Objective test
Objective tests are those measures which maximize objectivity, in the sense that response options are structured such that examinees have only a limited set of options (i.e. Likert scale, true or false) [1]. Structuring a measure in this way is intended to minimize subjectivity or bias on the part of the individual administering the measure so that administering and interpreting the results does not rely on the judgment of the of the examiner. Although the term ‘objective test’ encompasses a wide range of tests with which most people are somewhat familiar (i.e. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, Graduate Record Examination, and the Standardized Achievement Test), it is a term that arose out of the field of personality assessment [1]. Despite a number of measures outside of personality assessment bearing the qualities of what usually defines an objective test, typically only personality measures are labeled as such; a trend which occurred early in the field’s development as a response and contrast to the growing popularity of tests known as projective tests[1]. These ‘projective tests’ purportedly require examinees to generate responses to ambiguous tasks or activities, the content of which is supposed to represent their personal characteristics (i.e. internal attitudes, personality traits)[2]. Over time, these tests have gained a negative connotation, whilst objective tests tend to be viewed positively. Yet, the distinction between objective and projective tests is misleading, as it implies that objective tests are not subject to the influence of bias [1][3]. Although the fixed response style of objective tests does not require interpretation on the part of the examiner during the administration and scoring of the measure, responses to questions are subject to the examinee’s own response style and biases, in much the same way as they are for projective measures; therefore, both test ‘types’ are vulnerable to subjective factors that may affect scores[4]. Furthermore, understanding and giving meaning to the results of any assessment, projective and objective alike, is done within the context of an examinee’s personal history, presenting concerns, and understanding of the myriad of factors which can impact his or her scores on the assessment. This process inherently requires some degree of subjectivity. Thus, it is not simply that objective tests are “good” and projective tests are “bad”, but that they both carry potential sources of bias and require judgment in interpretation to varying degrees. Rather than categorizing tests on the basis of overt but superficial test characteristics, the individual merits of a test should be assessed and considered.
See also
References
- ^ a b c d Meyer, G. J. & Kurtz, J. E. (2006). "Advancing personality assessment terminology:
Time to retire "objective" and "projective"
as personality test descriptors". Journal of Personality Assessment. 87(3).
{{cite journal}}: line feed character in|title=at position 46 (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Projective test". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2018.
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|dead-url=(help) - ^ Wagner, E. E. (2008). "Beyond "objective" and "projective": A logical
system for classifying psychological tests: Comment on Meyer and Kurtz (2006)". Journal of Personality Assessment. 90(4): 402–405.
{{cite journal}}: line feed character in|title=at position 47 (help) - ^ Bornstein, R. F. (2007). "Toward a process-based framework for classifying personality tests: Comment on Meyer
and Kurtz (2006)". Journal of Personality Assessment. 89(2): 202–207.
{{cite journal}}: line feed character in|title=at position 85 (help)