WO2004058069A1 - System for psychological testing - Google Patents

Abstract

A projective psychometric test which is based on asking a subject to imagine a mental landscape, or other mental arena, to populate it and then to score various statements in relation to the landscape. The scores are used to calculate quantitative measurements relating to predefined psychological constructs of the subject, such as drive, confidence, responsiveness, empathy and control. The system is provided on-line, for example over the internet, with the subject's scores being stored in a database on the server side and the scores being used to update a graphical, and optionally textual, display presented to the subject.

Description

SYSTEM FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING

The present invention relates to a system and method for psychological testing, and in particular to a novel projective psychometric test. Psychometric tools have been used for 40 years or more to measure accurately and reliably different psychological constructs in individuals. Typical constructs that have been measured are: extroversion- introversion; anxiety; thinking style; poise; hostility or aggression; assertiveness; compliance and many more.

There are many tests available to measure such constructs. The most usual use of the such tests in a occupational or commercial context has been in recruitment. Individuals are asked to take tests wliich give a useful indication to a potential employer of the likely suitability of the person for the role they are applying for. There has been a market-led interest therefore in developing tests which indicate how a person will behave in an ongoing sense. Underlying these tests are psychological theories of personality or other less broad constructs. Personality theories upon which all significant tests are based all share one feature in common; they regard personality as something which is basically inherited, or at least is a very stable construct. For this reason too, personality tests have not been designed to measure a person's change or growth in 'personality' over time, as the expectation is that it will not change (very much).

At the same time, the method of data acquisition in these tests also militates against measuring change and development. Data is acquired by asking a subject to 'self-report' using a questionnaire. The questionnaire invites the subject to score or position a series of statements about issues, behaviours or practices. Responses indicate typically the attitude and supposedly the 'personality' (if that is what is being measured) of the subject.

The self report statements (items) require a person to be aware of their habitual, usual and historical attitudes to the issue in question. For instance, a statement might be 'I enjoy going out to parties', 'I prefer a quiet evening with a book than going out to a party', 'I enjoy being alone when I am tired' or 'I tend to read the instructions and follow them when making a recipe'. In other words, the statement refers to an actual experience the subject will have had or could have had in their life. The subject scores the statement by referring to their historical memory that relates to that specific contextual event or experience. The subject then may score the statement they feel best describes them with a high score, and use a low score to mark the one that they feel least applies to them.

These statements require self awareness and memory. The remembered pattern of historical behaviour enables the person to state what they have tended to do in the past. By definition, therefore, if the same person takes the same test again at a future date their answers are largely shaped by this existing historical repertoire, even if their current behaviours have moved on somewhat: the present perception is strongly affected by the past perception. Since time is sequential, memory is cumulative. Over time, the person's memory of how they tend to behave in such context specific situations will be hardened-up, reinforced and consciously owned. This is illustrated schematically in Figure 5 where 50 represents the subject's inner psychological dynamic, 52 represents the subject's memory and the context specific statements TO - T3 of the test, 51, are assessed at 54 by the subject with reference to the context-specific memories M0 - M3 etc in their memory 52. Because the memories tend not to change, the responses R0 - R3 also tend to be the same as shown at 56. Even if the subject changes behaviour and starts to approach the same situation completely differently, he may score the statement differently the next time he took the same test, but the change would refer to a modification in outward behaviour not in inner subjectivity. In other words, such tests are basically insensitive to change because they refer to an ever-hardening source of data. Hence Rl = R2 = R3 etc. And those changes that such tests may pick up will tend to be gross behavioural changes or habits, not subtle, subjective changes and probably be established over a matter of years not months. In general then, such tests are useful for measuring behavioural practices that are likely to remain the same, but not useful for measuring the inner subjectivity of the subject. A type of psychological test which aims to investigate the inner psychological state of a subject more deeply is the "projective" psychological test. Projective psychological tests have been around for 50 years. Examples are the Rorschach Inkblot test and the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) which work by giving the subject 'cues' , in these cases visual cues. The tests stimulate the subject to 'project' an idea or a narrative from the cue which reflects an underlying attitude or perception. They rely on the so-called 'projective hypothesis' which is attributed to Frank in 1939, and asserts that we all 'project 'our inner needs (whether fears or securities) onto our experiences in life (Kaplan and Saccuzzo, p458). We give life a meaning, often a meaning which has more to do with our own inner state than the objective reality. Our growing psyches build up a history of experiences which shape our understanding of who we are, what we want to encounter and what we want to avoid in life. Our risk avoidance strategy involves using such inner perception to predict, anticipate, and interpret experiences, in order to plot a safe path through life. It is about learning and responding and adapting to the experiences we have had. Projective tests provoke this inner self awareness through the use of cues, thus bypassing the more analytic and self-reflective aspects of cognition. They are thus, less easy to fake or to bias, and less reliant upon the subjects ability to self-reflect.

The problem with projective tests in general has been their subjectivity of scoring. Their psychometric properties are very poor (Kaplan and Saccuzzo, p460- 62). The tests require interpretation by a very experienced psychologist and the subjects are unable to gauge their psychological state themselves simply by taking the test. Even the assessment by the psychologist is subjective, and does not result in quantitative measurements, thus making the technique unsuitable for psychometric testing. The present invention provides a projective psychological test which is structured and provides quantitative measurements of predefined psychological constructs of the subject. It therefore provides a projective psychometric test.

This is achieved by introducing a structured and measurable self-scoring system, so that the subject can take the test themselves, the results can be objectively converted into scores relating to the psychological constructs or unconscious drivers of the subject. One embodiment of the invention provides a testing system wliich the subject can use, and which stores the scores so that the subject can retake the test and monitor the change in their psychological constructs or drivers over time.

In more detail the present invention provides a method of psychologically testing a subject comprising: prompting the subject to imagine a mental arena in which to articulate personal psychological attitudes; obtaining from the subject responses based on the effect of the projection of their personal psychological attitudes on the imaginary mental arena; and deriving from the responses a quantitative measurement of each of a plurality of predefined psychological constructs of the subject to provide a psychometric assessment of the subject.

The responses from the subject may be obtained by requesting the subject to score each of a plurality of statements about the arena. The subject may score the statements on a numerical scale reflecting the truth of the statement relative to the arena, and preferably the quantitative measurement of each of the predefined psychological constructs is based on the scores of a plurality of these statements. Thus several statements and responses contribute to the score for each psychological construct. There may be a plurality of dummy statements included which do not contribute to the quantitative measurement, but keep the mind of the user focussed in the right way.

Preferably the same prompt and statements are presented to the subject a number of times, i.e. the subject can take the test a number of times, whereby the quantitative measurements provide a monitor of the psychological state of the subject at those times:

The prompt may comprise neutral, context-free cues, such as verbal cues, and which are preferably non-experiential, i.e. they do not refer to specific actual situations faced in the real life of the subject.

The scores may be defined on a Likert scale. The subject may be prompted to develop the arena before being asked to provide the responses.

The arena is preferably integrated, singular and reflects a coherent set of attitudes. Preferably it is informed by memories, feelings, past experiences and beliefs of the subject. An example of such an arena is an environment, such as a landscape, domestic scene, theatre, movie stage, or the like which the subject can imagine occupying. Alternatively the arena can comprise a visual or narrative area or story, a script, play, drama, map, journey, adventure, or picture of items, colours and shapes.

The predefined psychological constructs preferably form a comprehensive range of psychological constructs relating to the subject's psychological state. They may relate the subject's behaviours, attitudes to themselves and others, and self- concept. They may comprise one or more of: extroversion, empathy, control, drive,- confidence and responsiveness, personality, work styles, thinking styles, assertiveness, aggression, anxiety, openness, inclusion, use of power, team roles, emotional intelligence, fear, happiness, guilt and hope. •

The invention is preferable embodied as a system which allows the subject to take the test without intervention by any third party. Thus preferably the invention extends to a system which has an output device for providing the prompt to the subject, an input device for receiving the responses, and a processor for deriving from the input responses the quantitative measurements and storing the quantitative measurements in a database. The quantitative measurements are preferably displayed to the subject on the output device, and preferably a history of previous values of the quantitative measurements are also displayed so that the change over time can be seen. The display may be a graphical display such as a graph, and preferably the subject can control the appearance of the display using the input device.

The system can be adapted to allow the subject to supplement the graphical display with comments, which are also stored in the database, or the display may be supplemented with markers which form hyperlinks to other stored data, such as a diary or other text data input by the subject. The system may be adapted to produce a textual report of the psychological state of the user, the report being automatically assembled on the basis of the quantitative measurements, or the raw subject responses, from a library of report components.

Preferably the system is based on a personal computer, and the invention- may be provided over a communications link, such as the internet, by having the processing and database remote from the subject. Thus, for example, the processor and database may be provided on a remote server which delivers the prompts to the user in the form of web pages, the subject's responses are transmitted to the processor which calculates the quantitative measurements, stores the results in the database, and then sends representative data for interpretation and rendering to the subject on the output device.

Thus the invention may be embodied in the form of one or more computer ^■ programs providing the functionality of the various parts of the system. These programs may be stored and executed on computers in different places linked by communication links such as the internet.

The invention will be further described by way of example with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:-

Figure 1 is a diagram of one embodiment of the invention;

Figure 2 illustrates an example display to a subject of the change in their psychological constructs over time;

Figure 3 illustrates schematically the client-server arrangement in one embodiment of the invention;

Figure 4 schematically illustrates the psychometric projective test methodology of one embodiment of the invention; and Figure 5 schematically illustrates a prior art psychometric test methodology.

One embodiment of the present invention which is a web-based psychological testing tool will now be described. This includes a description of a specific embodiment of a projective psychometric test.

This invention provides a projective psychological test which is structured and therefore objective and which needs no third-party interpretation. The test is designed to be deployed on-line so it can be taken again and again and is designed to provide ongoing visual results. It therefore provides a monitor for the subject's psychological condition, termed in this embodiment a "Personal Ecology Profile (PEP) Monitor". Because it is objective and can be taken repeatedly, it allows the measurement of change and personal development of the subject. The test is based on prompting the subject to take a short mental exercise in which they imagine a mental arena, such as an environment they would be comfortable inhabiting, invites them to populate it, such as with objects or people, and then obtains from them responses based on the effect on the arena of the personal psychological attitudes of the subject. The responses are assessed automatically by the system to provide the psychometric measurement of the subject's psychological condition at that time. Because the mental arena is imagined by the patient in response to a neutral (i.e. context free) cue, and because it can develop over time, it is an effective way to measure change in the subject's condition. This contrasts, therefore, with the context-specific cues used in previous psychometric tests, and the incoherent and unstructured visual cues of previous projective tests. While current projective tests such as the TAT may develop over time, because the test does not form a coherent single entity, the development of the subject is difficult to measure and quantify. Development tends to be interpreted by the consultant administering the test, and is therefore subject to the consultant's own subjectivity and change. The present invention removes this unhelpful subjectivity by using a single coherent mental arena introduced each time by the same neutral cues, and a single coherent, consistent set of statements to explore it.

The cues are context free, meaning that they do not refer to specific actual situations faced in the real life of the subject, but refer entirely to the imaged mental arena. Because they are context free they do not connect with the context-specific memory of the subject as in the prior art. Instead they connect with another part of the mind - the "unconscious" part. This part of the mind is always changing as it retains an impression of considerably more than is consciously and concretely processed and remembered. Therefore every new experience that the subject has will leave a potentially significant impression in this unconscious part of the mind, which can be regarded as "mental putty". When the subject responds to the cues in the test of the present invention, it is the latest impression made in the "mental putty" which shapes their projection. Therefore the projection reflects their on-going subjectivity, and this subjectivity is then hardened by being scored against^'a stable, consistent scale of items. Thus the impression is fixed at that point in time by the PEP Monitor. The PEP Monitor can test for a new impression at a later time and this impression will reflect the new subjectivity of the subject at the later time. This is illustrated in Figure 4 in which the subject's inner psychological dynamic is again illustrated as 50 and within which the subject's new experiences 41 at time points Tl, T2, T3 etc together with the subject's previous psychological fears, anxieties, insecurities etc 42 lead to new fears, anxieties and insecurities at time points Tl, T2 and T3 etc which in turn form the subject's present state 44 at those time points. The projective, psychometric test of the present invention provides a series of context free cues 45 at the time points TO, Tl , T2 and T3 which in response to the subject's present state 44 produce the projective responses 46 which consist of different forms of the mental arena, in this case illustrated as different forms of a landscape L0, LI, L2, L3 etc. Providing this on an on-line environment using a measurable self-scoring system allows the removal of the expert or consultant from the process, meaning that any development in the interpretation and scoring of the landscape can be properly and singularly attributed to the subject's own state and change.

A specific example of the psychometric, projective test will now be described. It invites the subject to imagine a world which they would feel comfortable inhabiting. It invites them to imagine various operations occurring within that imagined world, and then asks them to score some of the actual elements that they imagined in their landscape. It invites them to score how they would manage and govern the space, and how they would feel if certain events were to occur. The scores they indicate are then used to draw up the profile of the psychological constructs of the subject. Appendix 1 below sets out the prompt which the subject is presented with on starting the test. In this web-based embodiment, as indicated in Figures 1 and 3, the subject 1 (client) logs onto the test website 3 and is presented with the prompt causing them to create the projective mental landscape 5. It will be seen from Appendix 1 that the prompt involves nine questions which step the subject through constructing the landscape and populating it with objects or people and thinking about the landscape and the subject's situation within it.

Then the subject is asked to provide some responses which are based on the effect of the projection of their person psychological attitudes on the imaginary landscape. This is achieved in this embodiment using a questionnaire which is also set out in Appendix 1. In this process, illustrated in Figures 1 and 3 as box 7, the subject is invited to score sixty-eight items directly in relation to the landscape. The statements are given numerical scores between 1 and 5 based on the truth of the statement relative to the landscape. In fact in this embodiment twelve of the items - are dummy items (these are items 1, 6, 19, 28, 37, 46, 55 and 64 to.68. These are included to keep the subject's mind focussed upon the landscape and to prevent drift into a more self-analytical mode of thinking. The remaining fifty-six items investigate seven factor scales or psychological constructs, there being eight items per factor scale. The seven factor scales or psychological constructs are empathy, control, drive, confidence, self-presentation, lateral thinking and responsiveness. Other constructs could be measured, such as personality, work style, thinking style, assertiveness, aggression, anxiety, openness, inclusion, team role, emotional intelligence, fear, happiness, guilt and hope.

After the subject has completed the questionnaire the results (scores) are transmitted back to the website where the server processor stores the scores on the server 30 and processes the scores to provide output to the subject. As indicated in box 9 of Figure 1, one type of output is a textual report. This report is assembled automatically on the basis of the responses. Appendix 2 at the end of this description indicates the textual components which can be included in the report on the basis of the scores for the seven psychological constructs. For each of the psychological constructs, two of the paragraphs are selected and included, one on the basis of the score itself (e.g. low, medium or high as defined in Appendix 2), and one based on the amount of change since last time (e.g. up 1, down 1 or change less than 1). The report may, of course, include additional text explaining the significance of the various drivers and explaining how the subject can improve their psychological state, and these parts may be standard, rather than being responsive to the scores. In this embodiment the report presents only five of the constructs, namely Confidence, Empathy, Drive, Control & Responsiveness though obviously all, or a different number could be presented.

In this embodiment the scores for each of the five psychological constructs presented are calculated directly from the subject scores as follows:- Confidence (S) = 5.2 + 0.25 [q2-q3+q4-q5+q7-q8+q9-ql0]

Responsiveness (1) = 5.2 +0.25 [ql l-ql2+ql3-ql4+ql5-ql6+ql7-ql8]

Drive (X) = 5.2+0.25 [_q20-q21+q22-q23+24-q25+26-q27]

Control (T) = 5.2+0.25 [q38-q39+q40-q41+q42-q43+q44-q45]

Empathy ^' (M) = -5.2+0.25 (q56-q57+q58-q59+q60-q61+q62-q63)

where ql, q2 etc indicates the score for that question.

These calculated quantitative measurements are also stored on the database on the server as indicated at 11 in Figure 1, and then on a request by the user to see a report a PHP file is used to prepare the data for delivery as web pages to the subject so that the scores, and previous scores, can be displayed to the user as a graph, referred to in Figure 1 as the "PEP monitor" graph. An example of such a graph is illustrated in Figure 2. Appendix 3 is an example of the report, including some standard text (e.g. the introduction and "coaching options"), textual components for each of the five constructs assembled on the basis of the scores and, where indicated, a graph as in Figure 2 [Simon: Can you e-mail me the report so I can edit it please.].

In this embodiment the database 30 at the server is as MySQL 3.23 server database running on a Unix-based Apache server and using PHP server-side scripting language. Macro Media Flash MX (v6) is used for delivery of the graphical data and its display to the subject. Thus on the server side the PHP file 32 calculates from the data in the database 30 the representative data to be sent to the Macro Media Flash file 34 at the subject's computer (on the "client side"). The Flash file 34 on the subject's side then interprets the data and presents it in the graphical form of Figure 2. Because the system uses dynamic database interaction (in that the newly- added scores are shown along with previous data), it is possible to give the subject control over how the data is presented, for instance the preferred graph style, 2-D, 3- D, colour etc, and textual comments can also be included explaining how the data has changed. Further, the subject can select a period of time and see changes over that time, for example during a period of stress or change in their life. The system also allows the user to add their own comments (e.g. markers) to the graph, by way of a diary or personal commentary on the changes. The markers can be hyperlinked to the diary or commentary, or other stored data.

APPENDIX 1

The PEP personality profile involves an imagination game. This game involves no special imaginative ability. If you can remember what happened the last time you went shopping, then you can do this exercise!

^■ It will take you anything between 15 and 45 minutes. It does not matter if it takes you longer or shorter than this, but schedule enough time to complete the process in one go. Try and complete it undisturbed.

^■ Don't rush! Only move on to the next direction when the picture in your mind is settled.

^■ Do not stop to write your picture down as you go along- it will be easy to return to at the end at any time and you will not lose any details.

^■ If you want to stop the exercise at any point, you can do so, and return to it at a later point.

1. Imagine you are standing outdoors on a large plot of land.

2. Look around you and choose an area that you want to make your own.

3. Imagine constructing a boundary to divide this area off. You can construct whatever kind of boundary you want: perhaps a fence, or a rope, or a wall, or a line of trees, or a line on the ground, or a ditch or whatever. There might be a boundary there already that suits you. Inside your boundary is your space, your personal landscape.

4. Imagine what you want in your landscape, the kind of terrain, the kind of objects (perhaps buildings, artifacts, trees, water, flowers )

5. Imagine if there are people in it or not

6. Imagine for a moment the things you might like to go on there and who you might like to be there.

7. How do you like life to be ordered in your landscape?

8. How do you manage your relationships with other people?

9. Spend a few moments just exploring your landscape and feeling at home in it.

Now answer these questions, scoring between 1 and 5 in the empty column as indicated:

We are going to end the imagination game there. Leave your landscape now; you can return there whenever you choose.

That is the end of the exercise.

APPENDIX 2 YOUR PEP MONITOR

Because the PEP has measured your unconscious drivers rather than your exhibited behaviours, it can also plot how these change and develop over time. The PEP provides you with the unique facility to re-test yourself again at any time you choose to measure the level of your drivers at that time. This does NOT mean that your PEP report is merely an instant snapshot of how you happened to feel on the day you did the test; it has accessed much deeper and lasting self-understanding than that. Our unconscious drivers do not, in normal circumstance, change very much over months or even years. They may fluctuate more if we are trying to cope with trauma or crisis in our life, but on the whole they are robust and consistent. That is why we have to invest a great deal of energy and focus if we are to change them at all.

It may be appropriate to test yourself again:

_• Before, during and after a concerted focus on developing your personal characteristics over the course of several weeks or months

_• In preparation for a significant event such as job interview, an important meeting and a new project in life.

_• During a significant life crisis as a means of understanding how you are reacting and coping inside.

_• As a means of taking a regular rain check on your inner life over a period of months and years.

The PEP monitor graph (see Figure 2) indicates fluctuations over time in your five main drivers- confidence, responsiveness, empathy, drive and control. Each time you re-test yourself, the graph will have a new point on it and there will be an accompanying short report beneath explaining the significance of the change for each driver. Fluctuations of less than 1 point are regarded as insignificant. Sustained change will be evident if the new level, at least 1 point different, is maintained over a course of months.

CONFIDENCE- strong score Low- 0-3.9

Your confidence as a person as your report has indicated is currently low. The report has indicated some possible reasons for this and ways for you to enhance it from now on. Use the

PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your self confidence over time; hopefully you will begin to see a general upward slope, though there will always be times when anyone's confidence is knocked again.

Medium- 4.0-6.2

Your confidence as a person is currently stronger than many people's but not as strong as it could be. The report has indicated some ways for you to enhance and develop yourself confidence. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your self confidence over time; hopefully you will see a general upward slope, though there will always be times when anyone's confidence is knocked.

High- 6.3-10

Your confidence as a person is currently strong. The report has indicated some ways for you to use your self confidence to both support your own life and those of other people. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your self confidence over time; hopefully you will continue to see a high level of self-confidence, though there will always be times when anyone's confidence is knocked.

Up 1

Your confidence appears to have risen since you last measured it. There may be reasons for this rise: success at work; an important, positive life-choice you have made; the affirmation of someone close to you or a change in your own attitudes to yourself. Your increased confidence will enable you to face more difficult and daunting challenges; it will give you moreself belief and impact with others. However, you need to ensure that your rise in confidence is not just a temporary result of a change in circumstances. You need to allow it to become part of how you see yourself for good. You are now a more confident person on the inside; accept this, own this and believe this about yourself so that it will not be affected by challenges and knocks that come your way. You should also consider how best to use your new level of confidence to support and enable others also to grow; be positive, be encouraging, be sensitive!

Down 1

Your confidence appears to have dropped a little since you last measured it. There may be reasons for this fall: negative or critical feedback at work; an important decision you are anxious about making; guilt; the loss of affirmation of someone close to you or a change in your own attitudes to yourself. Your loss of confidence is not something to worry about as everyone experiences it from time to time. Make a decision not to give in to anxiety, fears or negative preoccupations. Deal with any issues that need to be dealt with. One way to increase your confidence again is to spend time with those who are close and tell them how you feel- let them support you! Gain a wider perspective by focusing on all the good things you have and the positive ways your life is better than many other people's right now. Set your eyes upwards again by reading some inspirational or spiritual books. Know that you are valued just for who you are!

Change is less than 1

Your confidence level has not changed significantly since the last time you measured it. If this remains the case over a period of 6-12 months it indicates that you have a fairly well established and stable level of self-belief; it will probably prove quite difficult to change it significantly. This may be because you have a firm notion of yourself that you are reluctant to change. This can be both a strength and a weakness; it can make you consistent and stable; it can also make you unwilling to address issues in yourself that might be there. Seek to combine your stability with sensitivity and self-awareness to the feedback others may give you.

EMPATHY

Low- 0-3.9- for empathetic

Your level of empathy, as your report has indicated, is currently low. This is matched by a highly evaluative attitude. The report has indicated some effects of this in your life and ways for you to enhance it from now on if you want to. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your levels of empathy over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your approach and attitudes in life are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Medium- 4.0-6.2

Your level of empathy is currently pretty well balanced with a more evaluating attitude toward others. The report has indicated some ways for you to manage and use your empathy and evaluating appropriately. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your empathy over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your approach and attitudes in life are reflected in the profile of your scores.

High- 6.3-10

Your level of empathy as a person is currently strong. The report has indicated some ways for you to use your empathy to both support your own life and those of other people. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your level of empathy over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your approach and attitudes in life are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Up 1

Your empathy appears to have risen since you last measured it. This means that you are currently more focused upon the human feelings in a situation than you previously were. This will enable you to better pick up atmospheres and tensions; to be more sensitive to interpersonal dynamics; to better manage your relationships. The reasons for this are that you committing more of yourself to a situation and to other people than you were. People will pick up this deeper engagement and warm to it. At the same time, you may find you have to work harder to detach yourself to make objective and clear-sighted decisions. Seek to use your greater empathy without becoming over-involved and losing your wider perspective.

Down 1 Your empathy appears to have dropped a little since you last measured it. This means that you are currently less focused upon the human feelings in a situation than you previously were. You may be less aware of moods and atmospheres in situations; be more clinical and objective in your relationships; be more evaluating and detached. This may enable you to make objective and clear-sighted decisions. The reasons for this are that you committing less of yourself to a situation and to other people than you were. People may pick up this more distant engagement and respond by being more detached with you in return. Seek to use your greater objectivity without becoming cold and clinical in the process.

Change is less than 1

Your empathy has not changed significantly since the last time you measured it. If this remains the case over a period of 6-12 months it indicates that you have a fairly well established and way of relating to others; it will probably prove quite difficult to change it significantly. This may be because you are familiar with a style that works for you and that you are reluctant to change it. This can be both a strength and a weakness; it can make you consistent and stable; it can also make you unwilling to adapt to the needs of situations around you. Seek to combine your consistency with sensitivity and self-awareness to the feedback others may give you.

DRIVE

Low- 0-3.9 for expansion

Your drive, as your report has indicated, is currently toward stability and risk aversion. The report has indicated some effects of this in your life and ways for you to develop and maintain more risk-taking, boundary-pushing attitude from now on if you want to. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in the direction of your drive over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitude are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Medium- 4.0-6.2

Your drive is currently pretty well balanced between wanting stability and wanting some change. The report has indicated some ways for you to manage your drive appropriately. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in the direction of your drive over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitudes are reflected in the profile of your scores.

High- 6.3-10

Your level of drive for change and challenge as a person is currently high. The report has indicated some ways for you to use your drive to both support your own life and those of other people. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your level and direction of your drive over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitudes are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Up 1

Your drive for growth and self-expansion appears to have risen since you last measured it. This means that you are currently more motivated to embrace change in your life, seek out challenges and push your boundaries than you were. There may be many reasons for this; you may be feeling more confident in yourself; you may be feeling a little bored and stale and wanting a change; you may be feeling that your current situation does not provide the challenges you require. People may pick up this stronger drive and sense your increased restlessness. Seek to combine your greater drive with an appreciation of how change, were you to introduce it, would affect others around you.

Down 1

Your drive for growth and self-expansion appears to have dropped since you last measured it. This means that you are currently more motivated to maintain stability in your life, avoid challenges and maintain your boundaries than you were. There may be many reasons for this; you may be feeling less confident in yourself; you may be feeling anxious about the degree of uncertainty and change around you and want to establish some control over it; you may be feeling ill-equipped to cope with the challenges that you are currently facing. People may pick up this stronger drive and sense your increased restlessness. Seek to combine your drive for stability with an appreciation of how your resistance to change around you might affect others.

Change is less than 1

Your drive for change or stability has not changed significantly since the last time you measured it. If this remains the case over a period of 6-12 months it indicates that you have a fairly consistent need for a certain level of challenge but will resist change to this. This may be because you are comfortable with a certain level of risk in your life but uncomfortable if it becomes either higher or lower than you want. This can be both a strength and a weakness; it can make you consistent and stable; it can also make you unwilling to adapt to the needs of situations around you. Seek to combine your consistency with sensitivity and self-awareness to the feedback others may give you.

CONTROL

Low- 0-3.9 for outcome-focus

Your need for control, as your report has indicated, is currently low. The report has indicated some effects of this in your life and ways for you to develop and more focused attitude from now on if you want to. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your need for control over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitude are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Medium- 4.0-6.2

Your need for control is currently pretty well balanced between some need for control and some openness to chance and possibility. The report has indicated some ways for you to manage your needs appropriately. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your needs for control over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitudes are reflected in the profile of your scores.

High- 6.3-10

Your need for control as a person is currently high. The report has indicated some ways for you to use this need to both support your own life and those of other people. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your need for control over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitudes are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Up 1

Your need for control appears to have risen since you last measured it. This means that you are currently feeling you need to have greater hands-on control and direction in your life than you did previously; you may be more focused, more timetabled and perhaps more tense. There may be many reasons for this; you may be feeling less trusting of other people around you; you may be anxious about failing to meet certain standards or demands or deadlines in your life right now. People may pick up this stronger need for control and sense an increased tension underneath. Seek to appreciate how your higher need for control right now will affect those around you and explain to them how they can best support you at present.

Down 1

Your need for control appears to have dropped a little since you last measured it. This means that you are currently feeling you need to have less hands-on control and direction in your life than you did previously; you may be more relaxed and at ease, more open and flexible to events that crop up. There may be many reasons for this; you may be feeling .more trusting of other people around you; you may be more confident of being able to adapt and cope with situations as they crop up. People may pick up this lower need for control and sense your calmer attitude underneath. This may reassure some who respond to the calm and adaptability. It may also frustrate others who would prefer you to be more focused. The important thing is that you make an intentional choice in order to meet the needs of a situation appropriately.

Change is less than 1

Your need for control has not changed significantly since the last time you measured it. If this remains the case over a period of 6-12 months it indicates that you have a fairly consistent need for control but will resist change to this. This may be because you are comfortable with a certain level of freedom and open-endedness in your life but uncomfortable if it becomes either higher or lower than you want. This can be both a strength and a weakness; it can make you consistent and stable; it can also make you unwilling to adapt to the needs of situations around you. Seek to combine your consistency with sensitivity and self-awareness to the feedback others may give you.

RESPONSIVENESS- flexible score Low- 0-3.9

Your responsiveness as a person as your report has indicated is currently low. The report has indicated some possible reasons for this and ways for you to become more responsive from now on if your choose to. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your responsiveness over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitude are reflected in the profile of your scores.

Medium- 4.0-6.2

Your responsiveness as a person is currently higher than many people's but not as high as it could be. The report has indicated some ways for you to enhance and develop it. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your responsiveness over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitude are reflected in the profile of your scores

High- 6.3-10

Your responsiveness as a person is currently strong. The report has indicated some ways for you to use this to better support your own life and those of other people. Use the PEP monitor over the next few months and years to profile the changes in your responsiveness over time; hopefully you will be able to see how any changes in your attitude are reflected in the profile of your scores

Up 1

Your responsiveness appears to have risen since you last measured it. There may be reasons for this rise: a change in your own attitudes to yourself or to other people, perhaps a stronger desire to support and please other people. Combined with high confidence, responsiveness can be a powerful way of enabling other people; combined with low confidence, it can be a way of avoiding conflicts or issues. You need to reflect on what factors have led to this change in your self-attitude. Can you identify them? What are the positive implications of this change for you? What are the potential negative implications? What goals forself development are you now going to set yourself in relation to responsiveness? How will go about achieving those goals? When will you measure this driver again to monitor your progress?

Down 1

Your responsiveness appears to have fallen since you last measured it. There may be reasons for this fall: a change in your own-attitudes to yourself or to other people, -perhaps a stronger sense of your own desires and needs and a greater resistance to having them challenged. Combined with high confidence, lower responsiveness will tend to make your stronger, more assertive and determined; combined with low confidence, it can tend to make you defensive and over sensitive. You need to reflect on what factors have led to this change in your self-attitude. Can you identify them? What are the positive implications of this change for you? What are the potential negative implications? What goals forself development are you now going to set yourself in relation to responsiveness? How will go about achieving those goals? When will you measure this driver again to monitor your progress?

Change is less than 1

Your responsiveness level has not changed significantly since the last time you measured it. If this remains the case over a period of 6-12 months it indicates that you have a fairly well established and stable attitude toward yourself and other people; it will probably prove quite difficult to change it significantly. This may be because you have a firm notion of yourself that you are reluctant to change. This can be both a strength and a weakness; it can make you consistent and stable; it can also make you unwilling to address issues in yourself that might be there. Seek to combine your stability with sensitivity and self-awareness to the feedback others may give you.

APPENDIX 3

Your PEPmon/tor

Significant personal development is something which brings rich rewards- fulfilment, satisfaction, purpose ar also, often, success- however, it involves sustained attention, focus and openness to change.

The PEP mon/tor as providing an ongoing

drive and control. As you use the monitor over months it will highlight new challenges for you every time yo

the IG

commitment to work with the issues it will clarify for you. What you put in will determine what you get out. you are working with a caoch, they will use your PEP monitor to help you stay focused on and committed to your important personal development goals.

Performance Impact of psychometrics

Time/months

-Traditional psychometrics • PEP Using the PEP monitor

When you use the PEPmonitora graph will indicate how each of your drivers has developed from the last time you assessed yourself.

• It will then offer you 5 pages of feedback to explain that development- whether it is a rise or a fall c a maintenance of the same value.

• It is important to say that a rise is not necessarily positive just as a fall is not necessarily negative.

• Fluctuations in each of the main drivers may be a consequence of a concerted effort on your part tc to

M M M Λ even years. They may fluctuate more if we are trying to cope with trauma or crisis in our life, but on the

• before, during and aa ^concerted focus on developing yojr personal characteristics over

life.

• during a significant life crisis as a means of understanding how you are reacting inside.

Your current PEP monitor graph is shown below:

-♦— Drive -•— Confidence

Responsiveneε -><- Empathy -•— Control

January April August November Confidence

- Drive - Confidence Responsiveness

- — Empathy

January -• — Control

April August November

Your confidence appears to have risen since you last measured it.

•

However, you need to ensure that your rise in confidence is not just a temporary result of a change

also to grow; be positive, be encouraging, be sensitive!

Try to think of situations in which you know that your confidence is still undermined- it may be when you are with a particular person, facing a certain problem or the like.... Reflection:

Spend some time visualising those experiences, imagine yourself owning and believing those affirmations as you deal with the situation. Try to Yeplay' those visualisations before going into a situation you know will challenge your confidence. Reflection:

Consider a situation in which you might try to encourage and affirm an individual whose confidence you know to be low. What do you sense as you offer that affirmation both within yourself and the recipient? What actions can you take in response to this? Reflection: Empathy

-♦ — Drive

-* — Confidence

-" — Responsiveness

-K — Em pathy

January April - Control

August November

Your empathy appears to have risen since you last measured it.

you were. People will pick up this deeper engagement and warm to it.

^■ At the same time, ■My find you have toftvork harder to detach yourself to make objective

■

Spend some time exploring these suggestions:

What do you feel were the benefits of focusing in this way; did you feel you were able to

'see' more than perhaps you had previously?

Reflection:

Could you sense a change in the way people related to you? What might be the benefits of this type of relationship, professionally and personally?

Reflection:

Imagine a situation where your evaluating skills might be usefully deployed; think through some of the ways that you might use your increased empathy alongside your evaluating skills, to be both committed and objective. What actions do you now need to take? Reflection: Drive

— — - Confidence

- Responsiveness

— > — Empathy

January April August November

the last time you measure

you have a fairly consistent need for a certain level of challenge but will resist change to this.

This may be becaιBPp*are comfortable v\fth a certain level of risk in your life but uncomfortable

Are there any issues you are aware of that are limiting that satisfaction or performance? What would be the benefits of confronting this issue and striving to overcome its limitations on your potential performance? Reflection:

What would greater success in this area look like? Use this incentive to motivate you to deal with any issue you might be choosing to bury.

Reflection: Control

January April August November

Your need for control appears to have risen since you last measured it. i

you may be anxious about failing to meet certain standards or demands or deadlines in your life rig!

■ higher need for best support you a

Spend some time considering these questions:

Have you sensed a change in yourself, your performance or your relationships since you have sought out this greater degree of control? Give yourself a few minutes to reflect on what the implications of this change has been? There may be positive, negative consequences or both. Reflection:

Are there any issues you are now aware of that are limiting your satisfaction or performance by causing you to tighten control? What would be the benefits of confronting this issue and striving to overcome its limitations on your potential performance? What would success in this area look like? Reflection:

What are the advantages of having less of a firm grip on day to day life? How might you flourish as a consequence How might your contribution to a group be positively affected by a less controlling nature?

Reflection: Responsiveness

- Confidence

- Responsiveness

January April August November

Your responsiveness appears to have fallen a little since you last measured it.

^■ There may be reasons for this fall: a change in your own attitudes to yourself or to other people, perhaps a stronger -flnse ofl our own desires and needs and a greater resistance to having them challenged.

^■ Combined with high fcnfidΛcellowΛ rΛporβverls-Λ/ill βnΛo rrβke your stronger, more assertive and determined; combined with low confidence, it can tend to make you defensive and ov sensitive (check your own confidence score).

Spend some time thinking about how you want to respond to this fall in responsiveness. You may feel that you want to continue to be less responsive in your life, becoming more defined, assertive and less easily influenced as a result. What might the obstacles be in maintaining this behavioural change? In what situations might you find it tempting to resort to a more adapting and accommodating style once more? Reflection:

Alternatively you may feel you want to regain a sense of flexibility, adaptability and responsiveness, becoming less defensive and over sensitive as a result. Think about the first step you need to take, perhaps thinking about the support you need-to put in place to make this decision a sustained reality. Reflection:

Claims

1. A method of psychologically testing a subject comprising: prompting the subject to imagine a mental arena in which to articulate personal psychological attitudes; obtaining from the subject responses based on the effect of the projection of their personal psychological attitudes on the imaginary mental arena; and deriving from the responses a quantitative measurement of each of a plurality of predefined psychological constructs of the subject to provide a psychometric assessment of the subject.

2. A method according to claim 1 wherein obtaining the responses from the subject comprises requesting the subject to score each of a plurality of statements about the arena.

3. A method according to claim 2 wherein the subject is requested to score the statements on a numerical scale reflecting the truth of the statement relative to the arena.

4. A method according to claim 2 or 3 wherein the quantitative measurement of each of said predefined psychological constructs is based on the score of a plurality of the statements.

5. A method according to claim 2, 3 or 4 wherein there are a plurality of dummy statements not contributing to the quantitative measurement.

6. A method according to any one of claims 2 to 5 wherein the same prompt and statements are presented to the subject a plurality of times whereby the quantitative measurement obtained each time provides a monitor of the psychological state of the subj ect at that time .

7. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the subject is prompted by the provision of neutral, context-free cues.

8. A method according to claim 7 wherein the cues are verbal cues.

9. A method according to claim 7 or 8 wherein the cues are non-experiential.

10. A method according to any one of the preceding claims further comprising prompting the subject to develop the arena before asking to provide the responses.

11. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena is integrated, singular and reflects a coherent set of attitudes.

12. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena is informed by memories, feelings, past experiences and beliefs.

13. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena is an environment which the subject can imagine occupying.

14. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena comprises a visual or narrative area or story.

15. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena comprises a visual landscape.

16. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena comprises at least one of the following:- a visualised domestic scene, a theatre, a movie stage.

17. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the arena comprises at least one of the following a script, play, drama, story, map, journey, adventure, picture of items, colours and shapes.

18. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the predefined psychological constructs form a comprehensive range of psychological constructs relating to an individual's psychological state.

19. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the psychological constructs relate to the subject's behaviours.

20. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the psychological constructs relate to an individual's attitudes to themselves and others.

21. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the ^■ psychological constructs relate to an individual's self concept.

22. A method according to any one of the preceding claims wherein the psychological constructs comprise at least one of: extroversion, empathy, control, drive, confidence and responsiveness, personality, work styles, thinking styles, assertiveness, aggression, anxiety, openness, inclusion, use of power, team roles, emotional intelligence, fear, happiness, guilt and hope.

23. A method according to any one of the preceding claims further comprising producing a textual report automatically assembled on the basis of the quantitative measurement from a library of report components.

24. An automated system for psychologically testing a subject, the system comprising an output device for providing a prompt to the subject to prompt the subject to imagine a mental arena in which to articulate personal psychological attitudes; an input device for receiving responses from the subject based on the effect of the projection of their personal psychological attitudes on the imaginary mental arena; and a processor for deriving from the input responses a quantitative measurement of each of a plurality of predefined psychological constructs of the subject to provide a psychometric assessment of the subject, and a database for storing the quantitative measurements.

25. A system according to claim 24 comprising displaying on the output device the quantitative measurements.

26. A system according to claim 25 further comprising displaying on the output device previous values of the quantitative measurement whereby the change over time can be viewed.

27. A system according to claim 25 or 26 wherein the display of the quantitative measurement is a graphical display.

28. A system according to claim 27 wherein the subject can control via the input device the appearance of the graphical display.

29. A system according to claim 25, 26 or 27 wherein subject can supplement the graphical display with comments, and said comments are stored on the database.

30. A system according to claim 25, 26 or 27 wherein subject can supplement the graphical display with markers forming hyperlinks to other stored data.

31. A system according to claim 30 wherein the other stored data comprises text data input by the subject.

32. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 31 wherein said automated system comprises a personal computer usable by the subject and having said input device and said output device.

33. A system according to claim 32 wherein said processor and database are remote from said personal computer accessible via a communications link.

34. A system according to claim 33 wherein said communications link comprises the Internet.

35. A system according to claim 33 or 34 wherein in response to input of said responses by the user, the processor calculates said quantitative measurements, stores the results in the database and sends representative data via said communications link for interpretation and rendering to the subject by said output device.

36. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 35 wherein the output device displays a request to the subject to score each of a plurality of statements about the arena as said responses.

37. A system according to claim 36 wherein the subject is requested to score the statements on a numerical scale reflecting the truth of the statement relative to the arena.

38. A system according to claim 36 or 37 wherein the quantitative measurement of each of said predefined psychological constructs is based on the score of a plurality of the statements.

39. A system according to claim 36, 37 or 38 wherein a plurality of dummy statements are displayed whose scores do not contribute to the quantitative measurement.

40. A system according to any one of claims 36 to 39 wherein the output device displays the same prompt and statements to the subject on a plurality of occasions whereby changes in the quantitative measurements provide a monitor of the psychological state of the subject on those occasions.

41. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 40 wherein the prompt comprises neutral, context-free cues.

42. A system according to claim 41 wherein the cues are verbal cues.

43. A system according to claim 41 or 42 wherein the cues are non-experiential.

44. A system according to any one of claims 23 to 43 wherein the output device displays a prompt to the subject to develop the arena before requesting the subject to provide the responses.

45. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 44 wherein the arena is integrated, singular and reflects a coherent set of attitudes.

46. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 45 wherem the arena is informed by memories, feelings, past experiences and beliefs.

47. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 46 wherein the arena is an environment which the subject can imagine occupying.

48. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 47 wherem the arena comprises a visual or narrative area or story.

49. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 48 wherem the arena comprises a visual landscape.

50. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 49 wherein the arena comprises ■ at least one of the following:- a visualised domestic scene, a theatre, a movie stage.

51. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 50 wherein the arena comprises at least one of the following a script, play, drama, story, map, journey, adventure, picture of items, colours and shapes.

52. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 51 wherem the predefined psychological constructs form a comprehensive range of psychological constructs relating to an individual's psychological state.

53. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 52 wherein the psychological constructs relate to the subject's behaviours.

54. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 53 wherem the psychological constructs relate to an individual's attitudes to themselves and others.

55. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 54 wherein the psychological constructs relate to an individual's self concept.

56. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 55 wherein the psychological constructs comprise at least one of: extroversion, empathy, control, drive, confidence and responsiveness, personality, work styles, thinking styles, assertiveness, aggression, anxiety, openness, inclusion, use of power, team roles, emotional intelligence, fear, happiness, guilt and hope.

57. A system according to any one of claims 24 to 56 further comprising a report generator for producing a textual report by automatically assembling on the basis of the quantitative measurements text selected from a library of report components.

58. A computer program comprising program code means for controlling a programmed computer to provide the functionality of the input device and output device in the system of any one of claims 24 to 57.

59. A computer program comprising program code means for controlling a programmed computer to provide the functionality of the processor in the system of any one of claims 24 to 57.

60. A computer program comprising program code means for controlling a programmed computer to provide the functionality of the database in the system of any one of claims