Does anyone give much credence to the various personality tests developed in the 50’s such as the Luscher color test, etc.? These are purported to analyze and identify significant personality traits, weaknesses, strengths, responses to stress, coping ability, etc. Have they ever been tested empirically? Are they of any value beyond that of a Ouija Board? Do respectable psychologists today put any faith in them?
I wondered this myself a few years ago and did a little digging around. For the most part, I couldn’t find much research on the test itself, or research that used the test - there were a few, however. Type in “Luscher color” to www.pubmed.gov and you can read a few abstracts, most of which didn’t seem to give it much weight. The ninth study in the results, “Examining the Luscher Color Test” seems to be the one that most directly addresses the test’s merits, and states “the data did not support Luscher’s predictions.”
It’s a really fun parlor game, regardless. 
Opps, I was addressing the Luscher test only; I don’t know if all such test are view with the same skepticism.
“Psychology” of that type is rapidly fading as are branches like Freudian psychoanalytical theory. All of psychology is rapidly moving to a more scientific modelalthough there are some holdouts. The rorschach ink blot test still sees occasional service but that is widely known to be crackpot as well.
I would say that younger psych practitioners would shun all tests of that types. Psychometric theory is strong enough to show what works and what doesn’t without any question.
I’d never even heard of this thing. If you’re interested, go head and take the test. I, apparently, readily participate in things that are exciting but am unsatisfied with some unnamed something and it’s depressing me.
Phew. Because, for a second there, I was thinking that I hated excitement & I was happy with everything in my life.
Seems pretty bogus to me.
Well, I know that there are some folks who put a good deal of faith in various projective tests and devices, and use them with a fair amount of success, taking them with a grain of salt, understanding their limitations, and using them, perhaps as entry to conversation, as opposed to definitive diagnostic tools. However, items such as the color test seem to be a step beyond simple projective devices, imbuing color preferences with somethig far more than simple taste. So that’s where I’m wondering how valid these types of tests are, whether there has been any formal validation attempted, or, as **Shagnasty ** suggests, they have been relegated to the dustbin, along with Mesmerism, etc.
Psychology is an experimental science and it is home to much of psychometric theory so it is an ideal position as a discipline to test its own tests. I studied a fair amount of psychometrics in grad school and we glossed over that whole category of tests but there is plenty of research on them.
The have been studied scientifically but the results weren’t positive (statistically conclusive in their favor) and negative results aren’t the most popular in the journals. When researchers don’t find anything positive for a long time, people simply stop using them. Real scientists don’t usually do the “mythbusters” thing because single studies aren’t really viewed that way. It is a slow aggregating process and it isn’t big news when the conclusions trickle in over time.
I took the color test.
It definitely proves the Forer Effect right.
My analysis says “Acts calmly, with the minimum of upset, in order to handle existing relationships. Likes to feel relaxed and at ease with his associates and those close to him.”.
FUCK THAT SHIT! Bullshit fuckin’ waste of time, know-it-all colour-flashing fucks! I hate my associates and they hate me!
Interestingly enought, I took the quickie test twice. First time honestly, and it reported on me in a way that I thought (Forer effect or not) quite accurate. Then, I took it again, intentionally dishonestly. It reported a personality that is totally alien to me - quite disturbing, in fact, but not at all like me. Now, if I’m the slightest bit gullible, I’m thinking that the test has some validity to it. But, of course, I don’t believe this parlor game crap. At all. And I’m throwing out that second test.
I did the same thing, and it totally hit the nail on the head the first time, and totally screwed up the second time. Hmmmmm.
There is no experimental data whatsoever to support the contention that the Luscher Color Test is an accurate measure of anything at all.
It is certainly true that many people, upon receiving the results of the LCT, will feel that the Test has accurately captured their personality. However, self-assessment of the accuracy of such a test, concerning a subject as large and open to interpretation as one’s ‘personality’, is notoriously unreliable. Read up on the subject of cold reading and ‘psychic’ readings (e.g. astrological readings, palm readings etc.) and you’ll understand what I mean.
There’s also this threadon a related subject.
If someone takes the LCT, gets their ‘profile’ or ‘reading’ back and feels it is highly accurate, this may seem to validate the Test. But it doesn’t. We would need to try two more experiments at least: (a) what happens if you take a dozen people and give them all the same profile / reading, but tell them it has been drawn up specifically for them. Maybe they would all say it fitted like a glove. (b) what happens if an LCT practitioner intentionally does not follow the prescribed ‘official’ interpretation for a test, but instead draws up a profile that’s the exact opposite of what the rule book says. Maybe the reaction would be just as positive.
The only people who seriously contend that the LCT and related psychometric tests serve any useful purpose are those who have a vested interest in doing so e.g. people who can earn money be devising them or administering them. Ask for the evidence that proves these tests actually yield any useful information, and see how far you get. I’ll tell you now: you’ll only get obfuscation, vagueness, evasion, irrelevance and bland assurance.
I just did the test too. The result seemed about as accurate as the tripe that’s served up in the daily horoscope in the newspaper.
:eek:
Holy Crap!
Now that’s just spooky.