Geist picture inventory (GPII) in psychological testing - Research Paper Example

?Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 2 The paper aimed to assess the scope of using Geist Picture Inventory (GPII) in Psychological testing. The paper covers a range of research papers that have reviewed GPII and also evaluated its scope and reliability for testing childre, adults with learning disabilities, culturally diverse populations or mentally challenged individuals. It uses research to discuss the utility of picture inventories in comparison to the verbal tests, and also the scope for using adaptations of GPIIs for different sections of society to suit their needs better. The paper presents a holistic assessment of GPII and highlights the factors that need be considered while using the GPII for vocational or hobby interests among different groups of society. The paper is followed by an Annotated Bibliograpy that contains an overview of all the research papers consulted during the writing of the current paper. The Annotated Bibliograpy provides a background and rationale for the current paper as well as establishes the validity of the arguments presented in it. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 3 The Geist Picture Interest Inventory (GPII) The Geist Picture Interest Inventory is a widely used test for gauging psychological inclination towards select vocations and avocations. This test is based on the use of pictures or line drawing rather than using written communications and hence it is useful even for people who have low reading skills. Technically, the Geist Picture Intrest Inventrory or GPII provides a norverbal measure of assessing vocational and other interets and it can be undertakne by grades 8 and above (Tiedeman, 1960). The point that a picture inventory is a more reliable than a verbal inventory is not stablished by research (Blake and Omaha, 1969), but the fact remains that a picture inventory test can be administered to a more diverse set of respondents than the language restricted verbal tests. This means that the Geist Picture Inventory test is useful for culturally diverse people and also for those with learning disabilities (Domino and Domino, 2005). The inventory is administered through a self-report format where the respondents are asked to circle one of the three pictures depicted different work, employment and hobbies that he or she prefers. The inventory has 42 such set of pictures depicting a range of interest options like music, social service, personal services, mechanical and outdoors. These pictures are therefore aimed at understanding what the respondents likes, what makes him happy and what he may be interested in pursuing as a career or a hobby. However, there is am imherent bias in the type of interests that geist test portrays via these pictures. According to Elksnin and Elksnis (1993), the range of interests that are depicted in the geist inventory are gender stereotypical. For example, the pictures contain a woman’s drawing to depict personal service and male subject’s drawing Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 4 to show the outdoors interest or mechanical interest. Nevertheless, the Geist inventory provides a councelling aid to students but should be used with caution as a high score on the test should not be interpreted as a high aptitude or ability for that activity. The tests utility is in pointong out the direction of a respondents’ interest and more exploration using additional sources like information about school grades and after school activities should also be employed before using the test (Elksnin and Elksnis, 1993). The school pyschologist can make use of the GPII to provide more sound councelling and career guidance if they take into account the general personality and academic acheivement background of the respondents as well (Elksnin and Elksnin, 1993). According to the author of the test, Geist, the test has been exgaustively tested for reliability and validity and its applicability for gauging the professional inclinations of culturally diverse people or educationally deprived individuals. The test retest reliability has been found to be an average of 0.3 correlation. However, Campbell (1965) expressed his doubts abut the reliability of the test, as according to him, Geist’s calculation suffered from several acure statistical defficiencies with the testing of the instrument. There are a large number of other career inventory scales like the Strong Interest Inventory and the Kudlder inventory tests but most of these require a higher level of reading skills and hence cannot be used for people who do not have language skills below the 8th grade. The Geist scale is found to be superior on this account as it does not challenge the verbal skills of the respondents (Geist, 1988). However, there is also an opinion that the non-verbal scales are Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 5 not technically adequate as these create ambiguity among the test takers (Elksnin and Elksnin, 1993). As such, researchers Elksnin and Elksnin propose that the verbal tests are more relevant than the picture inventories like GPII and that the verbal should be modified to become easily understood by the target group of culturally diverse, mentally challenged or young people. A modified version of the GPII was developed by Walcutt and Barrett (1965) and this is adapted for assessment of mentally challenged people. However, there are concerns on the validity of the test as according Domino and Domino (2005), career interest is not developed before ages 17 or 18, and in the case of people with developmental disorders, this delay could be even more. In this case, to assess an 8 grader for a career interest may not really be valid as by this time the respondents haven’t actually had enough experience or opinion about what they want to do in future. Another concern regarding validity of the test is that the test may not be a predictor of satisfaction with the interest chosen on the GPII-R. This means, that the premise of the test being valid - which according to the author of the test is the test’s ability to lead to career or hobby choices that are satisfying - is not sound. According to Geist and Berkeley (1963), GPII scores correlated powefully with scores on the Hoppock Job Satisfaction Survey and hence the inventory’s validity is established. But, according to Campbell, the correlation of 0.999 that Geist established between occupational interets using GPII measures and occupational satisfaction using the Hoppock Job Satisfaction Survey is tainted. Campbell points out to serious statistical errors in the calculation of the coefficient of correlation by Geist and also points out that similat attempts Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 6 at correlating ocupational interest and satisfaction have led to the computation of moderate coefficients of correlation of the order of 0.2 or 0.3 (1965). In addition, in spite of having the advantage of being not dependent on the verbal ability of the respondents, the test is perceived as a dated one due to the black and white drawings that it uses as pictures. An alternative test using the colored pictures was found to be more discriminant in terms of interest (Markey, Parker and Reisch, 1983). The above discussion shows that Geist Picture Interest Inventory finds utility in schools, and for assessing the interests of people with learning disabilities or those who come from diverse cultural background. However, there are concerns about the tests validity as it uses gender sterotypical interests that may not be relevant in the current time. Its validity is alsodisputed on the premise that it is not a predictor of the job satisfaction as the original research was statistically unsound, even though the author of the test provided a correlation of 0.99 between the measures of GPII and satisfaction scores. Several researchers have found a low Pearson’s r for GPII scores and scores on inventories of job satisfaction. This may be due to the fact that a high score on the GPII may predict an interet or liking about the job or hobby, but it does not indicate the ability or capacity to excell on that particulat career option. Job satisfaction is dependent not only on the liking for the job but other factors like aptitude, skills, work environment, and acheivement on job. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 7 Thus, people may want to take on a career because it is appealing but may lack real talent or capacity to do well in the area. As such, the GPII scores should not be taken as conclusive evidence that the respondent will be successful on the choice. There is a need to take into account the academic scores, and practical information on what the respondents likes to do, before making a career choice. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 8 Annotated Bibliograpy Blake, R. and Omaha, U. (1969). Comparative reliability of picture form and verbal form interest inventories, This article is not included in your organization's subscription. However, you may be able to access this article under your organization's agreement with Elsevier. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53 (1), 42-44 This article contains a comparative research done on testing the reliability of the picture and verbal interest inventories. The researchers hypothesised that the picture inventories for vocation or interest testing were more reliable than the verbal inventories. The research was conducted using two different types of respondents including high school boys and adults from the Manpower Development and Training Act. The two groups were separately sub divided into two sub groups each and each sub group was given either a picture inventory test or a verbal test. The tests were repeated over a period of time to calculate reliability score using the Pearson’s corfficient. It was found that the differences in reliabilities of the two sets of inventories were not significant. This research however established that the picture inventories were only slightly more reliable than the verbal versions. The research indicates that there is reason to express caution in utilizing the picture inventories and that the tested groups IQ, acamedic performance and other personal factors too play a role in the efficacy of the type of tests used on them. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 9 Campbell, P. David (1965).A critical note on Geist's "Work satisfaction and scores on a picture interest inventory, This article is not included in your organization's subscription. However, you may be able to access this article under your organization's agreement with Elsevier. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, (1)1, 74 This paper is written in response to the published paper of Geist (work satusfaction and scores on a picture interest inventory). The paper talks about the inadequacy of Geist to conduct research on this crucial manner in an ethical manner. Campbell shows that the high correlation coefficient between job satisfaction and scores on the GPII-R, was acheived due to statistical errors in the calculations. Campbell also presents the results of similar research undertaken by other researchers which had established that the Pearson’s coefficient found by other authors between the variables of work satisfaction and scores on GPII ranged at around 0.25 only. The author questioned the use of Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 10 Domino, G. and Domino, M. L. (2005).Psychological testing: an introduction. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press This book is written as an intrioduction to psychological testing for graduate students and is simple in terminology and language. The book contains five parts, and each part deals with a specific aspect of psychological testing like ethical considerationsm validity and reliability, dimensions of psychological testing, settings and contexts of testing, challenges of testing. The book has a full part dedicated to psychological testing for children, older adults and people with learning disabilities. It contains a review of the popular tests and inventories for testing the vocational interests as well as academic and intellectual levels of the people with learning disabilities. The book provides a description and analysis of these tests including the GPII and also sheds light on what protocols and procedures need to be maintained for testing children or people with disabilities. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 11 This article is not included in your organization's subscription. However, you may be able to access this article under your organization's agreement with Elsevier. Elksnin, L. K., & Elksnin, N. (1993). A review of picture interest inventories: Implications for vocational assessment of students with disabilities. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 11, 323-336. This article discusses the scope of using the picture inventory tests in general for the assessment of vocational interest of students with learning disabilities. It contains an exhaustive review and comparative analysis of a large number of verbal and non verbal inventories and tests them for utility for mentally challenged or learning disabled chilren. The paper concludes with the recommendation that the verbal inventories could be made more easy to administer if the reading skill level for them was reduced. Similarly, the researchers also found that the picture inventories, including the Geist Picture Inventory, were not technically sound as these contained content ambiguity and sometimes restricted the choice to gender sterotypes. The article also recommends that the picture inventories are best used in conjuntion with other measures like job shadowing, structured interviews and work samples. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 12 Geist, H. and Berkeley, C. (1963). Work satisfaction and scores on a picture interest inventory, Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, (6), 369-373 This paper presents the correlation analysis results for Geist Picture Interest Inventory (GPII) srores and the Hoppock Job Satisfaction Survey. The authors tested 6 occupational groups on GPII and the job satisfaction variables and then correlated the results to report a high Pearson’s coefficient of 0.999. The researcher used the premise that work satisfaction indicated that the GPII selection was valid for the participant. The results confirmed the hypothesis and thus were used to provide proof of validity for GPII. However, this research also provided additional data on what the respondents criteria for assessing job satisfaction was. It was found that the factors that impacted on job satisfaction were - Freedom at work, intellectual stimulation, appreciation by colleagues and administrators and the physical working conditions. These factors , as listed by Geist, are related to external environmental characteristics and have nothing in common with the interest of the individual. For exanple, the working conditions, if bad may lead to dissatisfaction even when the person may have an interest in the job at the onset. The article however, does not comment on this discrepancy but only uses the tests results to show that GPII is a valid interest test. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 13 Markey, E. M., Parker, H. J. and Reisch, J. S. (1983). The use of photographs as occupational stimuli, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22 (1), 117-125 This paper contains the results of a research undertaken on a group of eighty special education high school students using picture interest inventory tests. However, the test was modified to include photographs ofpeople doing different types of activities (as opposed to the line sketches used in the GPII). The researchers used 15 coloured photographs that were presumed to have 1200 correct interpretations in all. The researchers found that only 35 times the pictures were identified incorrectly, and hence concluded that the effectiveness of the coloured photographs was 97.1% correct (35/1200 = 2.9%). The researchers therefore postulated that colured photohraphs are better than line drawings as these reduce ambiguity and provide better stimulii to the respondents. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 14 Tiedeman, D. V. (1960). Review of the Geist Picture Inventory (1964 revision). Personnel and Guidance Journal, 38, 506-507. (Reprinted in O. K. Buros (Ed.), The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook (p. 1277). Highland Park, NJ: The Gryphon Press.) This paper was one of the most exhastive reviews of the Geist Picture Interets Inventory test and it carried a critical analysis of the methodology and the content of the test. According to Tiedeman, the test is useful to be used with people with low reading ability, as it is picture based. However, the researcher also contends that the test is ambigous and may not be valid in cases of people with diverse cultural backgrounds or with low mental abilities. There are also sterotypical cues in the tests that may not be valid in the longer term. Tiedeman recommends that verbal inventories which require low reading abilities may be suitable for people with low skills and picture inventories with less ambiguity may be more reliable. This paper was later printed in The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook IN 1965. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 15 Walcutt, B. B. and Barrett, A. M. (1965). Interest Testing with the Mentally Retarded, A Bi- Sensory Approac, American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 69, 548–52 The article is based on research conducted using a bi-sensory adaptation of the GPII. The researchers used a GPII that also had a verbal component and it was administered to mentally retarded respondents who had reported IQs between 34 and 79. The research found that GPII was more useful in assessing the interests of the mentally challenged individuals when they were also verbally informed about the contents. The article postulates that GPII may not be useful for the assessment of people who are mentally challenged or have below average IQ levels. The GPII is used in testing of children and people with learning disabilities that may make them low on reading skills. However, according to Walcutt and Barrett the GPII may appear confusing and vague to peopel who have limited cognitive development, and hence it needs to be modified to fit the needs of this group of people. Running head: The Geist Picture Interest Inventory 16 References Blake, R. and Omaha, U. (1969). Comparative reliability of picture form and verbal form interest inventories, This article is not included in your organization's subscription. However, you may be able to access this article under your organization's agreement with Elsevier. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53 (1), 42-44 Campbell, P. David (1965).A critical note on Geist's "Work satisfaction and scores on a picture interest inventory, This article is not included in your organization's subscription. However, you may be able to access this article under your organization's agreement with Elsevier. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, (1)1, 74 Domino, G. and Domino, M. L. (2005), .Psychological testing: an introduction. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press Elksnin, L. K., & Elksnin, N. (1993). A review of picture interest inventories: Implications for vocational assessment of students with disabilities. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 11, 323-336. Geist, H. and Berkeley, C. (1963). Work satisfaction and scores on a picture interest inventory, Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, (6), 369-373 Markey, E. M., Parker, H. J. and Reisch, J. S. (1983). The use of photographs as occupational stimuli, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22 (1), 117-125 Tiedeman, D. V. (1960). Review of the Geist Picture Inventory (1964 revision). Personnel and Guidance Journal, 38, 506-507. (Reprinted in O. K. Buros (Ed.), (1965), The sixth mental measurements yearbook (p. 1277). Highland Park, NJ: The Gryphon Press.) Walcutt, B. B. and Barrett, A. M. (1965). Interest Testing with the Mentally Retarded, A Bi- Sensory Approac, American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 69, 548–52 Read More