ADULT CASE HISTORY

Initial of the examiner: TS

Initial of the subject: AM

SOCIO DEMOGRAPHIC DATA:

Name : Mr. AM
DOB & Age : 6th April 1992 (23 years)
Sex : Male
Education : 9th Standard (discontinued)
Occupation : Carpenter
Marital Status : Unmarried
Religion : Hindu
Nationality : Indian
Socioeconomic status : Lower Socioeconomic Status
Area of Residence : Urban – Ambattur, Chennai
Informant : Self, Mother, Brother and Friends
Information : Reliable, adequate and consistent
Date of assessment : 21-23rd December 2014

PRESENTING COMPLAINTS:
The client was admitted for inpatient care by his friends and mother with the following
complaints;
1. Irritability and hitting mother
2. Talking and very high about self
3. Over familiarity with strangers
4. Stopped going for his job
These symptoms are present for duration of 20 days prior to admission.
HISTORY OF PRESENTING ILLNESS:
The client was apparently normal till 1st December 2014, after which the client was reported to
be having trouble going to sleep and disturbed sleep. Unable to get adequate sleep the client
would roam around the house continuously till the morning. He would also wake his mother and
brother and talk to them during the night. During the day the client would appear to be restless
visiting his friends in different areas and talk to them about having a business secret that he is
going to use to become rich and famous. He would also continuously tell them that he has the
power and the money to end poverty and become the Chief Minister of Tamilnadu. Despite
attempts made by his friends and mother to remind him of his occupation he would continue to
say the same lines over and over again. His rate of speech was reported by the friends to have
been increased and at times seems meaningless. Five days after the start of the sleep
disturbances, the client was reported by the informants to have become very moody and would
get angry at different times of the day without any concrete reasons. These changes in moods and
outbursts of anger were reported to be very different from his usual self. If the mother enquired
as to the reason he is angry he would apparently scream at her and throw objects in the house.
The friends and mother reported two isolated incidences where the client had gotten angry with
the mother and started beating her by hand and by the use of an object around the house. The
friends had to intervene and curtail him during those episodes of anger. After the time had
passed, the client was reported to have said that he was unaware as to why he behaved so and
was feeling like he was losing his mind (reported by mother).
The friends reported that the client suddenly began to dress and act differently, spending more
money than he had with him, became over familiar with strangers and began to get into fights
with others at random. The client’s use of ganja and other substances showed increase. He
gradually became irregular to work and stopped going to work two days prior to his admission.
The client was admitted in the psychiatric facility by force and is currently prescribed mood
stabilizers by the treating physician.
NEGATIVE HISTORY:
Information regarding physical illnesses could not be elicited. The client has a negative history
for any developmental disorder, head trauma, seizure disorder, presence of hallucinations and
sexually transmitted diseases.
HISTORY OF PAST ILLNESS:
On enquiry, the client was found to have been in a low mood six months back (June 2014)
following a failed relationship with a married women after 3 years. The relationship abruptly
ended after the affair was exposed to the husband. The client reported to have attempted suicide
in July 2014 due to grief. In August 2014, the client and friends reported that they had lost one of
their friends in a gang war following which the client was increased the use of ganja. During this
period the client was reported to have had a persistent low mood, sleep disturbances, reduced
sleep and frequent crying spells.

FAMILY HISTORY:
The client is from a nuclear family of four, hailing from the lower socio economic strata of
society. Family history indicates history of one or more substance use in all the male members
and history of suicide by the father and paternal aunt. The client’s father committed suicide
following prolonged feuds between husband and wife regarding extramarital affairs at the
client’s age of 15 (2005) . The client was a direct witness to his father’s hanging and reported it
to the police. The client’s aunt committed suicide through incineration following a family feud
with in-laws in 2009. The client and his brother have a history of substance use like Alcohol,
Ganja and beedi since 2005.
Mother reports family history of abuse by the father towards her and her children following
drunken brawls both at home and outside. The father was the head of the family till death, after
which the client took over the running of the family. The client’s family is not in frequent contact
with any of the extended family after the suicide of the father. The client was seen to be more
attached with the mother.

PERSONAL HISTORY:
Birth and Early Development:
The mother reported that the client was born out of a Full Term Normal Vaginal Delivery in a
hospital, birth cry was present and birth weight of 3kilgrams. Postnatal health was reported to be
normal an no developmental delays were reported. No major illness or injury was reported
during early childhood.
Behaviour during Childhood and Adolescence:
The child was reported to be an easy child, with proper sleep and feeding cycles. The client’s
temperament was seen to be normal. At the age of 5 years the mother reported that the client
would bully younger kids, break toys and vehicles that belong to the neighbours. The client
appeared indifferent to such acts when confronted. At the age of 9 years, the client was reported
to have molested a girl of age 5yrs which caused the family to change locality. At the age of 13
years the client was introduced cigarettes and fevibond by his peers and began smoking since
then. Many instances were reported that the client was caught for stealing and for lying for the
sake of money both at home and in local stores. By the age of 19 years the client and his peers
took part in gang wars with the use of weapons such as rods, stones, knives and swords and
indulge in destruction of public and private property.
Physical Illness during Childhood:
There were no previous reports of physical illness during childhood.
School History:
The client began schooling in a government school at the age of 5 years. The client was seen to
be regular to school till the 5th standard, after which frequent complaints regarding his behaviour
was reported by the school authorities some of which included stealing, breaking furniture,
frequent physical fights with other students and teachers. The client attended school in a different
locality from 8th standard, but showed poor academic performance, reduced discipline with
similar problem and prolonged absenteeism, causing him to discontinue from schooling and join
work.
The client was reported to have been feared in school and the client was proud of his behaviour.
Boycotting school, the client and his friends would go to the beach and use fevibond and engage
in sexual activity.
Occupational History:
The client joined as an apprentice in carpeting at the age of 16 years. The client was found to be
recluse at the start of his job. In the presence of authority, the client was found to work properly
and was on time. Absenteeism was punished and so the client was regular to work for the first 2
years of work. The client then spent a majority of his earnings to purchase drugs and cigarettes
and gave the rest to his mother. Since April 2014, the mother reported that the client stopped
giving money for home use. He stopped going to work since 17th December 2014.
Sexual History:
The client reported being sexually active since the age of 13years. The client was introduced to
sexual activity by his aunt who he had seen having sex on multiple occasions. The client also
reported that he would often peak into the houses elder women bathing and would masturbate to
the same. The client sexual preference was towards older women and gang sex with multiple
younger aged women without protection. The client was reported to be in a three year
extramarital relationship with a married woman aged 32 years which ended in June 2014. He was
in multiple sexual relationships for the past.
The client’s sexual fantasies involve sadism acts towards women, repeated sex and role playing.
Medical reports showed that the client had no sexually transmitted diseases.

Substance Use History:

The client began the use of fevibond at the age of 13 years. The use of the substance increased
after the death of the father. The client began to use cigarettes and hans at the age of 15 years.
Started using alcohol (brandy) at home at the age 17 years but would irregularly use it due to
lack of money. The client’s pattern of drinking was till intoxication and showed an increase in in
tolerance in two years. By the age of 19 years the client stopped using alcohol and began using
Ganja.
At present the client would smoke up to 6 joints a day and would actively seek out the substance.
Legal History:
The client began actively participating in gang wars between localities and was arrested multiple
times with regards to destruction of property, using profanity and for other antisocial acts. The
client was arrested but not charged of attempted murder of a rival gang member who was
accused of murdering his friend earlier on. None of the allegation was charged due to the use of
political influence.
Premorbid Personality:
The client was seen as ambivert, social with only peers and family. The client was seen as aloof
and destructive by others and was feared. The client was seen as hostile towards self and to
superiors. He was also impulsive when it came to relationships and dominance. the client was a
believer of his religion but did not actively participate in rituals. The client’s leisure activities
included socializing with peers, indulging in sexual activities and substance use.
The client is found to have a low threshold for stress and is found to act out in aggression. Sleep
and hunger patterns were normal.
MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION
General Behaviour:
The client was physically age appropriate, average build and groomed. The client has one scar
ascending across his right cheek and several on his arms and legs. The patient was seen as aloof.
The client’s posture indicated boredom and dominance. Attention could be aroused and sustained
for the required period of time. He was cooperative at the start of the interview but soon became
uncooperative and restless. He was overfamiliar, irritable and hostile towards the female
therapist and was found to be more cooperative in the presence the male attending physician.
Psychomotor Activity:
Psychomotor activity was normal
Talk:
The clients spec was hostile, spontaneous and coherent. Tone was normal, tempo was normal
with normal reaction time.
Thought:
The client’s stream and form was normal. Content of thought shows the presence of Grandiose
delusions(sample: “I am the richest man in this place. I can give you how much money you
want”) with regards to status, money and power is seen. The content of the delusion is also
poorly systematized.
Mood:
Mood was happy, affect was labile presenting with irritability, hostility, bursts of anger and joy.
Mood was incongruent to the situation.

Perception:
No perceptual Disturbance was observed and reported.
COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS:
Formal test of cognition could not be performed due to in attention and non-cooperation from the
client. The client is oriented to time place and person. Memory is intact. Intellectual functioning
is average. Personal judgement was intact. Social and test judgement was impaired. Level of
insight into his illness is Level II- slight awareness of being sick and needing help but denying it
at the same time.
INITIAL FORMULATION:
Mr. A is a 23 year old carpenter hailing from a lower income urban community presenting with
complaints of disturbances in sleep, excessive speech, psychomotor agitation, mood liability and
grandiosity hindering his personal, social and occupational functioning of a sub-acute nature.
Prior to this the client is seen to have an episode of depressive features that remained untreated
for three months. The client is known to engage in antisocial acts since childhood through
adulthood. There is presence of family pathology, substance use and suicide in the family.
MSE shoes the presence of delusions of grandiosity and manic affect during the interview and
assessment.
The client is currently under mood stabilizers prescribed by his treating physician.
PROVISIONAL DIAGNOSIS:
Based on the initial formulation, it is suggestive of multiple diagnoses.

F12.56 - Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of cannabinoids, psychotic disorder.
F23.01 -Acute polymorphic psychotic disorder without symptoms of schizophrenia with
associated acute stress.
F24- Induced Delusional Disorder.
F31.2- Bipolar Affective Disorder, current episode manic with psychotic symptoms.
F60.2 - Dissocial Personality Disorder.
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT:
The following tests were administered;
1. Bender Visuomotor Gestalt Test
2. Standard Progressive Matrices
3. Multiphasic Questionnaire
4. Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale
5. Young Mania Rating Scale
6. Addiction Severity Index
7. International Personality Disorder Examination
8. Draw a Person Test
9. Rorschach Ink Blot Test

RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Consistent use of psychopharmacotherapy is recommended for the client to regulate
emotional state.
2. Long term psychotherapy to help resolve any conflicts within the family.
 CHILD CASE HISTORY
Initial of the examiner: TS
Initial of the subject: AS

SOCIO DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS

Name :AS
Age : 8 years
Gender : Male
Education : 1st std
Father’s Occupation : Mechanical Engineer
Social Economic Status : Middle economic status
Nationality : Indian
Religion : Hindu
Referred By : School
Informants : Grandmother
Information : reliable and adequate
PRESENTING COMPLAINTS (According to Informant)
Duration of illness: Since childhood
∙ Poor eye contact
∙ Deficits in social-emotional reciprocity
∙ Odd behavior (laughs without reason)
∙ Screaming loudly
∙ Self injurious behavior (biting self -banging head)
∙ Not interested in playing with others
∙ Making vocal sounds
∙ Hyperactivity
Onset: Insidious
Course of the illness: Continuous
Progress: Deteriorating
Predisposing factor: Bipolar disorder in the mother and schizophrenia in maternal uncle.
Perpetuating factor: Negative reinforcement
HISTORY OF PRESENT ILLNESS
Mr. A S is an 8-year-old boy with difficult temperament. He is currently studying
st
in 1 standard in an English medium school. The child came with poor eye contact,
deficits in social-emotional reciprocity, odd behaviour (laughs, without reason),
screaming loudly, self-injurious behaviour (biting self, banging head), not interested in
playing with others, making vocal sounds and hyperactivity. According to the informant,
the child was apparently normal till the age of 1½ years. Then they noticed that child is
not responding when called by his names. He used to cry, scream and be irritable most of
the time. He used to make vocal noises for no apparent reason. It was also reported that
self-destructive behaviour such as biting and head banging. Also shows poor social
reciprocity, which included eye contact and did not mingle with anyone at home. Child
also showed disinterest in any kinds of play which included lack of curiosity towards
toys and he used to prefer to play alone. Informant (grandmother) reported that he loves
to listening music for long period of time, even for 4-5 hours. He is also interested in
table and singing alone. It is also observed by the informant that he is very restless. He
won’t sit in one place. Suddenly he will walk here and there. His restlessness has
increased in the last 1 year. For all these reasons they took treatment from NIMHANS.
From NIMHANS they referred to LGBRIMH for further treatment and follow up.
FAMILY HISTORY
He was only child born out non- consanguineous from second marriage. The
mother had multiple episodes of mania and depression and committed suicide when the
child was 4 months old. The father is a business man. He used to come to home once in a
year and for the last two years he didn't even come to see the child. The father is not
emotionally attached to the child. Grandmother is the primary caregiver of the child.
Child stays in a joint family with both his grandparents, maternal uncles, aunt.
PERSONAL HISTORY
Birth and early development
The child was a planned baby, born out of Caesarian, prematurely (within 8
months) because he was a breech baby. He also suffered from Meconium Aspiration
immediately after birth for which he was kept in the ICU for a week. Mother stopped
feeding the child after 1 month because of her post-partum manic episodes. He achieved
his developmental milestones on time. But after attaining one-word utterances the speech
has been delayed. Till 5 years 2–3-word utterances were present. His social
communication was delayed. The child started going to school at 3 years of age. He is
currently studying in 1st std. The child dropped out in U.K.G and 1st std because the
caregiver asked to put him in same class. The child was always just sitting in the class
and not attentive to any class. The complaint received from school was that his academic
performance was poor and not involving in any activity with his friends.
Biological functioning:
∙ Sleep: Normal
∙ Appetite: Normal
∙ Bowel and bladder functioning: Normal
Developmental Milestones
Turning over : 3 months
Babbling : 3 months
Crawling : 6 months
Sitting : 8 months
Standing : 8 months
First word : 9 months
Walking : 1 year
2-3 phrases : 1 year
Sentences : 1 year 6 months
Toilet Training : 3years 4 months
Based on the Grandmothers report, the developmental milestone is normal.
SCHOOL HISTORY
He is currently studying in 1st standard in an English medium school. The child was not
responding to their teachers and showed disinterest in any kinds of play which included lack of
curiosity towards toys and he used to prefer to play alone also not interested in playing with
others, making vocal sounds and hyperactivity.
TEMPERAMENT
∙ Activity level: High
∙ Rhythmicity: Irregular
∙ Approach/withdrawal: Withdrawn
∙ Adaptability: Shows difficulty adapting to changes.
∙ Sensitivity: Very sensitive to the changes in the environment.
∙ Intensity of Reaction: High
∙ Quality of mood: Quick to change
∙ Distractibility: He is easily distracted by external stimuli.
∙ Attention span and persistence: shows difficulty maintaining his attention and low
in persistence.
PAST HISTORY OF PHYSICAL ILLNESS:
∙ The child suffered from Meconium Aspiration immediately after birth. For these
kept in ICU for 1 week.
∙ Frequent fever from 1.5 to 3 years of age.
TREATMENT HISTORY
The child was taken to NIMHANS for his problem. He was diagnosed with
autism spectrum disorder and features of ADHD. The medication prescribed was
clonidine 100mg. Pt. was also referred to a speech pathologist.

MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION:

General Appearance
The client was physically age appropriate, average build and kempt. He was un
cooperative for testing. Rapport couldn’t be established with ease. Eye contact was not
maintained and hyper psychomotor activities. He was easily distractible and couldn’t follow the
comments.
Attention and Concentration
The client’s attention was tested using the digit span test, and listing the days of the week,
months of the year. He was unable to list the days of the week and months of the year. He had
difficulty while performing the test. Hence it can be said that his attention couldn’t be aroused
and sustained.
Activity Level
Hyperactivity and difficult to examine.
Motor Behavior
Hyper psychomotor activity and tics & mannerisms were detected.
Speech and Language Ability
The client speech is noted to be idiosyncratic. He has significant problem with
understanding and using spoken language answered appropriately. He has lack in communication
skills both verbally and non-verbally which visible with his hand gestures, eye contact and facial
expressions, excessive repetitions of phrases.
Mood and Affect
The client appears to be restless and irritated. And also exhibited anger outburst.

Perception
No perceptual disturbances such as hallucinations and delusions were reported by the
child.
COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS:
Immediate Memory
His immediate memory was tested by using the digit span test. She was unable to
recollect.
Recent Memory
He was un co-operative and find difficult to recall. Recent memory was assessed by
enquiring about what he had for breakfast that morning and dinner the previous night. Most of
were found to be wrong after verified with her grandmother.
Remote Memory
He was unable to correctly reproduce the answer.
Recall
His recall ability was assessed by presenting him with a list of 3 objects and asking him
to recall them after a period of time. He was able to recall all 3 items correctly.

INITIAL FORMULATION:
The client is a 8-year-old female student who is studying in 1ST standard and was referred for
psychological evaluation from the school following complaints not responding to their teachers
and showed disinterest in any kinds of play which included lack of curiosity towards toys and he
used to prefer to play alone also not interested in playing with others, making vocal sounds,
hyperactivity and other behavior problems caused due to the reduction of maternal. No history
suggestive of Mental Retardation, Pervasive Developmental Disorder or any Psychiatric Illness
is present.
Provisional Diagnosis
F84.0 Autistic disorder and Features of ADHD.

RECOMMENDATION:
1. Psychoeducation with regards to the client’s maladaptive activities, possible adaptations
mad in the client’s subjective environment and information with regards to the
misconceptions of the parents with regards to the client’s problem behavior.
2. Parental Counseling focusing to empower them for making a positive impact on the child
and time management.
3. Quarterly follow up to monitor progress.
 NEO-FIVE FACTOR INVENTORY

Initial of the examiner: TS

Initial of the subject: JS

INTRODUCTION:

According to Allport, “Personality is the dynamic organization within the individual which
determines his/ her unique adjustment to the environment”.

Theoretical background:
The two most commonly used NEO inventories are the Revised NEO Personality Inventory
(NEO-PI-R) and the NEO-Five- Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) developed by Costa and McCrae
(1992).
Gordon W. Allport may easily be referred to as a pioneer of modern personality research. His
definition resulted from his collection of over 50 different conceptions of personality.
Characteristic of his early work was an emphasis on intraindividual trait organization, whereas
more recent personality research focuses on interindividual differences, examining large groups
of people. It is important to note, however, that both approaches to personality research
distinguish fairly stable personality traits from more transient states. Today, traits are understood
as components of emotional, motivational, and social behavior. They are proposed to describe
and explain, as well as predict interindividual differences in human behavior and experience
(Herrmann, 1991; McCrae & Costa, 1995).
Allport and Odbert (1936), establishing their research on personality, took advantage of the fact
that language itself provides a style of classification of behavior into more "molar concepts"
(Watson, Clark, & Harkness, 1994). Human language is filled with a confusing variety of
descriptive attribute terms, many of which are redundant in their meaning, yet others serve their
purpose of making possible a fine-grained description of our living and breathing environment.
Allport and Odbert (1936) reasoned that any important personality trait should exist in natural
language (sedimentation hypothesis; lexical approach). Accordingly, they went through the 1925
edition of Webster's New International Dictionary and identified over 4500 terms describing
personality traits. By this, they set the stage for a first attempt to establish a structural model of
personality. Of course, the pool of 4500 items was vastly overinclusive and impractical to handle
for research purposes.
Many personality researchers afterwards took advantage of the initial descriptor collection and
further developed reduction and aggregation methods. Among the early attempts of aggregation
was the work of Raymond B. Cattell (1945, 1946) who used a variety of grouping methods to
form a coherent model of personality structure. He managed to reduce Allport and Odbert's items
to 171 variables and subsequently aggregated these to 35 bipolar scales by means of cluster
analyses of trait ratings. Further data reduction via factor-analytical techniques led to the
identification of 12-15 factors in peer ratings of these scales. Cattell and his colleagues
subsequently produced a considerable number of publications on these factors some of which
could be replicated (9 of 12 factors) in his later research. One of Cattell’s great strengths lies in
his efforts to approach data collection multi-methodologically: In his approach to human
personality, he relied not only on questionnaire techniques, but also on peerratings as well as
experimental and physiological evidence. In bringing results from these different data sources
together, Cattell and Kline (1977) constructed the 16-Personality Factors (16-PF) inventory.
Compared to other models of general personality factors (e.g., the 'Big Three' as suggested by
Eysenck, 1978), Cattell clearly chose a different level of resolution. However, a summary of his
work reveals an underlying model of a hierarchical structure of personality. At the bottom level
of this hierarchy, Cattell placed the so-called behavior tendencies, or Surface-Traits, which by
means of covariation build the basis of the next level First Stratum Source Traits, represented by
the 16 personality factors. Further aggregation then led to the level of Second Stratum Source
Traits (Extraversion, Cortertia, Independence, Anxiety, and Character Strength), which show
marked resemblance to the more recently discussed five-factor solutions (e.g., Borgatta, 1964;
Goldberg, 1990, 1993; Norman, 1963). One of the more popular
Costa and McCrae’s (1989, 1992) NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI), Revised NEO
Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R), and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO FFI) were developed
with the aim of assessing the five domains of the FFM: (a) neuroticism (N), the tendency to
experience negative emotions and psychological distress in response to stressors; (b)
extraversion (E), the degree of sociability, positive emotionality, and general activity; (c)
openness to experience (O), levels of curiosity, independent judgment, and conservativeness; (d)
agreeableness (A), altruistic, sympathetic, and cooperative tendencies; and (e) conscientiousness
(C), one’s level of self-control in planning and organization.
VERSIONS OF NEO FFI
The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) is a personality inventory that assesses
an individual on five dimensions of personality, the so-called Big Five personality traits. These
traits are openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness,
and neuroticism. In addition, the NEO PI-R also reports on six subcategories of each Big Five
personality trait. Historically, development of the Revised NEO PI-R began in 1978
when Costa and McCrae published a personality inventory.
Based on data from the Baltimore study, Costa and McCrae identified two additional
factors: Agreeableness (A) and Conscientiousness (C). The researchers later published three
updated versions of their personality inventory in 1985, 1992, and 2005:
1. In 1985 they published the first manual for the NEO. The NEO now assessed all five
traits,which are known as the Big Five personality traits. Costa and McCrae renamed
their instrument the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI). The term "NEO" was made
part of the name of the instrument; it was no longer an acronym. The instrument included
six facet sub-scales for the three original factors (N, E, & O), but not for A and C.
 2. In 1992 Costa and McCrae published the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO
PI-R), which included six facets for each factor (30 in total).
3. Then in 2005, Costa and McCrae published the latest version of the NEO
Inventories, NEO PI-3.The new version included revisions of 37 items. With the creation
of the NEO PI-3, Costa and McCrae intended to make the inventory accessible to a wider
portion of the population. The improved readability of the NEO PI-3 compared to the
NEO PI-R allowed the newer measure to be used with younger populations and adults
with lower educational levels. Additionally, with the replacement of the 37 items, the
psychometric properties of the NEO PI-3 were slightly improved over the NEO PI-R. In
addition to increasing the readability of the NEO PI, the NEO PI-3 added a glossary of
less familiar terms to aid in administration
4. These were called the NEO PI, NEO PI-R (or Revised NEO PI), and NEO PI-3,
respectively. The revised inventories feature updated vocabulary that could be understood
by adults of any education level, as well as children.
RECENT VERSION OF NEO-FFI
Finally, there is a 60-item inventory, the NEO FFI. There are paper and computer versions of
both forms.
The manual reports that administration of the full version should take between 30 and 40
minutes. Costa and McCrae reported that an individual should not be evaluated if more than 40
items are missing. They also state that despite the fact that the assessment is "balanced" to
control for the effects of acquiescence and nay-saying, that if more than 150 responses, or fewer
than 50 responses, are "agree" or "strongly agree," the results should be interpreted with caution.
Scores can be reported to most test-takers on "Your NEO Summary," which provides a brief
explanation of the assessment, and gives the individuals domain levels and a strengths-based
description of three levels (high, medium, and low) in each domain. For example, low N reads
"Secure, hardy, and generally relaxed even under stressful conditions," whereas high N reads
"Sensitive, emotional, and prone to experience feelings that are upsetting." For profile
interpretation, facet and domain scores are reported in T scores and are recorded visually as
compared to the appropriate norm group.
PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF NEO FFI
The NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), with 60 items is a shortened version of the NEO-PI-
R with equivalent comprehensiveness, but amenable to be applied in research projects that
require the administration of a brief instrument to measure the FFM (e.g., Aluja, Garcia, Rossier,
& Garcia, 2005; Lucas &Donnellan, 2009). The original NEO-FFI's reliability has been
demonstrated in the North American context (Costa & McCrae, 1989), with values of internal
consistency ranging from .68 to .86, and the same is true for adaptations developed for other
cultures (e.g., Aluja et al., 2005 found values ranging between .70 and .87; Egan, Deary, &
Austin, 2000, found values ranging between .72 and .87). Alike the NEO-PI-R, the NEO-FFI is
cross-culturally stable (Aluja et al., 2005; Lucas &Donnellan, 2009) although there are some
exceptions related to failures in the reproduction of structure (e.g., Aluja et al., 2005; Furham,
1997; Korner et al., 2008). The following strategies have addressed reliability and validity issues
with initial versions of the NEO-FFI (McCrae & Costa, 2004): (a) minimization the effects of
acquiescence; (b) increase the correlations with NEO-PI-R factor scores; (c) diversification of
the item content by selecting items from underrepresented facets, and increase the intelligibility
of the items. Validity and reliability (Cronbach alpha range from .75 to .82) of the new version
has been demonstrated (McCrae & Costa, 2004).
VERSIONS OF NEO-FFI:
Three different short versions of the NEO-PI-R are there. They are, The NEO-FFI, the NEO-FFI-
R, and a new short version NEO-60. This new version is intended to improve the psychometric
characteristics of the original NEO-FFI, specially in regard to the factor structure at the item-
level. Compared to the NEO-FFI, reliability coefficients and factor structure was enhanced by
the NEO-FFI-R and the NEO-60 in both samples.
NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3
The NEO-FFI-3 is a 60-item version of the NEO-PI-3 that provides a quick, reliable, and
accurate measure of the five domains of personality.
FEATURES AND BENEFITS
Fifteen of the 60 NEO-FFI items have been replaced to improve readability and psychometric
properties.
Self-report (Form S) and observer rating (Form R) forms are available. Separate adolescent and
adult norms are available. The NEO Style Graph Booklet and Your NEO Summary feedback
sheets provide an innovative way to give feedback to respondents based on their NEO profiles.
The NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3: Four-Factor Version (NEO-FFI-3:4FV)
The NEO-FFI-3:4FV provides information on four personality domains: Extraversion, Openness
to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. It is designed for use in employment and
personal counseling settings involving activities such as career counseling, career development,
and employee training.
STUDIES ON PERSONALITY AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS:
• A study by Khosravi, M. (2008) on the relationship between personality factors and test
anxiety among university students. This study aims to find out the relationship between
test anxiety, neuroticism and introversion/extroversion. Study took 300 samples from
university which includes 150 males and 150 females and used test anxiety scale and
eyzenck personality scale for assessment. Results of this study States that there is a
significant relationship between neuroticism and test anxiety and there is no relationship
between test anxiety and introversion/ extroversion. There is no significant difference on
test between boys and girls.
• Study on big five personality traits and academic performance (meta analysis) by
Mammadov, S. (2022) assess the strength of relationship between big five personality
traits and academic performance. This study took 267 independent samples and examines
the incremental validity of personality traits. Findings of this study States that
 relationship of academic performance with openness, extraversion and agreeableness had
larger effects on academic performance.
PERSONAL DETAILS OF THE SUBJECT
Initial: JS
Age: 23 years
Gender: Female
Marital status: Unmarried
Education: English
Urban/rural: Rural
Type of family: Nuclear family
TEST ADMINISTERED
NEO five factor inventory provides information of 5 personality domains such as Extraversion,
Openness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Agreeableness. The subject should be seated
comfortably and initially experimenter should built a rapport. Then experimenter should
explain the entire instructions such as this test consist of 60 items with 5 options such as strongly
disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree. The following instructions were given that “there
is no time limit for completing this test but try to complete it as soon as possible and there is no
right or wrong answers”. Experimenter should collect those responses, give scoring and
interpretation. At last, the experimenter should plot the scores and draw the graph.
Aim: To assess the personality traits of the subject.
Materials Required: NEO-FFI scale developed by costa and Mccrae (1992), writing materials
scoring key, manual and response sheet.
Procedure: The subject is asked to seated comfortably and the following instructions are given.
This questionnaire contains 60 statements with five responses like strongly disagree, disagree,
neutral, agree and strongly agree. Read each statement carefully and choose the appropriate
response that suits you most. There is no right or wrong answers, don’t omit any statement.
There is no time limit but try to complete it as soon as possible. After completion of test scoring
is done. Results are tabulated, discussed and conclusions are drawn.
Behavioral Observation: The Subject is co-operative and was conscious while conducting the
experiment. Eye contact was maintained, verbal and non-verbal communication was found to be
fair, comprehension was found to be adequate, there is no abnormalities while doing the
experiment.
Test findings:
Table 1: Shows the individual data for the experiment NEO Five Factor Inventory for
the subject:

Openness Conscientiousness Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism Predominant

characteristics

26 Averag 24 Low 32 High 30 Low 18 Avera Extraversion

e ge
Impression:
The subject JS has got the score of 26 average in Openness, 24 low in Conscientiousness, 32
high in extraversion, 30 low in agreeableness and 18 average in Neuroticism. The score indicates
that the subject JS have the predominant characteristics of Extraversion which means the subject
is extraverted, outgoing, active and high-spirited. The subject prefers to be around with the
people most of the time. The subject scored 26 interpreted to be average openness, this shows
that the subject is practical minded, seek to explore new ways and moderately shares her feelings
to others than who are close to her. In Neuroticism, she has scored 18 interpreted to be average.
This shows that the subject the is generally calm, able to deal with stress but sometimes express
the feeling of guilt, anger towards others and inappropriate sadness. In agreeableness and
conscientiousness, the subject has scored low which indicates that the subject is hard-headed,
sceptical, self-admiration, competitive, express anger directly and can’t able to agree to others
opinion and also not able to tolerate the situation when it goes out of hand. And then, the subject
might be not well organized, carelessness and prefer not to make plans.
Summary:
The assessment results that the subject JS has the Extraversion personality trait and the subject
scores from low to maximum personality characteristics.
Recommendation:
Getting Cognitive Behavior Therapy helps the subject to manage worry and it helps to manage
emotions and stay in present moment.
REFERENCES
• Garcia, O., Rossier, J., & Garcia, L. (2005). Comparison of the NEO-FFI, NEO-FFI-R
and an alternative short version of the NEO-PI-R (NEO-60) in Swiss and Spanish
samples. Personality and individual Differences, 38(1), 591-604.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.05.014
• https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.05.014
• Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1989). The NEO PI manual supplement. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
• Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1992). The revised NEO PI / NEO-FFI professional manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
• Martin T. A. (2005). "The NEO PI-3: A more readable revised NEO personality
inventory". Journal of Personality Assessment. 84 (3): 261–
270. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8403_05. PMID 15907162
• Costa, Paul T.; McCrae, Robert R. (1985). "The NEO personality inventory manual".
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
• Khosravi, M. (2008). The relationship between personality factors and test anxiety among
university students. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2(1), 13-24.
 INTERNATIONAL PERSONALITY DISORDER EXAMINATION (IPDE)
Initial of the examiner: TS
Initial of the subject: SK
INTRODUCTION
Personality disorders are deeply ingrained, rigid ways of thinking and behaving that result
in impaired relationships with others and often cause distress for the individual who
experiences them. Mental health professionals formally recognize 10 disorders that fall
into three clusters, although there is known to be much overlap between the disorders, each
of whichexists on a spectrum:
Cluster A — Odd or eccentric disorders, including paranoid personality disorder, as
wellas schizoid and schizotypal personalities.

ClusterB —Dramatic or erratic disorders, including narcissistic

personality disorder, histrionic personality disorder, and borderline personality disorder.

Cluster C — Anxious or fearful disorders, including avoidant personality disorder,

dependentpersonality disorder, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder.
HISTORY OF IPDE
One of the aims of the World Health Organization (WHO) and US National Institutes of
Health (NIH) joint program on psychiatric diagnosis and classification is the development
and standardization of diagnostic assessment instruments for use in clinical research
around the world. The IPDE is a semi-structured clinical interview developed within that
program, and designed to assess the personality disorders in the ICD-10 and DSM-IV
classification systems. The IPDE is an outgrowth and modification for international use of
the Personality Disorder Examination (PDE).2 To facilitate the development of the IPDE,
beginning in 1985 several workshops were convened. At these meetings representatives of
the international psychiatric community discussed the format of the interview, the wording
of items, and the development of a scoring manual. Translations were undertaken and
frequent revisions made to reflect the experience of interviewers with trial versions.
Finally, a field trial was undertaken in 1988 and 1989 at 14 participating centres in 11
countries in North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. In August 1991 the principal
investigators in the field trial met at WHO headquarters in Geneva to discuss the results
and the experience of the interviewers with the IPDE. This resulted in some minor
revisions of existing items. Subsequently additional modifications were made to
accommodate the transition from DSM-III-R to DSM-IV. To offset concerns about the
length of the interview, and to make it more acceptable to a wider range of clinicians and
investigators, it was decided to issue the IPDE in modules. The complete interview would
assess all of the disorders in both ICD-10 and DSM-IV. Separate modules would also be
available for those who wished to limit the examination to one of the two classification
systems.
Development of IPDE:
The IPDE is an outgrowth and modification for international use of the Personality Disorder
Examination (PDE). To facilitate the development of the IPDE, beginning in 1985 several
workshops were convened. At these meetings representatives of the international psychiatric
community discussed the format of the interview, the wording of items, and the development
of a scoring manual. Translations were undertaken and frequent revisions made to reflect the
experience of interviewers with trial versions. Finally, a field trial was undertaken in 1988 and
1989 at 14 participating centres in 11 countries in North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. In
August 1991 the principal investigators in the field trial met at WHO headquarters in Geneva
to discuss the results and the experience of the interviewers with the IPDE. This resulted in
some minor revisions of existing items. Subsequently additional modifications were made to
accommodate the transition from DSM-III-R to DSM-IV. To offset concerns about the length
of the interview, and to make it more acceptable to a wider range of clinicians and investigators,
it was decided to issue the IPDE in modules.
EXISTING TESTS TO ASSESS PERSONALITY DISORDER
Iowa Personality Disorder Screen (IPDS)
Standardized Assessment of Personality- Abbreviated Scale
Interview Methods (SAPAS)

Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines (DIE)

Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP;
Clark, 1993)

Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP;

Livesley, Jackson, & Schroeder, 1991; Pukrop, Gentil,
Steinbring, &Steinmeyer, 2001)

Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI; Cloninger,

Self- report methods
Przybeck, Svrakic, & Wetzel, 1994),

Personality Disorder Questionnaire (PDQ-4; Hyler, 1994)

DSM-IV and ICD-10 Personality Questionnaire (DIP-Q;
Ottosson et al., 1995)

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI, Millon, 1977)

Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire (TPQ, Cloninger,

1987)
VERSIONS OF IPDE
Investigators at the various centres involved in the field trial have translated the instrument
into the following languages: Dutch, French, German, Hindi, Japanese, Kannada,
Norwegian, Swahili, and Tamil. Translations have also been made into other languages,
including Danish, Estonian. Greek, Italian, Russian and Spanish. Additional translations
are contemplated. The translations were backtranslated into English by a psychiatrist or
psychologist who had not seen the original English version. Variations and problems in the
back-translation were then reviewed with those who undertook the original translation, and
corrections were made when indicated. Particular problems can arise when a semi-
structured interview like the IPDE is used with subjects who are illiterate and speak a
regional or tribal dialect. Since written and spoken languages are quite different in such
populations, the interviewer must frequently depart from the literal text and improvise an
equivalent question on the spot, in order to maintain communication with the subject.
Although this is a potential source of error variance, the examiner's familiarity with the
scope and meaning of the diagnostic criteria and with the intent of the original IPDE
question, should keep such error within tolerable limits.
Personality disorders among college students:
Wu, J. Y. W., Ko, H. C., & Lane, H. Y. (2016) made comparisons between sex and incorporated
a control group to compare the frequencies of PD between individuals with IA and those without
IA. Five hundred fifty-six college students (341 females) completed self-report surveys and were
later given diagnostic interviews to assess for a PD diagnosis. Males with IA showed a higher
frequency of narcissistic PD, whereas females with IA showed a higher frequency of borderline,
narcissistic, avoidant, or dependent PD when compared with those without IA. The high rate of
PD among Internet addicts may be associated with the core features of specific PD
psychopathology. Sex differences in the PD frequencies among IA individuals provide
indications for understanding the psychopathological characteristics of PDs in Internet addicts.
King, A. R., & Terrance, C. (2006) explored the links between Acquaintance Description Form
(ADF-F2) friendship qualities and Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-II) personality
disorder attributes were explored in this study of 363 college students. Passive-Aggressive,
Avoidant, Schizotypal, Sadistic-Aggressive, Antisocial, Borderline, and Self-Defeating features
were most closely associated with friendship insecurity. Participants exhibiting Passive-
Aggressive, Self-Defeating and Borderline features tended to view their closest friendship as
being more strongly influenced by external social forces. Passive-Aggressive scores and Personal
Maintenance Difficulty were positively related. Histrionic traits were associated with
descriptions of the closest friend as affirming and useful in utilitarian value. Sex differences were
minimal in the prediction of relationship qualities using the MCMI-II personality disorder
dimensions.
Summary
The instrument, the International Personality Disorder Examination (IPDE), has been developed
from the Personality Disorder Examination (PDE) which was modified for international use and
compatibility with the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) and the
American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth
edition (DSM-IV). The current version of the IPDE has been produced in two modules, one for
ICD-10 and one for DSM-IV criteria for personality disorders. The IPDE was developed in the
Framework of the Joint Project on Diagnosis and Classification of Mental Disorders, Alcohol-
and Drug related Problems carried out by the WHO and US National Institutes of Health
(formerly Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Adminstration). In theory, they provide clinicians
and investigators with a more uniform method of case identification, and thus facilitate the
comparison and replication of research findings.
PERSONAL DETAILS OF THE SUBJECT
Initial: SK
Age: 45 years
Gender: Female
Marital status: Married
Education: English
Urban/rural: Sub-urban
Type of family: Nuclear family

AIM:
To examine the personality attributes of the subject.
MATERIALS REQUIRED:
International Personality Disorder Examination questionnaire, scoring key, manual
and response sheet.
PROCEDURE: The subject is seated comfortably and the following instructions are given.
This questionnaire contains 60 statements with five responses like strongly disagree, disagree,
neutral, agree and strongly agree. Read each statement carefully and choose the appropriate
response that suits you most. There is no right or wrong answers do not omit any statement.
There is no time limit but try to complete it as soon as possible. After completion of test scoring
is done. Results are tabulated, discussed and conclusions are drawn.
BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATION: The Subject is co-operative and willingly
participated in the experiment. She was conscious while conducting the experiment. Eye
contact was maintained, verbal and non-verbal communication was found to be fair,
comprehension was found to be adequate, there is no abnormalities while doing the
experiment.
TEST FINDINGS:
Table 1: Shows the individual data for the experiment IPDE of the subject.

SUBJECT DIMENSION SCORE

 Paranoid 3/7
Schizoid 6/9
Antisocial 1/7
Impulsive 2/5
SK
Borderline 1/5
Histrionic 5/6
Anankastic 2/8
Anxious 3/6
Dependent 2/6

The subject SK has scored 6 in schizoid, 5 in histrionic,3 in paranoid and anxious, 2 in

impulsive, dependent, anankastic and 1 in antisocial, borderline.
IMPRESSION
The subject SK has scored 3 in paranoid. It is interpreted that she is vulnerable to paranoid
characteristics. The paranoid features include they are guarded, defensive, distrustful and
suspicious. She might be hypervigilant to the motives of others to undermine or do harm. She
wants to seek confirmatory evidence of hidden schemes always. She feels righteous, but
persecuted also. People with paranoid personality disorder are generally difficult to work with
and are very hard to form relationships with. The subject has scored 6 in schizoid. It is
interpreted that she is very apathetic, indifferent, remote, solitary, distant, humorless. Sometimes
she might withdraw from relationships and prefer to be alone. She has little interest in others,
often seen as a loner. To others, the subject may appear somewhat dull or humourless because the
people exhibiting this won’t tend to show emotion, they may appear as though they don’t care
about what’s going on around them. So, the subject might also be perceived as the same. The
subject has scored 1 in anti-social. It is interpreted that she is not impulsive, irresponsible,
deviant, unruly. She thinks well before doing anything and doesn’t act without due consideration.
She tries to meet social obligations not only when it is self- serving. She respects societal
customs, rules, and standards. She doesn’t perceive himself as free and independent as she tries
to bound to all the rules and regulations. The subject has scored 2 impulsive. It is interpreted that
she is slightly fidgety, restless or bored. She is able to control her thoughts and actions. She is
capable of planning his actions well and make wise decisions. She is able to analyse situations
based on the consequences and can make the right choices. The subject has scored 1 in
borderline. It is interpreted that she the subject is not unpredictable, manipulative, unstable
sometimes. She slightly fears abandonment and isolation with rapidly fluctuating moods. She
might shift rapidly between loving and hating. She would be unstable and has frequently
changing moods. People with borderline personality disorder have a pervasive pattern of
instability in interpersonal relationships. And the subject might take care of is interpersonal
relationships as he might exhibit certain characteristics of this disorder. The subject has scored 5
in histrionic. It is interpreted that she is much dramatic, seductive, shallow, stimulus-seeking,
vain. She does overreact to minor events. She seeks for others’ attention constantly. The
disorder is characterized by constant attention-seeking, emotional overreaction, and
suggestibility. So the subject have all these characteristics that impairs his interpersonal
relations.The subject has scored 3 in anankastic. It is interpreted that the subject is slightly
restrained, conscientious, respectful, rigid. She doesn’t maintain a rule- bound lifestyle and no
adherence closely to social conventions. To her, the world is not in terms of regulationsand
hierarchies. She is sometimes flexible in way of doing things and in situations. The subject has
scored 3 in anxious. It is interpreted that the subject is not hesitant, self-conscious, embarrassed,
anxious. She doesn’t have fear of rejection. She is not much sensitive about how others think
about her. She considers herself not inferior orunappealing over anyone. She has the feelings of
adequacy in herself that enables her to perform withoutanxiety. The subject has scored 2 in
dependent. It is interpreted that the subject is not helpless, incompetent, submissive, immature.
She considers himself responsible and doesn’t withdraw from them. She perceives himself as
strong and independent. She doesn’t need any constant approval from anyone. She doesn’t want
another person to take care of her. She doesn’t have any fear of being abandoned or separated
from important people in his life.
Summary:
The subject has the traits and behavior relevant to the Schizoid and Histrionic personality
disorders according to the criteria of ICD- 10 and considering her overall dimensional scores the
subject is more likely to fall under the Cluster-A and C criteria of personality disorders and is
less likely to fall under the Cluster-C criteria of personality disorders as per DSM- IV- TR.
The subject SK has scored for Schizoid and Histrionic personality disorders. This test reveals a
particular behavioural tendency of the subject this cannot be taken as only measure for
diagnosis and so other tests must also done by the subject to get the clear picture about the
subject’s personality.

RECOMMENDATION:
• Psycho-education to help the client understand his specific symptoms and thereby better
relate to other people around them more appropriately.
• Group therapy for social skills training, Cognitive and behavioral therapy along with the
support and involvement of family to help the subject effectively overcome fears, change
thought processes and behaviors, and to help the subject better cope with social situations
• Schema therapy to improve the subject’s daily functioning and thereby helps him to gain
insight for change based on understanding and re-engineering of his early life
experiences.
• Psychodynamic therapy to help the subject to be aware of how past experiences, pain,
and conflict is contributing to current symptoms.
• Proper self-care, including finding healthy coping skills, healthy eating, leisure, etc.
REFERENCES:
Collison, K. L., & Lynam, D. R. (2021). Personality disorders as predictors of intimate partner
violence: A meta-analysis. In Clinical Psychology Review (Vol. 88, p. 102047). Elsevier BV.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102047

Irfan, M., Sethi, M. R., Abdullah, A. S., Saleem, U., Zeeshan, M. F., & Najib-ul-Haq (2018).
Assessment of personality disorders in students appearing for medical school entrance
examination. JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 68(12), 1763–1768.

Loranger, A. W., Janca, A., & Sartorius, N. (2007). Assessment and diagnosis of personality
disorders: The Icd-10 international personality disorder examination (Ipde). Cambridge
University Press.
 RORSCHACH INKBLOT TEST
Initial of the examiner: TS
Initial of the subject: MS

The Rorschach test or the Rorschach inkblot technique is one of the most well-known
psychodiagnostic personality tests, allowing to investigate a human being in detail and
determining an individual’s psychological disorder. Each of us has seen at least one picture
with blots, that potentially remind us of something.
HISTORY OF THE RORSCHACH
Hermann Rorschach like most children of his time, often played the popular game called Blotto
(Klecksographie), which involved creating poem-like associations or playing charades with
inkblots. The inkblots could be purchased easily in many stores at the time. It is also thought
that a close personal friend and teacher, Konrad Gehring, may have also suggested the use of
inkblots as a psychological tool. When Eugen Bleuler coined the term schizophrenia in 1911,
Rorschach took interest and wrote his dissertation about hallucinations (Bleuler was
Rorschach’s dissertation chairperson). In his work on schizophrenia patients, Rorschach
inadvertently discovered that they responded quite differently to the Blotto game than others.
He made a brief report of this finding to a local psychiatric society, but nothing more came of
it at the time. It wasn’t until he was established in his psychiatric practice in Russia’s Krombach
hospital in Herisau in 1917 that he became interested in systematically studying the Blotto
game.
ADMINISTRATION
The Rorschach test is appropriate for subjects from the age of five to adulthood. The
administrator and subject typically sit next to each other at a table, with the administrator
slightly behind the subject. Side-by-side seating of the examiner and the subject is used to
reduce any effects of inadvertent cues from the examiner to the subject. In other words, side-
by-side seating mitigates the possibility that the examiner will accidentally influence the
subject’s responses. This is to facilitate a “relaxed but controlled atmosphere”. There are ten
official inkblots, each printed on a separate white card, approximately 18 by 24 cm in size.
Each of the blots has near perfect bilateral symmetry. Five inkblots are of black ink, two are of
black and red ink and three are multicolored, on a white background. After the test subject has
seen and responded to all of the inkblots (free association phase), the tester then presents them
again one at a time in a set sequence for the subject to study: the subject is asked to note where
they see what they originally saw and what makes it look like that (inquiry phase). The subject
is usually asked to hold the cards and may rotate them. Whether the cards are rotated, and other
related factors such as whether permissionto rotate them is asked, may expose personality traits
and normally contributes to the assessment.
As the subject is examining the inkblots, the psychologist writes down everything the subject
says or does, no matter how trivial. Analysis of responses is recorded by the test administrator
using a tabulation and scoring sheet and, if required, a separate location chart. The general goal
of the test is to provide data about cognition and personality variables such as motivations,
response tendencies, cognitive operations, affectivity, and personal/interpersonal perceptions.
The underlying assumption is that an individual will class external stimuli based on person-
specific perceptual sets, and including needs, base motives, conflicts, and that this clustering
process is representative of the process used in real-life situations. Methods of interpretation
differ. Rorschach scoring systems have been described as a system of pegs on which to hang
one’s knowledge of personality.
Rorschach used about 40 inkblots in his original studies in 1918 through 1921, but he would
administer only about 15 of them regularly to his patients. Ultimately he collected data from
405 subjects (117 non-patients which he used as his control group). His scoring method
minimized the importance of content, instead focusing on how to classify responses by their
different characteristics. He did this using a set of codes now called scores - to determine if the
response was talking about the whole inkblot (W), for instance, a large detail (D), or a smaller
detail. F was used to score for formof the inkblot, and C was used to score whether the response
included color. In 1919 and 1920, he tried to find a publisher for his findings and the 15 inkblot
cards he regularly used. However, every published balked at publishing all 15 inkblots because
of printing costs. Finally in 1921, he found a publisher- the House of Bircher willing to publish
his inkblots, but only 10 of them. Rorschach reworked his manuscript to include only 10 of the
15 inkblots he most commonly used. Rorschach’s original inkblots had no shading to them
they were all solid colors.
THE RORSCHACH SCORING SYSTEMS
Prior to the 1970s, there were five primary scoring systems for how people responded to the
inkblots. They were dominated by two- the Beck and the Klopfer systems. Three other that
were used less often were the Hertz, Piotrowski and the Rapaport-Schafer systems. In 1969,
John E. Exner, Jr. published the first comparison of these five systems entitled The Rorschach
Systems. The findings of Exner’s ground-breaking analysis were that there actually weren’t
five scoring systems for the Rorschach. He concluded that the five systems differed so
dramatically and significantly, it was as if five uniquely different Rorschach tests had been
created. It was time to go back to the drawing board. Given Exner’s disturbing findings, he
decided to undertake the creation of a new, comprehensive Rorschach scoring system that
would take into account the best components of these five existing systems, combined with
extensive empirical research on each component. A foundation was established in 1968 and
the significant research began into creating a new scoring system for the Rorschach. The result
was that in 1973, Exner published the first edition of The Rorschach: A Comprehensive
System. In it, he laid out the new scoring system that would become the new gold standard.
CONTENT: The goal in coding content of the Rorschach is to categorize the objects that the
subject describes in response to the inkblot. There are 27 established codes for identifying the
name of the descriptive object. The codes are classified and include terms such as “human”,
“nature”, “animal”, “abstract”, “clothing”, “fire”, and “x-ray”, to name a few. Content
described that does not have a code already established should be coded using the code
“idiographic contents” with the shorthand code being “Idio”. Items are also coded for statistical
popularity. More than any other feature in the test, content response can be controlled
consciously by the subject, and may be elicited by very disparate factors, which makes it
difficult to use content alone to draw any conclusions about the subject’s personality; with
certain individuals, content responses may potentially be interpreted directly, and some
information can at times be obtained by analyzing thematic trends in the whole set of content
responses (which is only feasible when several responses are available), but in general content
cannot be analyzed outside of the context of the entire test record.
LOCATION: Identifying the location of the subject’s response is another element scored in
the Rorschach system. Location refers to how much of the inkblot was used to answer the
question. Administrators score the response “W” if the whole inkblot was used to answer the
question, “D” if a commonly described part of the blot was used, “Dd” if an uncommonly
described or unusual detail was used, or “S” if the white space in the background was used. A
score of W is typically associated with the subject’s motivation to interact with his or her
surrounding environment. D is interpreted as one having efficient or adequate functioning. A
high frequency of responses coded Dd indicate some maladjustment within the individual.
Responses coded S indicate an oppositional or uncooperative test subject.
DETERMINANTS: Systems for Rorschach scoring generally include a concept of
“determinants”: These are the factors that contribute to establishing the similarity between the
inkblot and the subject’s content response about it. They can also represent certain basic
experiential perceptual attitudes, showing aspects of the way a subject perceives the world.
Rorschach’s original work used only form, color and movement as determinants. However
currently, another major determinant considered is shading, which was inadvertently
introduced by poor printing quality of the inkblots. Form is the most common determinant, and
is related to intellectual processes. Color responses often provide direct insight into one’s
emotional life. Movement and shading have been considered more ambiguously, both in
definition and interpretation. Rorschach considered movement only as the experiencing of
actual motion, while others have widened the scope of this determinant, taking it to mean that
the subject sees something “going on”. More than one determinant can contribute to the
formation of the subject’s perception. Fusion of two determinants is taken into account, while
also assessing which of the two constituted the primary contributor. For example, “form-color”
implies a more refined control of impulse than “color-form”. It is, indeed, from the relation and
balance among determinants that personality can be most readily inferred.
PURPOSE: The rorschach technique is used to elicit information about the structure and
dynamics of an individual's personality functioning. The test provides information about a
person's thought processes, perceptions, motivations, and attitude toward his or her
environment, and it can detect internal and external pressures and conflicts as well as illogical
or psychotic thought patterns. The rorschach technique can also be used for specific diagnostic
purposes. Some scoring methods for the rorschach elicit information on symptoms related to
depression, schizophrenia, and anxiety disorders. Also, the test can be used to screen for coping
deficits related to developmental problems in children and adolescents.
AIM
To identify Personality Structure, Diagnostic Indicators, Ego functions and Emotionality
Strengths and weaknesses, Ego strength and inner resources and affectional need.
PERSONAL DETAILS OF THE SUBJECT
Initial: MS
Age: 23 years
Gender: Female
Marital status: Unmarried
Education: English
Urban/rural: Rural
Type of family: Nuclear family
MATERIALS REQUIRED

• Rorschach Plates: The standard set of 10 Rorschach plates

• Location Chart: A printed single sheet of paper containing 10 Rorschach images.
• Response sheet: A specially designed full scape plain of paper with defined columns.
• Colour ink pen set: set of 6 colored ink pen set may be sketch pen or gel pen –
markblot areas on the location chart.
• Psychogram, Digital Stop Watch, Trace stick and Manual

PROCEDURE

The subject is asked to seat comfortably and following instructions are given: “I shall be giving
you one by one a series of 10 plates made of inkblots. Some of them are in black and white and
others are in colors. On seeing the plate, you are tell me everything that might be represented
by these blots. People see all sorts of things on these inkblot pictures. Tell me what you see,
what it might be for you, what it looks like? What it resembles with? What it reminds you?
What they might represent, what they could be? You are free to tell me anything as there is no
wrong answer. Say, whatever comes into your mind on seeing the plate, without considering
whether it is right or wrong or embarrassing. Usually people see many things on each plate.
Thus you are supposed to tell me everything you see on each plate. Do you have any question
then you are free to ask me. And if everything is clear, then we can start the testing”. Response
number, Rotation, Reaction time for first response to each card and total time will be noted for
each response.