The cycle of psychological tests in social networks is endless. Psychologist Ekaterina Orel — about the reasons for our love for tests and why you should not take the Luscher test on the Internet.
“What kind of leader are you”, “What kind of mother are you”, “Your inner age”, “What do your sexual fantasies say about you”, “Which cartoon character are you”, “How do you feel about yourself” — the cycle of psychological tests in social networks is endless . Psychologist Ekaterina Orel — about the reasons for our love for tests and why you should not take the Luscher test on the Internet.
The mass interest in tests is determined not so much by narcissism as by our unfulfilled need to play, the desire to learn something important about ourselves and the ability to instantly devalue the result.
Psychologies: Why do we like answering test questions so much?
Ekaterina Orel: We are always interested in ourselves. Tests are a quick and safe way to learn something new about yourself, strengthen self-esteem, and test the boundaries of your “I”. Simply load the page and answer 10-15 simple questions. The answer to each is always a little experience of self-discovery. Do I know or don’t I know? How will I behave in a conflict situation? Can I take over the kingdom? If the result confirms our image of «I», we calm down and begin to feel better about ourselves. If we learn something new, we correct our image or (even for a moment) take a closer look at ourselves. Test results rarely give negative information, and reading something good about yourself is always a pleasure. At the same time, we are also interested in competing with the creator of the test: to figure out what he attributed this or that answer to, and try to predict the outcome. Each question is not only an experience of self-knowledge (even in comic tests, you need to try on the answer and choose the one that is closest), but also an intellectual competition with the author.
How to explain the rapid spread of tests on the Web?
E. O .: Publishing your result on social networks for everyone to see — of course, there is a share of narcissism in this. Many of us care about how we look in the eyes of other people. And we publish, as a rule, only the results that we ourselves like. To show that you look like everyone’s favorite character is to get closer to him and take part of his appeal. In reasonable quantities, this experience is useful.
Of course, professional tests, if they meet testing quality standards, provide immeasurably more experience and valuable information. The questions in them relate to the key points of human experience and behavior, therefore, they allow us to focus on the most important aspects of our lives. Joke tests are often randomly designed, their results are understandable and predictable, but their appeal is higher, if only because they require much less work of the individual.
Should we trust the results?
E. O .: With tests on the Internet, as with any other information, you should be more careful. If it is easy enough to distinguish a joke test from a professional one, then separating a good professional test from a bad one is not so easy. Neither the authorship of a well-known psychologist (especially a long-dead one), nor promises to reveal all the secrets of the unconscious are a guarantee of the quality of the test, and therefore a guarantee that a person will receive complete and reliable information about himself.
The world is changing, people are changing, professions are changing — and tests must keep up with these variables. Passing the Eysenck test now, as Hans Eysenck designed it in 1963, we are comparing ourselves not with our contemporaries, but with a man of the 1960s, which may be interesting, but not very informative in today’s world. Therefore, when passing professional psychometric tests on the Internet, you should at least ask when they were updated and with whom you compare yourself.
Unfortunately, most sites where you can find well-known professional tests for free do not provide such information, and the methods that are publicly available there are long outdated. Therefore, you should not count on a reliable result on such sites. There are resources on the Russian-language and global Internet that provide access to high-quality psychometric tests, but there are not so many of them, for example, Russian-language www.ht.ru/cms/test and www.proforientator.ru/tests, English-language www.queendom.com/ tests/index.htm
How is a professional test different from an amateur one?
E. O .: Behind each question of a professional test there is a lot of work, both in developing and maintaining its quality. Professional psychometric tests (psychometric means tests of the usual “question — answer options” form) are based on the mechanism of comparing people with each other. Before publishing a test, authors should conduct research to prove, using empirical data, that the test measures exactly what it is intended to measure and its results are reliable and resistant to confounding factors (time, mood of the respondent, willingness to cheat the test) .
To do this, people are interviewed who have the same characteristics as those on whom this test will subsequently be carried out, and calculations are carried out confirming the quality of the test. If some indicators are unsatisfactory, the test is changed and the study is repeated until the obtained values satisfy the authors. The author of a professional psychometric test can always prove why each particular respondent got exactly the result that he got.
There is also an intermediate group of methods between professional and amateur tests: they are created by professional psychologists, but do not pass psychometric testing. Their goal is also rather entertaining, but, unlike amateur ones, they are still based on the professional experience and intuition of a psychologist. Their result, even if not entirely reliable, can make you think about life issues and the path of personal development.
How reliable are the results of the so-called projective tests — Luscher, Rorschach and others — if you pass them on the Internet?
E. O .: It is pointless to pass such tests on the Internet. We all run the risk of being «maniacs». No one can vouch for the qualifications of people who post projective tests on the Internet. In addition, their authors themselves put quite strict restrictions on the conditions for their passage. For example, the Luscher test is carried out only with cards of certain colors — a different shade can distort the result. It is impossible to control compliance with these conditions on the other side of the monitor, so you cannot vouch for the result. It makes sense to take projective tests (Luscher test, Rorschach test, any drawing techniques, thematic apperceptive test) only in dialogue with a qualified psychologist who has experience working with this class of tests.