Pyschological Tests (and my Predictive Index Results)

– May 19, 2010Posted in: Human Theory

Yesterday, I found myself talking about what I call “self-image” and “perceived self-image”:

We have phrases that we would use to privately describe ourselves (self-image). We could also come up with phrases for ourselves that we would use to describe how we think other people would describe us (perceived image). Strangely enough, self-image and perceived image are almost never the same. The difference is significant and depends upon an individual’s personality–how we judge ourselves and how we think we portray ourselves.

I then realized that this is a basis of one of those psychological tests that I’ve taken. The one I took is called the Predictive Index. The test has two steps: 1) you check boxes next to words that you think describe you and 2) you then check boxes next to the words that you think others would use to describe you (it’s the same set of words).

Here’s what this test claims about me just from this short exercise:

(Here’s a link to the PDF for better viewing: PredictiveIndex_Kevinvogelsang)

Some of this is proved out by the sheer fact that I blog and posted the results of a psychological test. However, I have a lot of doubts about these sorts of psychological tests (I go on a bit of a diatribe against them in my book. I’ll talk more about the reasons tomorrow perhaps). However, I think they can provide some perspective, and they do help you become a bit more self-aware.

What do you think of these conclusions about me? Does it seem like the tests work?

You probably have taken one of these tests before, or likely will take one, so it might be worthwhile to give them some thought.

-Kevin
5.19.2010

Tags: Predictive Index, Psychological testing, Self-Image

Best-retail-jobs

An evaluation designed in the 50s for middle class white guys: with middle class values of success: is hardly any kind of valid measure in today's complex cultural landscape let alone the Gen X and younger tech raised set. One has to wonder why a "personality" needs to be "labeled" anyway........Where is the proof that such reviews generate better on the job performance than those who never took such a review?

Jsentp1022

Mine was dead on but you need to be honest. Basically I had more boxes checked regarding expectations of myself versus what I thought people expected of me. Also....and this is important....you need to seperate business from personal life when checking the boxes. In other words, you need to think about what a friend would expect of you rather than a business. I know it sounds crazy but here is the problem with these personality tests: People don't behave the same way at home as they do at work. We separate our business lives from our personal lives. Where people get tripped up on the test is they go back and forth as to what a business would expect and what a friend would expect and their answers are all over the board. If you simply answer the question based on what you think a friend would expect of you then you should do fine.

mvm

You are missing the point. Any organisation that uses the predictive Index will have had their own workforce assessed and analysed. For examply, they will look at the characteristics of the PI results for the highes performing and underperforming members of the sales team. So if you aren't a good fit for sales... it's just for that organisation. you may be a great fit for a sales role elsewhere.

Whammo77

If this crap is what employers use to hire people, and if they REALLY believe the results, it just proves that we have a nation full of idiots. Hell, why not hire a palm reader, get some tarot cards, buy a crystal ball, get out the quija board, or hire a witch doctor????? Better yet, get a "Magic 8 Ball" and ask it: "Is this candidate worthy of hiring" and see what is says!!!! What a crock!

Jjones430

I feel that this test is not fair nor is the wonderlic test. You get no results or feedback and there are other ways to determine employability of candidates. I have been in Customer Service (Healthcare insurance) since 1997 I have been out of work for 3 years. I meet what they are looking for in qualifications and my resume speaks for itself. However, employers can now be extremely picky and can set the results that they seek to unattainable results of the test taker. Therefore, I raise the question Are they really hiring or using this as a severe basis of legal discrimination. I feel it is for legal discrimination of anyone that has been out of work for longer than 6 months as I have found in FL. I have also seen ads that state if unemployed longer than 6 months do not apply. So now I will work on my real 3 year plan. I wll retire at 62 and collect my Social Security. Also the other legal discrimination employers use regarding ag is they want a copy of your driver's License since they can no longer ask for the year of your birth. What is on your license. DAH date of birth with year. therefore legal discrimination

Ryan Johnson

wow Kevin, i think i'll hire you as my life coach.

Kevin Vogelsang

I'm open to the idea :)
As many of my friends know, I like to make people "great." (And will give epic speeches about this when drunk.)

Nat333

I recently took the test, and in my opinion, it doesn't make sense.

I know I'm good at selling. I've sold all kinds of products and services face to face, door to door, via telephone, etc, with great perseverance, motivation, and product/customer knowledge. Consequently, I have a track record of success in exceeding sales targets by volume and value.

But according to the result of the test, I am not a good fit for sales!

Kevin Vogelsang

perhaps this means sales isn't your strength and you're extraordinary at something else!

Whammo77

Perhaps it means just what he is saying it means.... that this test is a joke.

Employer: "Magic 8 Ball, is Nat333 a good salesman and someone we should hire?" M8 Answer: "My sources say no".
Employer: "Sorry Nat, no job for you bud!"

What a crock!

Teuler22

I recently discussed the test with my psychology professor in Boston and she firmly believes the test is highly flawed and that anyone be requested to take this test for employment should simply refuse even if pressured to do so.

Kevin Vogelsang

Thanks for the comment. Could you explain a little more as to why she has this belief? Also, if there are any sources on the matter that you know of, I'd appreciate those as well.

Joanna Hoyt

I took this test about 6 months ago, and am currently employed at said company. Upon 2nd review of my results with a manager I asked how the test is read by management, and what do the results show that isn't listed in the candidate's summary. In essence, "is there a converse summary, that provides information on the 'weaknesses' of the candidate?" She told me yes.... I want to know how to read that, from the graph...

Steve Waterhouse

Kevin, Let me help clarify what you learned from your Predictive Index® report. The report alone is not used by companies for hiring because it is not complete. The report is a generalized look at the self
pattern only. I am a Predictive Index® consultant (working in FL and GA) and know that we train our clients to use the full understanding of three graphs when analyzing an individual. The PI® analyst who gave you the assessment can give you a full read on your report.

You can find more on PI® at http://www.predictiveresults.c....

Sandramiller

Thank you salesman

Stings40

Kevin, I am glad to see there is someone who conducted a "failure analysis" test on one of the many "Psychological" self-test! Please explain to me how this cannot simply be repetitive results data? If you group each of the answers into a category, you then could simplify your formula thus narrowing your possible results. Remember, Freud once said about the Irish: "This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever". If Freud can't figure me out???????

Mary James

Stings40
I would appreciate of you could explain what Freud said about the Irish psychonalysis is of no use. Please reply as i am Irish Born and i hear a lot of stupid things said about the Irish that i never heard when i was growing up in Ireland. Thanks!!

TammySA

Interesting... we use this test in our recruitment process. We generally find this one to be particularly accurate, but there are several psychometric tests out there that are very easily manipulated. Naturally the key for any psychometric is to be honest and not let any external factors interfere, but this is almost impossible for any human. Interesting topic though

Kevin Vogelsang

Interesting you've found this particular test to be the most accurate. I'd be very interested in hearing more about how people will try to manipulate these tests, what they try and bias the results towards, and how you've come to find some better than others.

Rb Ashley

Hi,

What's the title of book you refer to with your "bit of a diatribe against them"?

I recently did the PI too. Accuracy notwithstanding, I thought it might useful as a conduit to conversation about "selfs" within an organizational context.

bob

Kevin Vogelsang

I was referring to my set of essays on personas that I published ("10 Powerful Personas"). I have a quasi-rant in the book as to how these tests aren't that useful because they aren't very good at capturing the multitude of faces that we display and the fact that our brains are in constant flux.
But you're right, they can be a good conduit for contemplation and discussion about the skills and personalities you want involved. Despite what I said previously, people *are* patterns.

Thanks for the comment. I take a deep interest in these topics.

Anonymous

What kind of response was this? Mental puke.

BOB

Kevin,

Could you please write the concept of survey. What questions it includes?

- Bob

Kevin Vogelsang

The concept is pretty simple (and interesting). The test offers a list of descriptive words, things like "humble", "proud", "leader", and asks you to choose all the words that other people would use to describe you. It then offers the same words and asks you to choose all the words that you would use to describe yourself. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the test itself so I don't have a copy to share with you.

Hello

I recently undertook this test for a sales position. Its very easy to score high by simply ticking the traits that you think are most important...ie the strong personality traits of dominance, persuasiveness, influence, etc. who wants to employ a sales person who is not going to get his point across (possibly at all odds even in the face of adversity?). with that in mind, i guess the test is valid in that you were going for a sales role and you don't identify the relevant traits that stereotypically make sales people successful then perhaps you should not be in sales in the first place!!!!!!!

What a load of rubbish!!!!

PS. I am Irish so guess Freud was right :)

Phrasmotic

Mr Hello, it is not possible to score "high" or "low" on many of these trait-survey tools. They are surveys, not scoring-sheets, and they give back a view of a person where the person typically has been asked to place him-/herself in a given position at work. I've been through many of these (MBTI, SHL, PI and more) and they all have their pros and cons. I actually found PI to be one of the better ones. Ticking the boxes you think will be right for the role is unlikely to work as a skilled interviewer will pick you apart once they probe for behavioral evidence of the traits you claim to have. Also, almost all of these tools have built-in checks to catch the "play to the tool" strategists out there. The more of these surveys you take, the more you get to appreciate the ones that offer "open form" responses, like PI. On SHL and MBTI (and others) you always have to deselect options which you do not feel comfortable eliminating - and sometimes all of the options given will fail to reflect what you would do in the described situation.
So: These things are tools for skilled interviewers to use, and should not be taken as a fit/no-fit. And they clearly do not tell the whole story of a person.