Rus Articles Journal

It is how possible to trust psychological tests or In what Hannibal Lecter was right?

the Requirement to learn itself and others is old as the world. Shumera in the 6th century BC made careful selection of soldiers, rigidly checking not only force, speed and accuracy, but also strong-willed qualities of young men: it was necessary to shoot a bow in the horse.

Examples of situational tests can be found in the Bible. Perhaps, risky experiment of the tsar Solomon on establishment of true motherhood is most known.

Confucius and his followers created the philosophy of selection of officials based on personal merits and abilities of the person, but not a notable origin and wealth. Selection of pupils in religious and philosophical schools of Greece was based not so much on an assessment of knowledge how many on detection of ability to use them in extreme situations.

At the end of the 19th century the English scientist F. Galton surveyed in seventeen parameters of 10 thousand people at the London international exhibition, having shown, distinctions between people even of one age are how big. And in several years the German psychologist Mr. Myunsterberg developed the first psychological tests applied still.

In the article “Whether It Is Worth Expostulating on a Curve Mirror of Psychology if …?“ I concerned a question of qualification and personal features of the psychologist. The personality - the important, but not the only instrument of our work if it is about psychological diagnostics.

The aspiration of the person to learn something about itself by tests and horoscopes does not cease to surprise, as well as children`s pleasure from coincidence of the received results to the idea of itself. But these results are how reliable?

The interpretation of results of diagnostics of temperament given in the manual for eighth-graders very much would surprise the author of the test G. Ayzenk: “If you have art abilities, then you can become the writer, the composer, the artist, the sculptor etc.“; “You can become an inventor“; “You can be the good actor, the teacher, the social worker, the psychologist, the compere, the head of children`s collective, etc. But be more serious“.

Most of all got to emotionally unstable children whom authors of this interpretation just pripechatat categorical formulations: “Imperious, hypochondriac, pedantic. Always you strive for superiority. You enjoy any superiority. It is inclined to a sneer, you are venomous. Easily you get tired“; “You often everything are dissatisfied, grumbling, inclined to cavils. It is envious. It is not self-assured, you give in to difficulties. It is difficult for you to make friends“.

In the same grant is given a projective technique “The geometrical drawing person “ and samples of drawings with interpretation! Generally use of projective techniques is possible only in special cases and with the consent of the client understanding what sort information can be obtained with their help. In practice projective tests, at external simplicity the most difficult and deep, are pretty often reduced to the level of farcical astrology.

The interpretation of a technique “Geometrical drawing of the person“ given in a grant is indistinct, as in a horoscope: “probably, you have a good, competent, developed speech. If is not present - be engaged in its development“. “The formula 415 speaks about literary, first of all poetic abilities“, “the increased emotionality can help, and can disturb you“. the Majority of the techniques used in psychodiagnostics are developed by

in the middle of the last century. For these years there were so many new realities what to offer school students questions at which still their parents laughed - means, to discredit idea of psychological diagnostics.

I think, it is difficult for modern teenagers to make a choice between “To combat diseases of plants, wreckers of the wood, a garden“, “To work at keyboard cars (the typewriter, the teletype, a type-setting machine, etc.) “ or “To watch quality of phonograph records, to make programs of computers, to work at the typewriter“. I Am afraid that pleasure “to do extracts, cuttings from various texts and to group them in a certain sign“ to school students of the 21st century it is difficult to receive.

It would seem, intellectual tests, unlike questionnaires, inflations are less subject. But also here “first try, then trust“. A few years ago at the All-Russian conference the famous scientist told to psychological community that the staff of its laboratory found 44 mistakes in the Test of structure of intelligence. The episode from the movie “Silence of Lambs“ when the maniac Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins), having looked at the questionnaire offered it by the agent Starling (Jodie Foster) ironically notices is remembered: “And you hoped to strike me with this stupid weapon? “

What techniques are necessary today? Considering a self-education role, they have to give the chance of self-diagnostics therefore to have the unambiguous and clear interpretation brought out of answers, stated in the supporting form, excluding “ directives you have to …“, “You cannot …“.

The overload of pupils and an intense rhythm of school life dictates the requirements to period of operation with a technique. It is desirable that time of its performance did not exceed 20 minutes. Should you not abuse direct “ questions you love lessons of mathematics, physics, chemistry …“ - they cause fair bewilderment of the teenagers who killed the whole lesson to learn things, obvious to them (“Just would ask what is pleasant to me, I would tell “equipment“ at once).

And the most important - you should not absolutize results even of the most reliable tests which reliability does not exceed 80%. The outstanding Russian psychologist B. M. Teplov noted that “nobody can foretell to what limits this or that ability can develop: it can develop infinately, being limited only to time of human life, methods of education and training“.

Diagnostics in which possibilities of intellectual and personal development of the person are not put is senseless if it is not immoral.