Essay on Personality Tests
Personality tests are used for a great variety of causes, from psychopathology determination (for example, personality malady, depressive malady) to checking job candidates. They may be applied in an educational or professional setting to define personality forces and weaknesses, or in the legal system to value paroles. Personality tests value the thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and behavioral features that form personality. The outcomes of these tests define an individual’s personality forces and weaknesses, and may denote certain maladies in personality, or psychopathology. Personality testing has been applied for many years by industrial psychologists to choose suitable applicants to fill definite job positions. Particularly, fire departments and even police departments usually require personality testing of candidates.
Our Service Can Write a Custom Essay on Personality Tests for You!
Even many seminaries demand testing of students who wish to become ministers or priests. At present time, certain professional sports teams use personality testing to help choose appropriate candidates from draft choices. The history of personality testing for work candidates and students is full of controversy because of many reasons and problems of the very process of personality testing.
These problems that usually happen in using personality testing in the choice process involve the difficulty of determination personality factors, issues belonging to the validity of tests and shortage of predictive investigation, and the amount of incorrect predictions. It is not easy to define the roots of personality testing. Fredrick Taylor in his book ‘Principles of Scientific Management’ declared that employee possibilities could be measured. Other investigations that followed created employee-rating means and other character evaluation systems. This first growth in personality testing achieved its flowering with Henry C.
Link’s ‘Employment Psychology’, in 1919, in which he declared: “The ideal employment techniques are undoubtedly an immense machine which would get candidates of all types at one end, automatically sort, interview, and record them, and at last turn them out at the other end nicely labeled with the work which they are to do” (Henry C. Link, Employment Psychology, 48, 1919). Next flowering of personality testing was filled with a more florid metaphor: Jungian “samples.” In the early 1940, Katherine C. Briggs and Isabel Myers developed the Meyers-Briggs Example-Indicator applying their own version of Jung’s samples. The test was applied to help employers check female candidates for factory job places.
Unlike its preceding, Taylorite boom, personality testing post, was at first used to denote “executive material.” Although testing had long been professionalized, many companies, involving IBM, designed their own tests, which placed forth apparently chance list of topics and pastimes for candidates to evaluate on a scale of “like” to “dislike.” Personality testing drifted back down the job-placement scale in the 1960s, when hirers gave variants of Myers-Briggs or some other tests to everyone from accountants to firemen. But the revolution influenced a stumbling block in the kind of a 1971 Supreme Court solution.
Duke Power, the court governed that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made some kinds of a worker testing unconstitutional. A small manufacturing sprang up to display the prejudice of personality tests, which was easy, given that many of tests had been developed with “control” groups composed of psychology students, their friends, and family members of psychology students: not a very specific example.
Various testing processes:
1) Black box testing is conducted by testing the system without any notion of essential design or code. This generally is performed by a functional specialist than a technical expert.Tests are based on demands and functionality.
2) White box testing is based on notion of the inward logic of a usage’s code. Tests are based on coverage of code declarations, branches, paths, and requirements.
3) Unit testing is the primary level of dynamic testing and is primary the charge of the developers and only then of the testers. Unit testing is conducted after the expected test outcomes are met or variations are acceptable.
4) Parallel (or audit) testing where the user compares the data of the new system to the production of the present system to check the new system conducts the operations in a correct way.
5) Functional testing is black-box type of testing that is geared to functional requirements of an application. Testers should perform this type of testing.
6) Application testing is testing for ‘user-friendliness’. It is clear that this is subjective and hinges on the targeted ending user or client. User interviews, investigations, video recording of user sessions, and other methods can be applied. Programmers and testers are generally not suitable as usability testers.
7) Incremental integration testing is persistent testing of a usage as new operation is recommended. This may need different aspects of an application’s operation be independent enough to work apart before all components of the program are set up, or that test drivers are developed as required. This kind of testing may be conducted by programmers or by testers.
8) Integration testing, which is black box testing, follows the unit testing. The objective is to provide distinct parts of the usage still work pursuant to client requirements. Test sets are developed with the clear aim of conducting the interfaces between the parts. This work is to be performed by the test team.
Integration test is considered complete when real outcomes and expected outcomes are either in line or variations are explainable based on management input.
9) During system testing, which is a black box test, the full system is limited in a conducted milieu to validate its exactness and completeness in fulfillment of the functions as elaborated. The system test represents production in that it can happen in the “production-like” test milieu and test all of the system functions demanded in production.
The test team finishes the system test. Previous to the system test, the part and integration test outcomes are examined by Software Quality Assurance (SQA) to provide all problems have been solved. It is significant for higher level testing attempts to perceive unsolved problems of the lower testing levels.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
These problems that usually happen in using personality testing in the choice process involve the difficulty of determination personality factors, issues belonging to the validity of tests and shortage of predictive investigation, and the amount of incorrect predictions. It is not easy to define the roots of personality testing. Fredrick Taylor in his book ‘Principles of Scientific Management’ declared that employee possibilities could be measured. Other investigations that followed created employee-rating means and other character evaluation systems. This first growth in personality testing achieved its flowering with Henry C.
Link’s ‘Employment Psychology’, in 1919, in which he declared: “The ideal employment techniques are undoubtedly an immense machine which would get candidates of all types at one end, automatically sort, interview, and record them, and at last turn them out at the other end nicely labeled with the work which they are to do” (Henry C. Link, Employment Psychology, 48, 1919). Next flowering of personality testing was filled with a more florid metaphor: Jungian “samples.” In the early 1940, Katherine C. Briggs and Isabel Myers developed the Meyers-Briggs Example-Indicator applying their own version of Jung’s samples. The test was applied to help employers check female candidates for factory job places.
Unlike its preceding, Taylorite boom, personality testing post, was at first used to denote “executive material.” Although testing had long been professionalized, many companies, involving IBM, designed their own tests, which placed forth apparently chance list of topics and pastimes for candidates to evaluate on a scale of “like” to “dislike.” Personality testing drifted back down the job-placement scale in the 1960s, when hirers gave variants of Myers-Briggs or some other tests to everyone from accountants to firemen. But the revolution influenced a stumbling block in the kind of a 1971 Supreme Court solution.
Duke Power, the court governed that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made some kinds of a worker testing unconstitutional. A small manufacturing sprang up to display the prejudice of personality tests, which was easy, given that many of tests had been developed with “control” groups composed of psychology students, their friends, and family members of psychology students: not a very specific example.
Various testing processes:
1) Black box testing is conducted by testing the system without any notion of essential design or code. This generally is performed by a functional specialist than a technical expert.Tests are based on demands and functionality.
2) White box testing is based on notion of the inward logic of a usage’s code. Tests are based on coverage of code declarations, branches, paths, and requirements.
3) Unit testing is the primary level of dynamic testing and is primary the charge of the developers and only then of the testers. Unit testing is conducted after the expected test outcomes are met or variations are acceptable.
4) Parallel (or audit) testing where the user compares the data of the new system to the production of the present system to check the new system conducts the operations in a correct way.
5) Functional testing is black-box type of testing that is geared to functional requirements of an application. Testers should perform this type of testing.
6) Application testing is testing for ‘user-friendliness’. It is clear that this is subjective and hinges on the targeted ending user or client. User interviews, investigations, video recording of user sessions, and other methods can be applied. Programmers and testers are generally not suitable as usability testers.
7) Incremental integration testing is persistent testing of a usage as new operation is recommended. This may need different aspects of an application’s operation be independent enough to work apart before all components of the program are set up, or that test drivers are developed as required. This kind of testing may be conducted by programmers or by testers.
8) Integration testing, which is black box testing, follows the unit testing. The objective is to provide distinct parts of the usage still work pursuant to client requirements. Test sets are developed with the clear aim of conducting the interfaces between the parts. This work is to be performed by the test team.
Integration test is considered complete when real outcomes and expected outcomes are either in line or variations are explainable based on management input.
9) During system testing, which is a black box test, the full system is limited in a conducted milieu to validate its exactness and completeness in fulfillment of the functions as elaborated. The system test represents production in that it can happen in the “production-like” test milieu and test all of the system functions demanded in production.
The test team finishes the system test. Previous to the system test, the part and integration test outcomes are examined by Software Quality Assurance (SQA) to provide all problems have been solved. It is significant for higher level testing attempts to perceive unsolved problems of the lower testing levels.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTENTION!!! HotEssays.blogspot.com provides free sample essays and essay examples on any topics and subjects. EssayLib.com essay writing service produces 100% custom essays, term papers & research papers, written by quality essay writers only. The prices start from $10 per page. You can order a custom essay on Personality Tests now!
