Abstract
Previous research efforts to use on-line computer systems for personality assessment are briefly reviewed. Shortcomings in the conversion of paper-and-pencil testing forms to computer media are noted. Construction of a new instrument, specifically designed for use with an on-line computer system, is described. Advantages of this approach are noted.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Elwood, D. L., &Griffin, H. R. Individual intelligence testing without the examiner: Reliability of an automated method.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1972,38, 9–14.
Finney, J. C. Programmed interpretation of MMPI and CP1.Archives of General Psychiatry, 1966,15, 75–81.
Giannetti, R. A., Johnson, J. H., Klingler, D. E., &Williams, T. A. A comparison of linear and configurai MMPI diagnostic methods with an uncontaminated criterion.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978,46, 1046–1051.
Giannetti, R. A., Klingler, D. E., Johnson, J. H., &Williams, T. A. The potential for dynamic assessment systems using on-line computer technology.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1976,8, 101–103.
Greist, H. H., Gustafson, D. H., Stauss, F. F., Rowse, G. L., Laughren, T. P., &Chiles, J. A. A computer interview for suicide-risk prediction.American Journal of Psychiatry, 1973,130, 1327–1332.
Gorham, D. R. Validity and reliability studies of computer-based scoring system for inkblot responses.Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967,31, 65–70.
Hedl, J.H., O’Neil, H. F., &Hansen, D. N. Affective reactions toward computer-based intelligence testing.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1973,40, 217–222.
Johnson, J. H., &Williams, T. A. The use of on-line computer technology in a mental health admitting system.American Psychologist, 1975,30, 388–390.
Johnson, J. H., Williams, T. A., Klingler, D. E., &Giannetti, R. A. Interventional relevance and retrofit programming: Concepts for the improvement of clinician acceptance of computer-generated assessment reports.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1977,9, 123–132.
Karson, S., &O’Dell, J. W. A new automated interpretation system for the 16PF.Journal of Personality Assessments, 1975,39, 256–260.
Kleinmuntz, B., &McLean, R. S. Diagnostic interviewing by digital computer.Behavioral Science, 1968,13, 75–80.
Landis, C., Zubin, J., &Katz, S. E. Empirical evaluation of three personality adjustment inventories.Journal of Education Psychology, 1935,26, 321–330.
Lushene, R. E., O’Neill, H. F., Jr., &Dunn, T. Equivalent validity of a completely computerized MMPI.Journal of Personality Assessment, 1974,38, 353–361.
Pearson, J. S., Swenson, W. M., Rome, H. P., Mataya, P., &Brannick, T. L. Development of a computer system for scoring and interpretation of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories in a medical clinic.Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1965,126, 682–692.
Piotrowski, Z. A digital-computer interpretation of inkblot test data.Psychiatric Quarterly, 1964,38, 1–26.
Space, L. G. A console for the interactive on-line administration of psychological tests.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1975,7, 191–193.
Veldman, D. J. Computer-based sentence completion interviews.Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967,14, 153–157.
Williams, T. A., Johnson, J. H., &Bliss, E. L. A computerassisted psychiatric assessment unit.American Journal of Psychiatry, 1975,132, 1074–1076.
Wood, R. Response-contingent testing.Review of Education Research, 1973,43, 529–544.
Woodworth, R. S.Personal data sheet. Chicago: Stoelting, 1917.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Johnson, J.H., Giannetti, R.A. & Williams, T.A. Psychological systems questionnaire: An objective personality test designed for on-line computer presentation, scoring, and interpretation. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation 11, 257–260 (1979). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205660
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205660