions evaluated through GSCT subtest items.

Conclusion of research project:

This research project concluded that the GSCT has proven to be a measure that can assist investigators both
in screening for and in evaluating symptoms associated with clinical depression. It incorporates both
historical knowledge and novel approaches to assessing and treating depressed individuals. Because the
experiment involved a sampling of non-disordered volunteers, these results can be generalized to "normal"
populations and be used in a variety of settings. In so doing, screening tools can not only report relative
levels of pathology, adjustment, or discomfort, but may also provide a more evaluative glimpse into the
individual's personality and perceptions. Furthermore, the relative ease of scoring can allow both entry-
level clinicians and seasoned practitioners to evaluate subject's depressive symptoms and underlying
perceptions. The GSCT can thereby become a widely used and well-regarded method of screening for
depression, evaluating and individual's perceptions, and developing client-centered treatment approaches.
Ongoing research and investigation can only help to solidify the benefits of this new measure. Indeed, the
development of the GSCT represented an exciting research opportunity for this investigator. More
importantly, results indicated that it may also represent an exciting new frontier of studying and objectifying
projective measures which can impartially screen for clinical syndromes.

validity and reliability Of GSCT:

Usually there are two methods for analyzing the data from the GSCT:

• Qualitative
• Quantitative

Also, two different types of interpretations can be obtained from the GSCT Subject intuitive based
motivation of the individuals response and the second being based on the score allotted to each sentence.

The validity of each sentence must be determined independently. These validities depend on the instructions
laid for the individuals. On a comparison with Likert-Type Sales and on the basis of this particular thesis
for determining depression in the individuals, GSCT stands to be of high face validity which can, in this
case be, define as the extent to which a measurement accurately follow the concept of being measured.

Whereas in case of reliability in the particular thesis it also has to be expected High as the sentence tends
to bring the focus more specific to objects and the individuals response accordingly to that particular object,
as was the case in the dissertation.

Overall, the reliability and validity stand high in relation to other testing scales and so was seen in the
analysis of the thesis.

As norms for GSTC are given as:

Scoring Responses:
• 3-point score: should indicate more SEVERE symptoms of depression. Suicidal thoughts, extreme
negativism, hopelessness, anger, maladaptive cognitions, affects or behavior, etc.
• 2-point score: are associated with MODERATE depressive symptoms. Dysphoria, agitation,
negative thinking or behavior associated with minimal activity.
• 1 score: should correspond to responses that do not necessarily Indicate depressive symptomology.
These statements may be direct, unambiguous responses that describe general levels of functioning,
everyday cognitions, and normative emotions.
• 0-point score: are assigned to responses that are free from depressive thinking, negative effects, or
maladaptive behaviol1l. These responses should indicate high levels of functioning, self-efficacy,
motivation, and self-determination. Spiritual or religious activities may also be coded here if
Involve the individual's direct participation and are optimistic, future oriented.

Results indicated that GSCT subtest scores, or those perceptions related to self, world, and future, could
predict an individual's Total GSCT scores 57% (self= .570), 52.4% (world = .524), and 43.9% (future =
.439) of the time. When compared together, GSCT Total Dimension subtest scores and GSCT overall total
gleaned a 92.9% predictive rate. Although the data supported the principal and secondary hypotheses.

So we come to the conclusion that GSCT has some definite norms.

Objectivity of a test is determined by carefully studying the administration and scoring procedures to see
where judgment is basic, or bias may occur. Objective type tests such as true/false, multiple choice and so
on are developed to overcome the lack of objectivity in tests. In essay type tests objectivity may be increased
by careful phrasing of questions and by a standard set of rules for scoring. so in GSCT there is certain rules
for scoring, there is a separate scoring table and scoring response given so this test is high in objectivity.

Any test in which the same test is given in the same manner to all test takers and graded in the same manner
for everyone is a standardized test. so GSCT is a standardized test because the same test was given to all
the individuals under same experimental conditions but the scoring method for GSCT was not standardized.

These results can be generalized to "normal" populations and be used in a variety of settings. The GSCT
can thereby become a widely used and well-regarded method of screening for depression, evaluating and
individual's perceptions, and developing client-centered treatment approaches.


Standard objective scoring methods were utilized to evaluate participant responses both from the BDI-II
and from the HDI (Reynolds et al., 1995) tools. For example, BDI-II requires that an investigator sum the
21 responses (where subjects select the best response to self-statements using an ordinal continuum between
0 and 3) and assign an overall score of "Minimal", "Mild", "Moderate" or "Severe" based on this total (APA,
2000). The 23 items from the HDI, which also measure severity of depressive symptoms, requires a series
of mathematical computations to score subject responses. Overall scores can later be sorted into categories
of "Not Depressed", "Subclinical", "Mild", "Moderate", "Moderate to Severe", and "Severe". Similarly,
specific formulas are required to calculate HDI subscale items, including the HDI Melancholia Subscale
which was compared in this investigation. However, because no formal scoring methods were found to
evaluate sentence completion tests, a Likert-Scale method to score the GSCT instrument was developed.
An objective method of scoring the responses, similar to that used in the Vocabulary section of the Wechsler
Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition (WAIS-III), was selected as a model scoring template (Wechsler,

The newly developed GSCT scoring method required that each response (except for filler stems) be given
a score ranging from 0 to 3 (Appendix C). Example response sets were developed in order to assist in
assigning an appropriate clinical score for each item. For instance, responses that demonstrated minimal
and/or an absence of physical, emotional, social, or spiritual activity were assigned a score of (3). Scores
of (3) were more heavily weighted and indicated a response considered to be most closely associated with
depressive symptomology as described in the DSM-IV-TR (APA, 2000). Conversely, non-depressive
responses, or those atypical of depressed individuals, gleaned scores of (0). Responses could also earn
scores of (1) or (2) (wherein 1 represents mildly depressed symptoms and 2 refers to moderately depressed

In addition to deriving an overall score, the GSCT scoring method also allowed for the analysis of
perceptions related to self, world, and future. After the filler items were excluded, the sentence stems
associated with each of the three dimensions were solid into their relative categories. Then the subtest items
were averaged, and a dimension score was assigned to each of the three domains. This average dimension
score represented the subtest score relating to an individual's self-, world-, or future- related perceptions
(Appendix D). A total dimension score was then computed by adding together the separate subtest
dimension scores. Because the premise of this investigation was to compare the GSCT with other
standardized measures, a method of ranking total GSCT scores on symptom severity was also developed.
Like the BOl-II and HDI, a range of scores was assigned to specific categories. BOI-n ranges were selected
for adaptation because of the multiple levels associated with the HOI score ranges. Four equidistant ranges
were then constructed and assigned severity levels. For example, GSCT total scores between 0-18
corresponded to the "Minimal" range, 19-37 represented "Mild" symptoms, and scores of38-56 or 57-75
were associated with "Moderate" and "Severe" symptoms, respectively. Although developing ranges and
assigning symptom severity levels based upon the results of the investigation would have been preferred,
this method allowed for the establishment of a baseline for eventual comparison. To avoid influencing
participant responses, subjects were not informed that this was a newly formulated tool with corresponding
scoring methods.


Inter services Selection Board (ISSB):
Aim of Inter Services Selection Board is to select potential officers for the defense forces of Pakistan who
have the requisite capabilities to successfully complete their course of training at the military academies
and also possess physical, mental, social and dynamic qualities to make successful leaders during peace
and war. Inter Services Selection Board caters for selection of candidates for training as potential officers
for all the three services of Pakistan. Services Headquarters, however, plan the total number of candidates
to be tested/inducted in various courses as per their overall requirement/schedule. The selection technique
followed by the ISSB is three dimensional. All candidates appearing before the ISSB are to take three
different types of tests, i.e. psych tests (intelligence, mechanical aptitude test and personality tests), GTO
tests and Interview. The Psychologist Officers, Group Testing Officers and the Deputy Presidents, who are
specialists in their respective fields, administer these tests in order to determine who possesses the potential
for leading the military outfits in peace and war.

In this ISSB various sentences are displayed on a projector and the candidates have to complete them. This
test is a very important tool for the psychologist to assess the personality traits of the candidate. personality
traits include Knowledge, sharpness of mentality and how they are associating things.
Educational settings:
Psychological tests specially that of projective tests such as sentence completion test has very extensive use
in educational classification, selection and planning.

National Testing Service - Pakistan (NTS) is an organization in Pakistan that administers academic
performance evaluation tests. It is similar to Educational Testing Service (ETS) in the United States. NTS
offers two main types of tests, the National Aptitude Test (NAT) and the Graduate Assessment Test (GAT).
NAT is aimed at students seeking admission to colleges and universities. GAT is aimed at graduates seeking
admission to postgraduate education. NTS exams are also used to determine qualifications of students
seeking advanced study abroad. There is a separate portion of sentence completion to assess candidate's
mental level.

sentence completion test in Sports:

Sport Psychology is an interdisciplinary science that draws on knowledge from the field of kinesiology and
Psychology. It involves the study of how Psychological factors affect performance and how participation
in support and exercise affect Psychological and Physical factors. In addition to instructions and training of
Psychological skills for performance improvement, applied support Psychology may include work with
athletes, coaches and parents regarding injury, rehabilitation, Communication, team builder and career and

Personality Test such as projective test type (sentence completion test) is the personality measures that most
often get used in PCB Team. Performing tests are used to measure level of skills such as Sport confidence
inventory and athlete coping skill inventory, test of Performance Strategies used to get an understanding of
current level for psychological Skills of Players.

Psychological tests in Industries:

Industrial and organizational Psychology Also known as I/O Psychology work, Work Psychology or
Personnel Psychology is the scientific study of employees, workplaces and organizations. There are a
variety of selection tests. They range from unstructured interviews to structured personality tests. The main
goal of these tests is to predict job performance. Each test has its own relative strengths and weaknesses in
this regard. sentence completion tests are widely used in Pakistan in these settings to evaluate the mental
ability of the candidate

Moreover, sentence completion test is very useful in other settings too such as clinical, counselling etc.
Miller, J. (2015). "Dredging and Projecting the Depths of Personality: The Thematic Apperception Test
and the Narratives of the Unconscious". Science in Context. 28 (1): 9–30

Shatz, Phillip. (n.d.) "Projective personality testing: Psychological testing." Retrieved November 21, 2012,
from Staint Joseph's University: Department of Psychology Web

Putthiwanit, C. (2012) Investigating consumer insight by using completion techniques: A pilot study of a
motorcycle accessory shop in Thailand. International Review of Management and Marketing, 2, 92-8.

Rhode, A.R. (1957) The Sentence Completion Method. New York: The Ronald Press 1957; Lah, M.I.
(1989). Sentence Completion Tests. In C.S. Newmark (Ed.), Major psychological assessment instruments,
Vol II (pp 133-163). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Holaday, M., Smith, D.A. & Sherry, A. (2000). Sentence completion tests: A review of the literature and
results of a survey of members of the society for personality assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment,
74, 371-383.; Lubin, B., Larsen, R.M. & Matarazzo, J.D. (1984). Patterns of psychological test usage in
United States: 1935-1982. American Psychologist, 39, 451-454.

Lawrence C. Soley & Aaron Lee Smith (2008). Projective Techniques for Social Science and Business
Research. Milwaukee: The Southshore Press.

Gregory, J. Robert., Psychological Testing: History, Principles and Applications. Ed. 5. Wheaton College.
Wheaton, Illinois. Peterson: 2007.
Answer Number 2
It is believed that testing has a promising future. This optimism is based on the integral role that testing has
played in the development and recognition of psychology. The field gained its first real status from its role
in the development of screening tests for the military in World War I. Later, the creativity and skill of
psychologists in testing during World War II no doubt numbered among the factors that ultimately led to
government funding to encourage the development of professional psychology. Indeed, this federal
funding, first earmarked for psychology in 1945 in the United States, played an important role in the birth
of clinical psychology and formal training standards. The central role played by testing in the development
and recognition of psychology does not alone ensure an important future role for testing. Despite division
within psychology about the role and value of testing, it remains one of the few unique functions of the
professional psychologist. When one sees psychological testing as encompassing not only traditional but
also new and innovative uses – as in cognitive-behavioral assessment, psychophysiology, evaluation
research, organizational assessment, community assessment, and investigations into the nature of human
functioning – one can understand just how important tests are to psychologists.

New and Improved Tests:

The future is likely to see the development of many more tests. The experts have observed that currently
available intelligence tests are far from perfect and have a long way to go. The Stanford-Binet and Wechsler
tests are technically adequate. However, they can be improved through minor revisions to update test stimuli
and to provide larger and even more representative normative samples with special norms for particular
groups and through additional research to extend and support their validity. During the next few decades,
these two major intelligence tests are likely to be challenged by similar tests with superior standardization
and normative data. A true challenge can come only from a test based on original concepts and a more
comprehensive theoretical rationale than that of the present tests.

The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children may be one such contender in its age range. The
development of such a test is only a question of time. Kaplan and Saccuzzo (2007) believed that in
structured personality testing, the MMPI-2 appeared destined to be the premier test of the 21st century. It
may be due to the innovative approach of Butcher and his colleagues in dealing with the original MMPI’s
inadequate normative sample.

The Rorschach is based on the early theories of Freud. Its psychometric properties are under continual
attack. Many critics doubt whether the Rorschach provides clinically useful information or not. Thus, the
proponents of the Rorschach are already fighting an uphill battle . This test needs to have more support in
terms of scoring reliability and standardized administration.

The future of the TAT is more difficult to predict. TAT has an incredibly extensive research base and is a
prominent clinical tool. The TAT stimuli have been revised (Ritzler, Sharkey & Chudy, 1980). Thus, it may
enjoy increased respectability as more data are acquired on the more recent versions. Performance testing
requires a subject to do something or act rather than to provide a verbal response or fill in a blank.

In performance testing in the schools, the students would write essays, provide written responses to
specified problems, or solve open ended math problems. Performance testing includes such varied
procedures as observing a foreign-language student having a conversation in the foreign language, requiring
science students to conduct a real experiment, asking students to work together as a group and observing
the interaction, and giving problems that have no answer or more than one correct answer and observing a
student’s approach.

Reliance on standardized testing has increased, and the stakes have become higher for individual educators
and schools to increase scores on standardized tests. Teachers, in order to increase scores, diverted valuable
class time to the instruction of specific knowledge to be tested and adjusted the curriculum in such a way
that test results might appear favorable.

The level of adjustment increased as the stakes increased. Although favorable results on standardized tests
have been achieved in this manner, many teachers feel that the actual educational success of their students
has been sacrificed. Many teachers believe that scores could be raised without any real improvements in
learning, and that the benefits of standardized testing programs were not worth the time and money they
required. Regardless of the apparent dissatisfaction connected with the expansion of standardized testing in
schools, performance tests are still not being used on a widespread basis.

Innovations in Testing:
The integration of concepts from experimental cognitive psychology, computer science and psychometrics
are rapidly shaping the field today. Multimedia computerized tests form the most recent cutting edge in the
new generation of assessment instruments. The test taker sits in front of a computer that presents
realistically animated situations with full colour and sound. The program is both interactive and adaptive.
The computer screen freezes and asks the test takers to provide a response. If the response is good, then a
more difficult item is presented. For example, in research programs developed at some companies, the
computer may show a scene involving sexual harassment. The screen freezes just after an employee has
made an inappropriate joke. The test taker, who has applied for a job, is given four choices to deal with the
situation. If an effective choice is made, the computer moves on to an even more difficult situation, such as
a threat from the offensive employee.

The computer offers test developers unlimited scope in developing new technologies: from interactive
virtual reality games that measure and record minute responses to social conflict within a digital world to
virtual environments that are suitable for measuring physiological responses while offering safe and
effective systematic desensitization experiences to the individuals with phobias. In other words, the
computer holds one of the major keys to the future of psychological testing.

The psychologists remain the undisputed leaders in the field. It is unlikely that attacks on and dissatisfaction
with traditional psychological tests will suddenly compel psychologists to abandon tests. Instead,
psychologists are likely to continue to take the lead in this field to produce better tests, and such a direction
shall benefit psychologists, the field, and society. Even if this doesn’t happen, testing corporations that
publish and sell widely used high-stakes standardized tests will no doubt continue to market their products
aggressively, Tests are used in most institutions – schools, colleges, hospitals, industry, business, the
government, and so forth – and new applications and creative uses continue to emerge in response to their

Tests will not suddenly disappear with nothing to replace them. The current tests will continue to be used
until they are replaced by still better tests, which of course may be based on totally new ideas. Though
current tests may gradually fade from the scene, it is believed that psychological testing will not simply
survive but will flourish through the 21st century. The future of psychological testing depends on many
issues and developments. Professional issues include theoretical concerns, such as the usefulness of the trait
concept as opposed to index of adjustment; the adequacy of tests; and actuarial versus clinical prediction.

Moral issues include human rights, such as the right to refuse testing, the right not to be labeled, and the
right to privacy. Another ethical issue that concerns test users and developers is the divided loyalty that can
result from administering a test to an individual for an institution: whose rights come first? Also,
professionals have an ethical duty to provide and understand the information needed to use a test
properly. Finally, social issues such as dehumanization, the usefulness of tests, and access to testing
services are typical to the field of testing today.

Most Common Tests Used in the 21st Century:

The most common tests that are used in the 21st century are:

• 16 PF
• SCL-90

Another study says that :

Most Used Cognitive Tests*

• Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children

• Wide Range Achievement Test

• Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test

Most Used Personality Tests*

• Rorschach Inkblot Test

• Thematic Apperception Test

• Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventor

A research "Testing Practices in the 21st Century" conducted By the European Psychologists in 2012 tells
us about the most common and frequently used test in 21st century. The result of this research tells us about
the most common tests are the classic psychometric tests of intelligence and personality: WISC, WAIS,
MMPI, Raven, 16 PF, etc. The WISC is in the top ten in 16 out of 17 countries, the WAIS in 14 countries,
the MMPI and Raven in 10 countries, whereas these numbers are gradually decreasing, with the number 10
in the total group – the NEO-PI-R – being among the top ten in only 2 countries. Although all countries
seem to share a common basis of tests used, there is also wide variation, as shown by the fact that, in the
top-ten lists of the 17 countries, 64 different tests appear. Lithuania, Poland, and Romania show the most
specific test repertory, as their top-ten lists have only three tests in common with the list of the total group.
The tests used in Spain are the most representative of the tests used conjointly in all countries, as Spain has
nine tests in common with the total group. The results from the Finnish survey (Kuuskorpi & Keski- nen,
2008) seem to confirm this picture. The top ten of the Finnish survey (N = 1,600) were: WAIS (54%),
WISC (47%), Wartegg (47%), Rorschach (46%), NEPSY (40%), WMS (37%), WPPSI (29%), BDI (26%),
Lukilasse (21%, an educational test), and PRF (21%, Personality Research Form). As people in this survey
were asked to write down the ten most essential tests (instead of the three most frequently used tests, as in
the EFPA-survey), the numbers in the Finnish survey cannot be compared to those of the EFPA-survey. As
expected, the percentages generally are higher. The Finnish top-ten list has four tests in common with the
list of the total group, whereas three tests are not on the top-ten lists of any of the other countries


In the 21st century, psychological testing is a big business. There are thousands of commercially available,
standardized psychological tests as well as thousands of unpublished tests. Tests are published by hundreds
of test publishing companies that market their tests very proactively—on the web and in catalogs. Before
the turn of this century, these publishers were earning close to $200 million per year (Educational Testing
Service, 1996), and approximately 20 million Americans per year were taking psychological tests (Hunt,
1993). For the names and web addresses of some of the most well-known test publishers, as well as some
of the most popular tests they publish, see on the table below:

Publisher Website Popular Published Tests

Educational • Advanced Placement (AP)

Testing Service Program Tests
• Graduate Management
Admission Test (GMAT)
• Graduate Record
Examinations (GRE)
• Scholastic Assessment Test
• Test of English as a Foreign
Language (TOEFL)
Pearson • BarOn Emotional Quotient
• Bayley Scales of Infant and
Toddler Development—III
• Bender Visual-Motor
Gestalt Test—II
• Watson–Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal
Hogan Assessment Systems • Hogan Personality
Inventory (HPI)
• Hogan Development Survey
• Hogan Business Reasoning
Inventory (HBRI)
• Motives, Values,
Preferences Inventory (MVPI
IPAT • 16 Personality Factors
PAR • Self-Directed Search
• NEO Personality Inventory
• Personality Assessment
• Slosson Intelligence Test—
Revised for Children and
Psytech International • Occupational Interest
• Clerical Test Battery
• Values and Motives
PSI • Customer Service Battery
• Firefighter Selection Test
• Police Selection Test
Hogrefe • Rorschach Inkblot Test
• Trauma Symptom Inventory
• WPQ Emotional
Intelligence Questionnaire
University of • Minnesota Multiphasic
Minnesota Press Personality Inventory
Test Division (MMPI)

Current trends include the proliferation of new tests, higher standards, improved technology, increasing
objectivity, greater public awareness and influence, the computerization of tests, and testing on the Internet.
Psychology is now better equipped in technique, methodology, empirical data, and experience than ever
before. Therefore, what happens to testing in future will depend on the goals and objectives chosen by
those in the field and by their persistence and creativity in accomplishing their goals.

Ball, J. D.; Archer, Robert P.; Imhoff, Eric A. (1994). Time Requirements of Psychological Testing: A
Survey of Practitioners. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63(2), 239-249.

Kaplan, Robert M. & Saccuzzo, Dennis P. (2007). Psychological Testing : Principles, Applications and
Issues. Indian Reprint of the Sixth Edition. India: Wadsworth – Thomson Learning.

Wood, J.M., Nezworski, M.T., Lilienfeld, S.O. & Garb, H.N. (2003). What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?
Science confronts the controversial inkblot test. San Francisco : Jossey – Bass.

Hunsley, J. & Bailey, J.M. (1999). The clinical utility of the Rorschach : Unfulfilled promises and an
Uncertain future. Psychological Assessment, vol. 11, pp. 266-277.

Weiner, I.B. (2003). Principles of Rorschach Interpretation. Mahwah, NJ ; Erlbaum.

Ritzler, B.A., Sharkey, K.J. & Chudy, J.F. (1980). A comprehensive projective alternative to the TAT.
Journal of Personality Assessment, vol. 44, pp. 358-362.

Ever, A, Muniz, J, Bartam, D, Boben , D. (2012). Testing Practices in the 21st Century , Article: European
Psychologist, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 300-319

Author. (n.d.). What Are Psychological Tests?. Retrieved from