Pitfall 1 – To design the instrument based on one or two theoretical constructs
Using one or two theories from one school of personality theories has its limitations. Let us use the analogy of the elephant as your personality. It is akin to the fables of six blind men of Hindustan trying to guess what an elephant is like. Using one theory to explain human difference is akin to one blind man touching the belly and validates the belly and claims that the belly is your personality. Clearly, it is imperative to develop an instrument using multiple theoretical constructs to enable us to see the whole elephant to enhance greatly the predictive value and accuracy of psychometric assessment instruments.
Pitfall 2 – To put a number on the typology of personality
Human beings are not so simple that we can put a number on the typology and slot them, for example, into 16, 32, 243, 625 pigeon holes. It is a fallacy to put a number on the typology of personality. The reality is that no two human beings are alike even if they are identical twins growing up in the same environment due to genetic differences. Every personality is unique. Therefore the number of personalities is infinite
Pitfall 3 – To assume that our behavior pattern is constant and is not affected by the environment
Some psychometric instruments interpreting personality from four quadrants use this assumption to interpret human patterns of behavior. As such some predictor variables in each quadrant are not supported by their theoretical constructs.
Human behavior is not only a function of the genes. It is also affected by the environment. Predictor variables in the four quadrants are not sensitive to environmental influences.
Pitfall 4 – To classify human differences using adjectival descriptors
Psychometric instruments using the four or other adjectival descriptors are not inclusive of all psychological traits. For example, how do you classify the word prudent, calculated risk taker, and impulsive, under openness, extraversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness and neuroticism? Likewise for the categories we call dominance, influence, steadiness and compliance? When there is a confusion to classify traits under steadiness and compliance, the adjectival descriptor compliance is replaced by consciousness. In addition certain traits under the adjectival descriptors are not supported by their theoretical constructs. Such traits are thrown everywhere in the interpretation of human differences. The interpretation is limited to telling you what you are and cannot explain why you behave the way you do.
Pitfall 5 – To assume that human beings are simple and their behavioral patterns are recognizable, predictable and are consistently persistent between situations and across time
While certain people are simple and have recognizable patterns of behavior, they are also human beings whose behavioral patterns are unrecognizable, complex and vary between situations and across time. Psychometric instrument should not be limited to predict simple human beings by classifying human beings into one type or another, such as “A is an extrovert, B is an introvert”. Both A and B can be extroverted and introverted depending on the situations. In the midst of important people, one chooses to be introverted whereas in the midst of his or her friends, one can choose to be extroverted. Likewise for the thinking type and the feeling type. One becomes the thinking type if the issue is very important, and if it is a trivial issue, one may use one’s gut feelings to make a decision. Psychometric personality assessments should be able to predict complex human behavior that can be this type or that type depending on the situations and the environment over time.
Pitfall 6 – To limit the interpretation of personality to positive traits only
Psychometric instrument should not confined to predicting positive traits and qualities of human beings only. It should also be able interpret personalities with negative traits, characteristics and qualities as well. Psychometric personality tests which do not measure neuroticism often limit its interpretation to positive traits only.
Pitfall 7 – To assume that the prediction of variables is not free from personal biases
Ideally the interpretation of the variables is supported by a body of knowledge in the theoretical constructs described and explained by the existing gurus of personality theories. Every predictor variable must be supported by psychological theories.