Discuss your evaluation of this instrument’s validity, cross-cultural fairness and practicality.
The Woodworth Psychoneurotic Inventory (WPI) was developed during World War I to screen recruits for their risk of developing shell shock (PTSD). However, because it was not finished in time to be useful for its intended purpose, the WPI instead became the dominant self-report personality measure during the 1920-30s, after which it was mostly forgotten.
Click this link to take the WPI: http://personality-testing.info/tests/WPI.php
Post your results in this discussion forum (just your total, not individual answers). Discuss your evaluation of this instrument’s validity, cross-cultural fairness, and practicality. Be sure to refer to the summary of how your score compares vs. the average person in the 1930s and today. Also, refer to specific questions that you feel may not be valid of cross-culturally fair and explain why. You can click the back button to see the questions again.
It is very important assignment. I have to get an A in this work .
Open the link , do the test, share the score and follow the instructions in the question (
this are the requirements that I have to answer after take the test. what were the results when you took this test? Do you think the instrument is valid for assessing PTSD since that was its original purpose? How does the summary of your score compare vs. the average person in the 1930s and today. Also, what specific questions do you feel may not be valid or cross-culturally fair?)
Sample answers from fellow students to help and give you a hint!
this is answer of one of my classmate (
Taking this test was very interesting and I’ll admit, I chuckled at a few of the questions! My total result after taking the Woodworth Psychoneurotic Inventory (WPI) was 24 out of 116. The graph illustrating the number of people and the scored received showed that the normal range seemed to be between 20 and 55, with scores of 10 or less being very low and scored of 65 or more being very high. However, according to Franz and earlier interpretations, the average white individual scored only 10 and those who scored higher than twenty should be suspected of instability. Therefore, had I taken this test in the 1930s, I would be deemed mentally unstable. Furthermore, according to this test, 81 percent of the average person today would also be considered psychologically unstable.
Evaluation of this instrument’s validity
The WPI was intended to test soldiers for their risk for shell or PTSD. I found it very hard to understand how some of these questions were aimed at answering this particular question. I felt as though some these questions were very general and had a wide net of topics it was attempting to cover. Some examples of these questions were do you have sexual dreams? Are you bothered much by blushing? Did you ever make love to a girl (or boy)? I could not figure out how these questions could determine the possibility of someone having a high risk of a traumatic event triggering a intense, sometime debilitating reaction that can last for months or years. I feel that this test would be a good test if it was not focused particularly on the risks of PTSD but was used to get a general idea of the person taking the test.
Cross-Cultural Fairness
The fact that this test was used in the 1930s for soldiers and the interpretation of the scores suggested that white men scored 10 or less indicates that this test’s focus was on the white, male (solider) population. Therefore, I assumed that the cross-cultural fairness and practicality is limited. One example is the question did your teachers treat you right? This question would be a complex questions for some people. For example, the definition of ‘teachers treating you right’ could be considered different in some cultures. Another question is do you ever think you have lost your manhood (womanhood)? That question could be perceived and interpreted very differently in different cultures.)
Second classmate answer:
I scored a 42 on the WPI, putting me in the normal range for neuroticism, but still slightly more neurotic than the today’s average female. Compared to the average 1930s female, I am substantially more neurotic.
At face value, I would agree with this verdict, but a closer look at the instrument begs the question of whether this is actually assessing the construct of neuroticism.
First, what exactly is “neuroticism?” Gilovich, Keltner, and Nisbett describe individuals who score high on this personality dimension as tense, anxious, and moody (2006). For the WPI to accurately assess these traits, its items must have content validity. While many of these items hint at neurotic tendencies, many “Yes’s” can easily be explained by something other than neuroticism. For example, a person who responds yes to “Do you have a great many bad headaches?” may have headaches due to innate personality features that leave them prone to feeling tense, external stressors, or a medical condition. Neuroticism is one possibility, but not the only possibility . Other questions, like “Have your employers always treated you right?” are hardly measuring the construct at hand (although this is just my opinion. Maybe this just lacks face validity).
In terms of practicality, in its present form, the WPI is both time and cost effective, and it’s bimodal format is easy to navigate.
Cross culturally, I noticed a few concerns:
Items that ask about jobs may have excluded most women in the 1930s, and may not have been applicable to people who lived in agrarian areas (which was probably a significant portion of the country at that time. Many people still lived on farms and that was their career, rather than going to work in a factory).
“Have you ever seen a vision?” undermines the fact that in some religions, seeing visions is a sacred experience as opposed to an instance of psychosis.
“Do you find it difficult to pass urine in the presence of others?” probably would not apply to female participants. If a man or woman answered this question yes or no, it might have different significance.
Answer preview to discuss your evaluation of this instrument’s validity, cross-cultural fairness and practicality.
APA
484 words
