There is an urgent need to streamline, if you like, to technologize the diagnostic work of the educational psychologist. To do this, it is necessary to determine the diagnostic situations and conditions for the use of one or another toolkit. It seems to us that the approach presented in this article is quite effective and can be used by psychologists from various educational institutions, primarily school ones.
To do this, it is necessary to once again carefully evaluate the available diagnostic tools, but not only from the position of theoretical psychodiagnostics as a science that “develops the theory, principles and tools for assessing and measuring individual psychological features personalities" ( S.F. Burlachuk), but from the point of view of the daily practice of an ordinary psychologist.

CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO GUREVICH

The problem of classifications, typologies, differentiation of certain diagnostic methods and techniques has been repeatedly raised in the literature.
So, K.M. Gurevich et al. (1997) considers two groups of diagnostic tools: methods high level of formalization and methods little formalized .
He refers to the first group tests (which can be divided into several subclasses), questionnaires, projective methods and psychophysiological methods.
The methods of this group are characterized by:
- strict regulation of the examination procedure (strict adherence to instructions, strictly defined methods of presenting stimulus material, non-interference of the researcher in the activities of the subject);
- standardization (presence of norms or other criteria for evaluating results, for example, level criteria);
- Reliability and validity.
Such diagnostic tools make it possible to obtain diagnostic information in a form that makes it possible to quantitatively and qualitatively (in the case of level evaluation criteria) compare an individual or a group of people with other groups of people according to various distinguished parameters. That is, when using high-level formalization techniques, it is necessary to apply statistical norm .
The second group (slightly formalized methods) includes such techniques as observation, surveys, and analysis of activity products.
They are characterized by:
- the absence of any quantitative evaluation standards, that is, the inability to fully apply standardization, the statistical norm;
- extreme variability (variability of the mood of the subjects, motivation in different situations, the state in general), that is, again, a low possibility of objectifying the measurement;
- availability of professional experience, psychological intuition of the researcher.
At the same time, such techniques can provide valuable information about mental states and processes that are difficult to standardize, but have great importance in the study of children.
Separately, K.M. Gurevich highlights methods of clinical diagnostics , built on the basis of the principle of an exclusively qualitative analysis of the features of a mental phenomenon (as opposed to the task of only a quantitative measurement).
Of great importance here is the qualification and experience of a specialist, his ability to put forward and change hypotheses, assumptions, and outline methods of verification. K.M. Gurevich considers this type of diagnostic process as a kind of psychological art, a special "technology", generally oriented towards "intensive study of an individual case" and not always available to a practical psychologist.
Considering individual methods and tests within the framework of clinical diagnostics, K.M. Gurevich focuses on only one side of this approach - on the individual variant of using the methods of this plan and refuses clinical diagnostics the possibility of any comparison of the results, that is, he considers it impossible to typify the data.
In accordance with this approach, the assessment procedure itself, the technology of analysis and the conclusions of a specialist are determined.
It should be immediately noted that when using the clinical approach and, accordingly, clinically oriented psychological methods, one can speak (using the classification criterion of K.M. Gurevich - the level of formalization) about methods medium level of formalization .
For such methods, from our point of view, the following criteria are characteristic:
- The presence of clear requirements for the examination procedure and at the same time the possibility of relative changes depending on the age, condition of the child, that is, a certain variability.
- Possibility of variation and procedure, first of all, depending on the operational capabilities of the child (working capacity, mental tone, tempo characteristics of activity).
- Standardized stimulus material, but at the same time the admissibility of varying the presented stimuli depending on the age, condition of the child or the diagnostic hypothesis of the researcher.
- The absence of standardized age norms in the presence of qualitative or level-qualitative normative indicators of performance, depending primarily on the age of the child.
- The possibility of providing training assistance at various levels - from motivating to detailed, which is taken into account when assessing the quality of assignments.
- Typologically oriented analysis of the results of the survey, excluding a purely quantitative assessment, which, as a rule, does not explain anything for a particular individual. Possibility of multifunctional evaluation of performance results.
- Understanding the consistency and interdependence of results.
Similarly, the chosen tools provide a much wider range of possibilities for analyzing the results obtained with their help, although they require more qualifications and experience from the psychologist.

CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO BURLACHUK

There is also a slightly different basis for the classification of diagnostic tools, based on the division of the research method into non-experimental (descriptive) and experimental , with selection within the framework of the last special psychodiagnostic method (Burlachuk, 2002). It is concretized by the author in three main diagnostic approaches (which, in his opinion, exhaust all known diagnostic methods): objective, subjective and projective methods.
The author of the most complete and well-known monograph on psychodiagnostics examines the hierarchical system of organization of diagnostic approaches, methods and tools.
Considering specific methods and techniques for diagnosing manifestations of human individuality, he proposes a traditional division into two types of methods: intelligence tests and methods for diagnosing personal characteristics .
The first are considered as general ability tests (diagnosis of the level of intellectual development), special ability tests (measuring the level of development of certain aspects of the intellect and psychomotor functions that ensure efficiency in specific, narrow areas of activity).
They are adjacent achievement tests (identifying the degree of mastery of certain knowledge, skills), which to some extent can also be considered as an assessment of certain aspects of intelligence.
Personal methods are conventionally divided by the author into action tests (targeted personality tests that involve some kind of perceptual action to detect masked figures) and situational tests (in which the subject is placed in some life situation).
Each of the approaches proposed by the author defines a group of homogeneous, close to each other methods.
Objective Approach , in which diagnostics is carried out on the basis of the success, effectiveness and / or method (features) of performing an activity, includes:
- intelligence tests;
- tests of special abilities;
- personality tests (objective);
- achievement tests.
Subjective approach as an assessment of information reported about oneself, self-description (self-assessment) of personality traits, state, behavior in certain situations is based on:
- personal questionnaires;
- mood and state questionnaires;
- questionnaires.
projective method (analysis of the features of interaction with externally neutral, impersonal material, which, due to its indeterminacy, becomes an object of projection) includes:
- motor-expressive techniques;
- perceptual-structural techniques;
- apperceptive-dynamic techniques.

ANOTHER LOOK

There are other classifications of methods and techniques used in psychological diagnostics. For example, the classification given in study guide edited by L.V. Kuznetsova (2002), which is focused on developmental and special psychology. There research methods are divided into non-instrumental (observation, conversation); non-hardware (instrumental) experimental (game, construction, tests, questionnaires, actions according to the model); hardware experimental (determination of the physical spatio-temporal characteristics of visual, auditory, tactile perception, memory, thinking, motor sphere) (Basics special psychology, 2002 ).
As can be seen from this short review, most classifications, focusing on the characteristics of the diagnostic process, the diagnostic methods and techniques themselves, do not directly take into account the types and forms. organizations diagnostic activity of a practical psychologist.
It seems to us more important for the practical activity of the psychologist of education to typologize the very organization diagnostic process.
Hence the need to include in the assessment mental development child diagnostic tools, depending on the nature of the diagnostic work of the psychologist, the specific goals and objectives of the survey. Organized in this way typology diagnostic tools does not at all negate, rather complements other classifications within the diagnostic process.
At the same time, the categories and types of diagnostic tools are also determined by the age of the child being examined, the characteristics of his condition (mainly, his operational capabilities), and the diagnostic hypothesis of the psychologist.
From this point of view, we can say that the nature of the diagnostic procedure is determined by the following criteria.
- Form of examination: individual or group diagnostics.
- Type of diagnostic process: screening psychological diagnosis or in-depth.
- Stages of the examination procedure: primary or repeated assessment (the latter can again be subdivided into dynamic and final).
- Evaluation prolongation: monitoring or slice (single).
- The nature of the assessment. AT this case can talk about expert assessment (differential-level) and .
Each of the listed categories of the diagnostic process is characterized by its own, most effective in each case, technologies, methodological tools, and technologies for analyzing the results.
So, it is quite natural that group examination of children, the possibility of using clinically oriented methods (which we called methods of the average level of formalization) is limited.
In turn, the group form of the survey is possible only for screening diagnostics, which is aimed solely at identifying groups of children with certain characteristics, which allows us to speak of this type of diagnostic process as a expert, differential-level. Such group screening can be monitoring, and slice .
Advanced psychological diagnostics is focused on identifying the specifics of mental development in the broad sense of the word, understanding the mechanisms and causes that led to this type of conditionally normative or deviant development.
An in-depth assessment can only be carried out in individual examination mode. It is characterized, in connection with its main goals and focus, by limiting the use psychometric tests, as well as the inability to combine depth and screening mode.
In-depth psychological diagnostics can be:
- primary (as a rule, in a situation of individual examination of a child initial evaluation is an in-depth psychological diagnosis);
- dynamic , with the help of which the dynamics of development, the effectiveness of training, the dynamics of developing and / or corrective measures are monitored;
- final , the purpose of which is to assess the state of the child "at the exit", at the end of a certain stage of education, a cycle of developmental or corrective work.
Andmonitoring , and slice (single) diagnostics can be both individual and group, screening or in-depth, depending on the goals and objectives set for the specialist.

NATURE OF ASSESSMENT

Separately, one should dwell on the classification of diagnostic procedures according to such a criterion as nature of assessment . It is quite natural that almost any type of psychological diagnostics can be considered as an examination procedure, that is, “examination of an issue by experts to make a conclusion”, “research of an issue that requires special knowledge with the presentation of a reasoned conclusion” ( Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, 1995).
The ultimate goal of any examination is the answer to the question posed by the customer, which is drawn up in the form of an expert opinion. The issues addressed by expert research are determined on the basis of the real needs of educational practice.
As can be seen from these definitions, practically the entire diagnostic component of professional psychological activity. Such an overly broad interpretation of expert works, of course, does not have sufficient grounds.
At the same time, it makes sense to talk about peer review in the narrow sense of this concept - as one of the categories of the diagnostic procedure. The assessment of the state of the child, the level of his actual development in this case will not have an individual-qualitative character, but only a level or, more precisely, differential-level character.
At the same time, both a “binary” expert assessment (according to the “yes - no” type: whether a child or a group of children has a given feature, sign, functional development or not) and a multi-level assessment (three or four levels) have the right to exist.
In a similar way, for example, a level assessment of the development of children's cognitive activity in the well-known psychodiagnostic complex developed by L.I. Peresleni (1996), where the indicators of the intellectual development of children are "separated" into four levels.
In a situation like this true peer review we can talk about the typology of the state of children mediated by the levels of performance of tasks without determining the qualitative nature inherent in one or another of the identified types. Such a truly expert assessment should also include an assessment of the readiness of children to start schooling.
We have already expressed our position on this issue in guidelines(see "School psychologist", No. 9, 2003). In the case of such an assessment, the question is decided solely on the readiness or unpreparedness of the child for this type of educational institution, but not about the qualitative nature of its development and compliance with the requirements of first-class program material.
According to the classification of psychodiagnostic situations, V.N. Druzhinina (2001), the situation of expert (differential-level) assessment is characterized by a high level of social control over the behavior of the subject, coercion (even if in the form of external motivation of parents to undergo a psychological examination) to participate in the examination and decision-making on further behavior (for example, change educational route) against his will.
It is clear that such an expert assessment can be carried out both in individual , and group shape, have screening kind, be slice (one-time) examination or have monitoring (reusable) character.
The goal is differential typological diagnosis is quality assessment of the child's mental development, its regulatory, cognitive and affective-emotional sphere, personal characteristics.
The result of such a complex psychological diagnosis should be a psychological diagnosis, which will not only describe the current state of the child, attribute him to a certain type of deviant (or conditionally normative) development, but also provide a reliable forecast of his further development and education.

The tools that modern psychodiagnostics has at their disposal are divided into 2 groups according to their quality: methods of a high level of formalization and methods of low formalization.

Formalized methods include tests, questionnaires, projective technique and psychophysiological methods. They are characterized by strict regulation of the examination procedure (exact observance of instructions, strictly defined methods of presenting stimulus material, non-interference of the researcher in the activities of the subject, etc.), standardization (the presence of norms or other criteria for evaluating results), reliability and validity (for details, see Chap. .III). These techniques allow the collection of diagnostic information in a relatively short time and in a form that makes it possible to quantitatively and qualitatively compare the individual with other people.

Less formalized methods include such techniques as observations, surveys, and analysis of activity products. These methods provide very valuable information about the subject, especially when the subject of study is such mental phenomena that are difficult to objectify (for example, subjective experiences, personal meanings) or are extremely variable (dynamics of goals, states, moods, etc.). At the same time, it should be borne in mind that poorly formalized methods are very laborious (for example, observations of the subject are sometimes carried out for several months) and are largely based on professional experience, the psychological intuition of the psychodiagnostic himself. Only the presence of a high level of culture of conducting psychological observations, conversations helps to avoid the influence of random and side factors on the results of the survey.

Less formalized diagnostic tools should not be opposed to strictly formalized methods. As a rule, they complement each other. In a full-fledged diagnostic examination, a harmonious combination of formalized methods with slightly formalized ones is necessary. Thus, the collection of data using tests should be preceded by a period of familiarization with the subjects in terms of some objective and subjective indicators (for example, with the biographical data of the subjects, their inclinations, motivation, etc.). For this purpose, interviews, surveys, observations can be used.

§ 2. TECHNIQUES OF A HIGH LEVEL OF FORMALIZATION

As mentioned above, they include four main classes of methods: tests (which, in turn, are divided into several subclasses), questionnaires, projective techniques and psychophysiological methods (meaning only those developed in the school of B.M. Teplov).

Usually, in Western manuals, all methods for determining individual psychological differences are called tests, and books on diagnostics are called books on testology. However, in their psychological essence, tests and, for example, questionnaires are very dissimilar to each other. Methods of a projective nature are also a special tool, not similar to any of those listed. Therefore, for a better understanding of what diagnostics gives, they should be separated from each other by name. Psychophysiological methods should take a special place in the classification. These are original diagnostic tools that have arisen in our country.

Tests (translated from English as “test”, “check”, “test”) are standardized short and most often time-limited tests designed to establish quantitative (and qualitative) individual psychological differences.

Tests can be classified depending on which sign is taken as the basis of division. The following three grounds for classification seem to be the most significant: the form, content, and purpose of psychological testing.

FORM OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING

The form of tests can be individual and group; oral and written; blank, subject, hardware and computer; verbal and non-verbal (practical).

Individual and group (collective) tests. Individual tests are a type of methodology when the interaction between the experimenter and the subject takes place one on one. These tests have a long history. Psychodiagnostics began with them. Individual testing has its advantages: the ability to observe the subject (his facial expressions, other involuntary reactions), hear and record statements that are not provided for by the instructions, which allows you to assess the attitude towards testing, the functional state of the subject, etc. In addition, the psychologist, based on the level of preparedness of the subject , can replace one test with another during the course of the experiment. Individual diagnostics is necessary when working with children of infancy and preschool age, in clinical psychology- for testing persons with somatic or neuropsychiatric disorders, people with physical disabilities, etc. It is also necessary in those cases when close contact between the experimenter and the subject is needed in order to optimize his activity. For individual testing, as a rule, a lot of time is needed. It makes high demands on the skill level of the experimenter. In this respect, individual tests are less economical than group tests.

Group tests- this is a type of technique that allows you to simultaneously conduct tests with a very large group of people (up to several hundred people).

One of the main advantages of group tests is the mass nature of the tests. Another advantage is that the instructions and procedure are quite simple, and the experimenter does not require high qualifications. In group testing, the uniformity of the experimental conditions is observed to a large extent. The processing of the results is usually more objective. The results of most group tests can be processed on a computer. Another advantage of group testing is the relative ease and speed of data collection and, as a result, more favorable conditions for comparison with the criterion compared to individual testing. It is not unusual for most modern standardized tests to have normative samples of between 100,000 and 200,000 people, while even the most carefully designed individual tests have difficulty collecting data for 2,000 to 4,000 people when standardized.

However, certain disadvantages of group testing should also be noted. Thus, the experimenter has much less opportunity to reach an understanding with the subject, to interest him and secure his consent to cooperate. Any random conditions of the subject, such as illness, fatigue, restlessness and anxiety, which can affect the performance of tasks, are much more difficult to identify in group testing. In general, individuals unfamiliar with such a procedure are more likely to show lower results in group tests than in individual ones. Therefore, in those cases where the decision made on the basis of the test results is important for the subject, it is desirable to supplement the results of group testing either with individual verification of unclear cases, or with information obtained from other sources.

Oral and written tests. These tests differ in the form of the answer. Oral most often are individual tests, written - group. Oral answers in some cases can be formulated by the subject independently ("open" answers), in others - he must choose from several proposed answers and name the one that he considers correct ("closed" answers). In written tests, answers are given to the subjects either in a test book or on a specially designed answer sheet. Written responses may also be "open" or "closed" in nature.

Blank, subject, hardware, computer tests. These tests differ in the material of the operation. Blank tests (another well-known name is Pencil and Paper tests) are presented in the form of notebooks, brochures that contain instructions for use, solution examples, the tasks themselves and columns for answers (if children are tested younger age). For older teenagers, options are provided when the answers are not entered in test notebooks, but on separate forms. This allows you to use the same test notebooks over and over until they wear out. Blank tests can be used for both individual and group testing.

In subject tests, the material of test problems is presented in the form of real objects: cubes, cards, parts geometric shapes, structures and components of technical devices, etc. The most famous of them are the Koss cubes, the addition test of figures from the Veksler set, the Vygotsky-Sakharov test. Subject tests are mostly conducted individually.

Hardware tests are a type of technique that requires the use of special technical means or special equipment to conduct research or record the data obtained. Widely known devices for studying reaction time (reactors, reflexometers), devices for studying the characteristics of perception, memory, thinking. AT last years hardware tests make extensive use of computer devices. With their help, various types of activities (for example, a driver, an operator) are modeled. This is especially important for professional, criterion-oriented diagnostics. In most cases, hardware tests are carried out individually.

Computer tests. This is an automated type of testing in the form of a dialogue between the subject and the computer. Test tasks are presented on the display screen, and the subject enters the answers into the computer memory using the keyboard; thus, the protocol is immediately created as a data set (file) on a magnetic medium. Standard statistical packages allow very fast mathematical and statistical processing of the obtained results in different directions. If desired, you can get information in the form of graphs, tables, charts, profiles.

With the help of a computer, the experimenter receives for analysis such data that it is almost impossible to obtain without a computer:

the time to complete the test tasks, the time to get the correct answers, the number of refusals of the decision and the number of requests for help, the time spent by the subject thinking about the answer when the decision was refused, the time for entering the answer (if it is complex) into the computer, etc. These features of the subjects can be used for in-depth psychological analysis in the process of testing.

Verbal and non-verbal tests. These tests differ in the nature of the stimulus material. In verbal tests, the main content of the work of the subjects is operations with concepts, mental actions carried out in a verbal-logical form.

The tasks that make up these methods appeal to memory, imagination, thinking in their mediated speech form. They are very sensitive to differences in linguistic culture, educational level, and professional characteristics. The verbal type of tasks is most common among intelligence tests, achievement tests, and when evaluating special abilities (for example, creative ones).

Non-verbal tests are a type of methodology in which the test material is presented in a visual form (in the form of pictures, drawings, graphics, etc.). They include the speech ability of the subjects only in terms of understanding instructions, while the very performance of these tasks is based on perceptual, psychomotor functions. The most famous non-verbal test is Raven's Progressive Matrices. Non-verbal tests reduce the influence of language and cultural differences on the test result. They also facilitate the examination of subjects with speech, hearing, or low levels of education. Non-verbal tests are widely used in assessing spatial and combinatorial thinking. As separate subtests, they are included in many tests of intelligence, general and special abilities, tests of achievement.

Intelligence tests. Designed to study and measure the level of human intellectual development. They are the most common psychodiagnostic techniques.

Intelligence as an object of measurement does not mean any manifestations of individuality, but primarily those that are related to cognitive processes and functions (to thinking, memory, attention, perception). In form, intelligence tests can be group and individual, oral and written, blank, subject and computer.

Ability tests. This is a type of methodology designed to assess the ability of an individual to acquire the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for one or more activities.

It is customary to distinguish between general and special abilities. General abilities provide mastery of many activities. General abilities are identified with intellect, and therefore they are often called general intellectual (mental) abilities.

Unlike general, special abilities are considered in relation to individual types of activity. In accordance with this division, tests of general and special abilities are developed.

In their form, ability tests are of a diverse nature (individual and group, oral and written, blank, subject, instrumental, etc.).

achievement tests, or, as they can be called differently, tests of objective control of success (school, professional, sports) are designed to assess the degree of advancement of abilities, knowledge, skills, abilities after a person has completed training, professional and other training. Thus, achievement tests primarily measure the impact that a relatively standard set of influences has on an individual's development. They are widely used to assess school, educational, and professional achievements. This explains their large number and variety.

School achievement tests are mainly group and blank, but can also be presented in a computer version.

Professional achievement tests usually take three different forms: instrumental (performance or action tests), written, and oral.

Personality tests. These are psychodiagnostic techniques aimed at assessing the emotional-volitional components of mental activity - motivation, interests, emotions, relationships (including interpersonal), as well as the ability of an individual to behave in certain situations. Thus, personality tests diagnose non-intellectual manifestations.

Personal characteristics are measured using three types of methods: tests, questionnaires and projective techniques.

Detailed tests of intelligence, abilities, achievements and personality are discussed in the relevant chapters of the manual.

OBJECTIVES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING

The correct assessment and interpretation of the results of psychological testing should be based on knowledge of the purpose for which they are used.

The reason that prompted Binet to develop tests in his time was the need to identify mentally retarded children with their subsequent determination in special schools. And to this day, the definition of inferiority remains an important area of ​​​​application of certain types of psychological tests. However, in this case, testing is carried out only for the purpose of compiling psychological characteristics concerning the specific features of thinking, memory, attention and other mental processes of the child, and the final conclusion about whether he is mentally retarded or simply pedagogically neglected is made by defectologists. According to the same scheme, the use of psychodiagnostic data in medicine, in the judiciary (at the request of the court for the preparation of a psychological examination). In all these cases, the test results are intended for representatives of related specialties who use them to make a non-psychological diagnosis (for example, in medicine - to determine the form of the disease) or for one or another decision (administrative, judicial, etc.).

Fairly comprehensive application. psychological tests are found in the education system, where, based on their results, a psychological diagnosis is made. Distribution of children according to abilities, according to which different types of schooling are applied; identifying the incapable, on the one hand, and the gifted, on the other; identifying the psychological causes of school failure are just some examples of the use of tests in education. In school practice, tests can also be used for the purpose of professional consultations and for selection to certain vocational schools and colleges.

The use of tests in counseling has gradually expanded from narrowly focused advice on educational and professional problems to a deep consideration of aspects of a person’s whole life Emotional states and interpersonal relationships are increasingly becoming the object of counseling Psychological testing is increasingly being used as a means of self-knowledge and self-development, behavior correction, etc. Indicators tests become a tool that facilitates the decision-making process for the individual.

Psychological tests are also used to study very different problems, such as age-related changes in human development, the effectiveness of different teaching methods, the impact of psychotherapy, the dependence of performance on noise.

The selection and distribution of personnel in industrial enterprises is another fairly large area of ​​application for tests. Abroad, psychological testing is used when hiring people for work, distributing responsibilities, transferring to a new place, promotion or dismissal. Similarly, psychological testing is used in the selection and deployment of military personnel.

In the works of domestic psychologists, the use of tests as tools is increasingly common. practical work on vocational selection and vocational consultation At the same time, the need for

Psychological diagnostics (mainly in the West) currently has large quantity methods that meet the basic requirements for their development and verification, but differ both in content and in methods of extracting diagnostic information. Acquaintance with the main types of diagnostic methods while understanding their specifics and scope is an essential component of the knowledge of a modern psychodiagnostician.

At the same time, the authors of the book did not aim to describe the whole variety of methods developed by specialists and constituting the psychodiagnostic toolkit. Readers will be introduced only to some of the most well-known and used in domestic practice methods that can be considered as an illustration of diagnostic methods (a set of methods and techniques for assessing psychological properties that have significant similarities).

The specific features of each method determine the possibilities and difficulties in working with it, the advantages and disadvantages of its use, the nature of the information extracted with its help, methods for analyzing and interpreting the results, and probable errors. The importance of this kind of knowledge is obvious to both developers and users of psycho diagnostic methods, and for customers of diagnostic examinations, taking into account their results in their practical activities.

For example, the level of confidence in the diagnosis is determined by what methods were used (questionnaires, tests or projective ones), how complex the procedures for conducting and analyzing were, how dependent the interpretation of the survey data was on the qualifications of the diagnostician, etc.

In addition, the difficulty of making a diagnosis is due to the fact that the results of one technique are not enough, no matter how perfect it may be. Psychodiagnostics, believing that the results of any technique should be accompanied by additional data about the individual, include observation, conversation, and analysis of the products of activity among their methods. Therefore, those who naively call psychodiagnostics testologists are mistaken - a specialist in the field of psychodiagnostics must own non-formalized methods and use them in practice. Understanding the specifics of these methods, he must know the criteria and principles for their diagnostic use.

The classification of diagnostic methods serves the purpose of ordering information about them, finding grounds for their relationship, and thereby contributes to the deepening of special knowledge in the field of psychological diagnostics.

Types of diagnostic methods

The means available to modern psychodiagnostics can be divided into two groups according to their quality:

1) formalized methods;

2) methods are not formalized.

To formalized methods include:

Questionnaires;

Methods of projective technique;

Psychophysiological methods.

They are characterized by:

Certain regulation;

Objectification of the examination or test procedure (accurate observance of instructions, strictly defined methods of presenting stimulus material, non-interference of the researcher in the activities of the subject, etc.);

Standardization (i.e., the establishment of uniformity in the processing and presentation of the results of diagnostic experiments);

Reliability;

Validity.

These techniques make it possible to collect diagnostic information in a relatively short time and in a form that makes it possible to quantitatively and qualitatively compare individuals with each other.

To unformalized methods should include:

Observation;

Analysis of activity products.

These techniques provide very valuable information about the subject, especially when the subject of study is such mental processes and phenomena that are difficult to objectify (for example, poorly perceived subjective experiences, personal meanings) or are extremely variable in content (dynamics of goals, states, moods, etc.).

It should be borne in mind that little-formalized methods are very laborious (for example, observations of the subject are sometimes carried out for several months) and are largely based on professional experience, the psychological preparedness of the psychodiagnostic himself. Only the presence of a high level of culture of conducting psychological observations, conversations helps to avoid the influence of random and side factors on the results of an examination or test.

Less formalized diagnostic methods should not be opposed to formalized methods. As a rule, they mutually complement each other. In a full-fledged diagnostic examination, a harmonious combination of both methods is necessary. Thus, the collection of data using tests should be preceded by a period of familiarization with the subjects (for example, with their biographical data, their inclinations, motivation, etc.). For this purpose, interviews, conversations, observations can be used.

Formalized methods

As mentioned above, they include four main classes of methods: tests (which, in turn, are divided into several subclasses), questionnaires, projective technique methods and psychophysiological methods. In the literature, often all methods for determining individual psychological differences are called tests, and diagnostic manuals are called testology manuals. However, in their psychological essence, tests and, for example, questionnaires are very dissimilar to each other.

Methods of a projective nature are also a special tool, unlike any of the above. Therefore, for a better understanding of what diagnostics gives, they should be separated from each other by name. Psychophysiological methods should take a special place in this classification. These are original diagnostic tools that have arisen in our country.

Tests. Tests(English) test- trial, test, trial) these are standardized and usually short and time-limited tests designed to establish quantitative and qualitative individual psychological differences between people.

Their distinguishing feature is that they consist of tasks for which you need to get correct answer.

Tests can be classified, several subclasses can be distinguished, depending on which feature is taken as the basis for division. The most significant are the classifications of tests in form and content.

Form and content of psychological testing.

The form of tests can be individual and group, oral and written; blank, subject, hardware and computer; verbal and non-verbal (practical).

Individual tests. Individual tests are a type of methodology when the interaction between the experimenter and the subject takes place one on one. Individual testing has its advantages: the ability to observe the subject (his facial expressions, involuntary reactions), hear and record statements that are not provided for by the instructions, which allows you to assess the attitude to the examination, note the functional state of the subject, etc. In addition, based on the level preparedness of the subject, it is possible to replace one test with another during the experiment.

Individual diagnostics is necessary when working with infants and preschool children, in the clinic - for testing people with somatic or neuropsychiatric disorders, people with physical disabilities, etc. It is also necessary in cases where close contact between the experimenter and the subject in order to optimize his activity. However, individual tests require, as a rule, a lot of time to conduct the experiment and, in this sense, are less economical than group tests.

Group tests - this is a type of technique that allows you to simultaneously conduct tests with a very large group of people (up to several hundred people). Since the instructions and procedures are detailed, the experimenter must strictly follow them. In group testing, the uniformity of the experimental conditions is especially strictly observed. The processing of the results is objectified and does not require high qualifications. The results of most group tests can be processed on a computer. However, certain disadvantages of group testing should also be noted.

Thus, the experimenter has much less opportunity to establish a rapport with the subject, arouse his interest and enlist his cooperation. Any random states of the subject, such as illness, fatigue, restlessness and anxiety, which can affect the performance of tasks, are much more difficult to identify in group testing. In general, individuals unfamiliar with such a procedure are more likely to show lower results in group testing than in individual testing. Therefore, in those cases where the decision made on the basis of the test results is important for the subject, it is desirable to supplement the results of group testing either with individual verification of unclear cases, or with information obtained from other sources.

Oral and written tests. These tests differ in the form of the answer. Oral most often are individual tests, written-mi - group. Oral answers in some cases can be formulated by the subject independently ("open" answers), in others - he must choose from several proposed answers and name the one that he considers correct ("closed" answers). In written tests, answers are given to the subjects either in a test book or on a specially designed answer sheet. Written responses can also be open or closed.

Blank, subject, hardware, computer tests. These tests differ in the material that is used in testing. Blank tests (others widely famous name is the "pencil and paper" tests) are presented in the form of separate forms or notebooks, brochures, which contain instructions for use, examples of solutions, the tasks themselves and columns for answers. Forms are provided when answers are entered not in test notebooks, but on separate forms. This allows you to use the same test notebooks multiple times. Blank tests can be used for both individual and group testing.

In subject tests, the material of test tasks is presented in the form of real objects: cubes, cards, details of geometric figures, structures and units of technical devices, etc. Subject tests are more often conducted individually.

Hardware tests are a type of methodology that requires the use of special technical means or special equipment to conduct research or record the data obtained. Widely known devices for studying the indicators of reaction time (reactors, reflexometers), devices for studying the characteristics of perception, memory, thinking. In recent years, hardware tests have been widely used on computer devices. In most cases, hardware tests are carried out individually.

Computer tests. This is an automated type of testing in the form of a dialogue between the subject and the computer. Test tasks are presented on the display screen, and the test subject enters the answers into the computer memory from the keyboard; thus, the protocol is immediately created as a data set (file) on a magnetic medium. Standard statistical packages allow you to very quickly carry out mathematical and statistical processing of the results obtained in different directions. If desired, you can get information in the form of graphs, tables, diagrams, profiles.

With the help of a computer, the experimenter receives for analysis such data that it is almost impossible to obtain without a computer: the time for completing individual test tasks, the time for obtaining correct answers, the number of refusals to solve and seek help, the time spent by the subject thinking about the answer when refusing a decision, the time for entering the answer (if it is complex) into a computer, etc. These features of the subjects can be used for an in-depth psychological analysis of the results obtained during the testing process.

Verbal and non-verbal tests. These tests differ in the nature of the stimulus material. In verbal tests, the main content of the work of the subjects is operations with concepts, mental actions carried out in a verbal-logical form. The tasks that make up these methods appeal to memory, imagination, and thinking in their mediated linguistic form. They are very sensitive to differences in linguistic culture, level of education, and professional characteristics. The verbal type of tasks is most common among intelligence tests, achievement tests, and when evaluating special abilities.

Non-verbal tests are a type of methodology in which the test material is presented in a visual form (in the form of pictures, drawings, graphics, etc.). The subjects are required to understand verbal instructions, while the performance of tasks itself is based on perceptual and motor functions. Non-verbal tests reduce the influence of language differences on test results. They also facilitate the testing of test subjects with speech, hearing, or low educational levels. Non-verbal tests are widely used in assessing spatial and combinatorial thinking. As separate subtests, they are included in many tests of intelligence, general and special abilities, tests of achievement.

Intelligence tests;

Ability tests;

Personality tests;

Achievement tests.

Questionnaires

Questionnaires call such a group of psihodiagnostic methods, where tasks are presented in the form of questions and statements and are intended to obtain data from the words of the subject.

Questionnaires are among the most common diagnostic tools and can be divided into personality questionnaires and questionnaires. Unlike tests, there are no right or wrong answers in questionnaires. They only reflect the attitude of a person to certain statements, the extent of his agreement or disagreement.

Personality questionnaires can be considered as standardized self-reports, which are group and individual in form, most often written, blank or computerized. According to the nature of the answers, they are divided into questionnaires with prescribed answers (closed questionnaires) and with free answers (open questionnaires).

AT closed questionnaires pre-specified answers to the question posed. The subject must choose one of them.

The most common is a two- or three-alternative choice of answers (for example, “yes, no”; “yes, no, I find it difficult to answer”). The advantage of closed questions is the simplicity of the procedure for registering and processing data, a clear formalization of the assessment, which is important in a mass survey. At the same time, this form of answer “coarsens” the information. Often, subjects have difficulty when it is necessary to make a categorical decision.

Open Questionnaires provide free answers without any special restrictions. The subjects give the answer at their own discretion. Standardization of processing is achieved by assigning arbitrary responses to standard categories. Open questionnaires, along with the advantages (obtaining detailed information about the subject, conducting a qualitative analysis of the answers) also have certain disadvantages: the difficulty of formalizing the answers and their assessments, the difficulty of interpreting the results, the cumbersome procedure and the large time costs.

The form of answers in personality questionnaires can also be presented in the form of a measurement scale. In this case, it is supposed to evaluate certain statements according to the severity of the quality in them, represented by a scale in the form of a straight line segment (for example, a two-pole scale: difficult-easy, good-bad). Typically, scales with three, five or seven divisions are used, indicated on a straight line segment. The subject must note the degree of severity of the quality being assessed.

Questionnaires serve to obtain information about a person that is not directly related to his psychological characteristics (for example, to obtain data about his life history). They imply a rigidly fixed order, content and form of questions, a clear indication of the form of answers. Answers can be given by the respondents alone with themselves (correspondence survey), or in the presence of the experimenter (direct survey).

Questionnaires are classified primarily by the content and design of the questions asked. Distinguish questionnaires with open questions, questionnaires with closed questions and questionnaires with semi-closed questions (the respondent can choose an answer from those given or give his own). Questionnaires often combine all options: open, closed, semi-closed. This increases the validity and completeness of information.

Among questionnaires for psychodiagnostic purposes, biographical questionnaires are widely used to obtain information about a person's life history. Most often, these questions relate to age, health, marital status, level and nature of education, special skills, career advancement, and other relatively objective indicators. They help to collect the information necessary for a reliable interpretation of test scores.

Projective technique

A projective technique is a group of methods designed to diagnose a personality, which are characterized by a global approach to assessing a personality, rather than identifying its individual features. The most significant feature of projective methods is the use of vague stimuli in them, which the subject himself must supplement, interpret, develop, etc.

So, the subjects are asked to interpret the content of plot pictures, complete unfinished sentences, give an interpretation of indefinite outlines, etc. In this group of methods answers to tasks also can't be right or wrong; a wide range of different solutions is possible. It is assumed that the nature of the answers of the subject is determined by the features of his personality, which are "projected" in his answers. The purpose of projective techniques is relatively masked, which reduces the ability of the subject to give answers that allow him to make the desired impression of himself.

These methods are mostly individual in nature and for the most part they are subject or blank methods.

It is customary to distinguish the following groups of projective methods:

Methods of structuring: the formation of incentives, giving them meaning;

Design methods: creating a meaningful whole from the details;

Interpretation techniques: interpretation of any event, situation;

Supplement techniques: completion of a sentence, story, history;

Methods of catharsis: the implementation of gaming activities in especially organized conditions;

Methods for studying expression: drawing on a free or given topic;

Techniques for studying impression: preference for some stimuli (as the most desirable) over others.

Psychophysiological

A special class of psychodiagnostic methods are sychophysiologicalmethods to diagnose natural features of a person, due to the main properties of his nervous system.

They were developed by the national school of Teplov-Nebylitsa and their followers within the framework of the scientific direction, which received the name "differential psychophysiology". These techniques have a clear theoretical justification - the psychophysiological concept of individual differences, properties of the nervous system and their manifestations.

Individual differences due to the properties of the nervous system do not predetermine the content of the mental. They find their manifestation in the formal-dynamic features of the human psyche and behavior (in speed, pace, endurance, working capacity, noise immunity, etc.).

Particular attention should be paid to one feature of psychophysiological methods that diagnose individual differences: they are deprived of an evaluative approach to the individual. Conducting tests of intelligence or abilities, the researcher ultimately gives an evaluative conclusion: one testee is higher or better than the other, one is closer to the standard, the other is further.

An evaluative approach also takes place in some personality tests, questionnaires, however, not in all, but only in those where the goal is to identify some generally recognized human virtues or to state their absence. Diagnostic psychophysiological methods do not claim to be an assessment, since it is impossible to say which properties of the nervous system are better and which are worse. In some circumstances, people with some properties of the nervous system will show themselves better, in others - with others.

When proving the diagnostic significance of the results obtained with the help of psychophysiological methods, all those criteria that have been developed within the framework of traditional testology (standardization, reliability, validity) are used.

In their form, most psychophysiological methods are instrumental: both electroencephalographs and special equipment are used. But in the last two decades, pencil and paper techniques (blank techniques) have been developed. For a practical psychologist, they may be of particular interest, since they can be widely used in school practice and directly in production. Both instrumental and blank methods are individual in nature.

Less formalized methods

Now let's consider some of the methods that are included in the concept of "slightly formalized diagnostics". As already mentioned, such techniques include observations, conversations, and analysis of the products of activity.

observation method. This is the oldest method of psychologicalagnostics. With this help, you can get a lot of information about a person. It is indispensable wherever standardized procedures have not been developed or known. Wherein the researcher does not need the consent of the observed and cooperation with them to conduct the observation.

The method of observation is of particular importance for studying the psychological characteristics of children, since the child, as an object of research, presents greater difficulties for experimental study than an adult.

In our country (in the 1920s) observation was widely used in works M. Ya. Basova when studying children's behavior. He developed a methodology for psychological observations and general principles for educating the ability to conduct observations among psychologists. According to B. M. Teplov, the method of psychological observations of M. Ya. Basov was the only scientific development of this method in the world literature. This assessment is still valid.

Since in this method the observer himself acts as a "measuring tool", it is very important that he master the technique of observations on high level and in full. M. Ya. Basov draws a sharp line between the teacher's usual observations of children, which he makes almost every day, and those observations that can be classified as scientific.

In his opinion, in the first case, the teacher is a "passive perceiver" of the child, his observations are random, unfocused, and therefore often superficial. Owning the same scientific method observation, the teacher becomes an active observer, a true researcher of the child's behavior, since he carries out observation on the basis of a well-thought-out plan, thorough preliminary preparation.

Scientific observation as a psychodiagnostic method is characterized by:

Statement of the problem;

The choice of situations for observation;

Determination of psychological qualities or features of behavior that should become the object of observation;

Developed system for fixing and recording results.

In other words, observation as a method includes: purpose of observations and observation scheme.

Purpose of observation. Observation can be exploratory and specific, strictly defined. The purpose of exploratory observation, which is usually carried out at the initial stage of developing a problem, is to obtain the most complete description of all aspects and relations inherent in this problem, to cover it entirely. M. Ya. Basov calls this kind of goal in general to observe, to observe everything that an object manifests itself with, without selecting any of its specific manifestations.

If the purpose of the observation is specific and definite, then in this case only the necessary facts and phenomena are selected. Such an observation is called researching or choosing. Here, the subject content of the observation (what to observe) is predetermined and the division of the observed into units is carried out. The subject content of observation can be quite general, wide, or it can be narrow and particular. As an example, let us cite the levels of subject content identified by M. Ya. Basov, which can become the goal of observing a child. The main goal is to study the personality of the child in all its manifestations.

This general goal can be divided into several specific goals:

Monitoring the development of the child's personality;

Observation of his individual psychological characteristics;

Observation of one side of the child's personality, for example, the emotional side.

Observations pursuing narrowly limited goals are much simpler and easier (compared to those where the goal is of a general nature) if the observer knows in what types of behavior, in what types of occupations, the sides of interest to him can manifest themselves. If the observer does not know this, special studies will be required to reveal this. And in this case, the purpose of observation will not be the personality of the child as a whole or in parts, but various types of his activities, activities from the point of view of their psychological composition. In other words, the observer must find out which, for example, aspects of the personality can be revealed when the child draws, plays, participates in construction games, in outdoor games, listens to fairy tales, etc.

Observation scheme. Regardless of the nature of the observation - search or research - the observer must have a certain program, a scheme of actions. The observation scheme includes a list units of observation, method and form descriptions of the observed phenomenon. Before observing, it is necessary to single out from the general picture of behavior certain aspects of it, individual acts accessible to direct observation (behavior units), which are the units of observation. These units of behavior may be more complex in exploratory observation, and simpler in investigative observation.

So, for example, while observing behavior in general, the researcher nevertheless divides it into a number of units: motor skills, speech, communication, emotions, etc. If, however, only the child’s speech is the subject of observation, then the units can be: content speech, its orientation, duration, expressiveness, features of the lexical, grammatical and phonetic structure, etc. Thus, the units of observation can vary greatly in size and complexity of the selected fragment of behavior, as well as in content.

The choice of methods and form for describing an observation depends on its nature: exploratory or investigative.

However, there are some General requirements to the observation record:

1. The record should fix the observed fact in the form in which it really existed, without replacing it with a description of personal impressions and various judgments of the observer himself. In other words, you only need to record what happened and how (photographic recording).

2. The record must record not only the observed fact, but also the environment (background) in which it occurred.

3. The record should reflect the reality being studied as fully as possible in accordance with the goal.

At search surveillance usually used forms of records in the form of a continuous protocol or diary (you can also resort to such forms as film, photo, video recording). The continuous protocol is the usual form of recording without any headings. It is written during observation, so it is advisable to use conventions or shorthand to speed up recording.

The diary is used for multi-day observations, sometimes lasting months and years. The diary is kept in a notebook with numbered pages and large fields for processing entries. It is desirable to keep a record during the observation. If this is not always possible, then at least the essential points should be recorded, and the details - immediately after the end of the observations.

At investigative observation the recording method differs significantly from that discussed above. If in exploratory observation the list of signs, units of behavior is open and more and more new signs can be added there, then in investigating observation the categories in which the units of observation will be recorded are often already listed in advance. Nothing new can be added to this system. Sometimes categories may contain only one observation unit, but more often several different observation units belong to the same category.

In this case, the most common ways to record an observation is to record in symbols (pictograms, letter designations, mathematical signs, and combinations of the last two) and a standard protocol, which has the form of a table. Here, a meaningful description of the units of behavior is no longer provided, but these units are immediately brought under one category or another and recorded in the protocol of observation.

When observing, you can use both a qualitative description of events and a quantitative one. The analysis of the results can also be qualitative and quantitative. In order to reduce to some extent the observer's subjectivity in describing and processing the results, psychological scaling is widely used. It is aimed at assessing the severity of the observed signs.

Scaling is carried out mainly with the help of scoring. The severity of the trait increases in proportion to the number of points in the scale. Usually 3-10-point scales are used. Such scales are called numerical.

Examples.

1. Activity 0 12 34 5.

2. What interest does the child show during the lessons?

Does not show at all (1 point);

Barely shows (2 points);

Shows some interest (3 points);

Shows great interest (4 points);

Shows pike interest (5 points).

Another option is the scales of adjectives that express either the intensity or the frequency of the trait under study, for example:

Sociable: quite - medium - moderately - not at all;

Punctual: always - usually - average - sometimes - never.

A graphical form of the scale is also used, in which the assessment is expressed by the value of the part of the straight line segment, the extreme points of which mark the lower and upper scores.

Types of observations. Pedagogical and psychological research uses a wide variety of types and forms of observation.

The most common types include the following:

1. Chronological observations: longitudinal, or "longitudinal"(carried out over a long period of time, usually a number of years, and involve constant contact between the researcher and the object of study); periodical(carried out during certain, usually exactly given intervals time); single, or single(usually presented as a description of a single case).

2. Depending on the situation, observations may be field(natural conditions for the life of the observed), laboratory(the object is observed in artificial conditions) and provoked in natural conditions.

3. Depending on the position of the observer in relation to the object, the observation can be open or hidden(for example, through Gesell glass), observation from the side and included(the investigator is a member of the group, a full member of it). The included observation, as well as observation from outside, can be open and hidden (when the observer acts incognito).

The listed classifications do not oppose each other and in a real concrete study their different types can be combined.

In conclusion, it must be emphasized once again that the method of observation is a rather laborious and complex diagnostic tool that requires extensive professional experience and special training from the observer.

A number of rules have been formulated, under which the effectiveness of this method increases:

Conduct repeated systematic observations of this behavior in a variety of situations, which will allow us to separate random coincidences from stable regular relationships;

Do not jump to conclusions, be sure to put forward and test alternative assumptions about the reality behind the observed fact;

Do not separate the particular conditions for the occurrence of the observed fact from general situation; consider them in the context of the general situation;

Try to be impartial;

Several observers (not less than 2 people) should evaluate one subject, and the final assessment should be formed from their observations, while the judgments of each of them should be independent.

Attempts to give this method a formalized character (for example, drawing up a rigid observation procedure, obtaining quantitative assessment scales with the help of scales) also help to increase the objectivity and reliability of the information received. However, it is still impossible to completely exclude the influence of the experimenter's personality on the results of observation.

Conversation. Conversation is a method of collecting primary databased on verbal communication.

It, subject to certain rules, allows you to obtain no less reliable information than in observations about past and present events, about stable inclinations, motives for certain actions, about subjective states. It would be a mistake to think that conversation is the easiest method to apply. The art of using this method is to know how to ask, what questions to ask, how to make sure you can trust the answers you get. It is very important that the conversation does not turn into an interrogation, since its effectiveness in this case is very low.

Conversation as a method of psychodiagnostics has some differences in the form and nature of the organization.

One of the most common types of conversation is an interview.

An interview is a conversation conducted according to a certain plan, which involves direct contact between the interviewer and the respondent.(respondents).

It comes in the form:

Free (conversation without strict detailing of questions, but according to the general program: a harmonious strategy in general terms, and tactics are free);

Standardized (with detailed development of the entire procedure, including overall plan conversations, sequence of questions, options for possible answers: persistent strategy and tactics);

Partially standardized (strong strategy, but tactics are looser).

Diagnostic purposes are more consistent with the standardized form of the interview, since it makes it possible to obtain comparable data on different subjects, limits the influence of external influences, and allows you to work out all the questions in full and in the right sequence. However, it should only be used when the respondent is willing to do so. Otherwise, the result may be unsatisfactory, since a standardized interview is perceived by many people as a situation of an examination survey, which limits the manifestations of the spontaneity and sincerity of the respondent. The interview should not be long and boring. Registration of responses should not deter the respondent.

Depending on the intended purpose, the interview is divided into diagnostic and clinical. A diagnostic interview is a method of obtaining general information and is aimed at probing various aspects of behavior, personality traits, character, and life in general: finding out interests and inclinations, getting along in the family, relationships with parents, brothers and sisters and etc. It can be managed and unmanaged (confessional).

A clinical interview is a method of therapeutic conversation that helps a person to become aware of his inner difficulties, conflicts, hidden motives of behavior.

Certain difficulties in applying the method of conversation arise for a psychologist when working with children. In this case, a standardized interview is rarely used. The psychologist strives for more natural forms of conversation (diagnostic interview). Children most often lack any motivation to communicate with a psychologist, and therefore it is not always possible to immediately establish contact with them, which is so necessary when conducting a conversation. In these cases, the psychologist should have at hand bright toys, colored pencils, paper and other entertaining things that arouse the child's interest and incline him to communicate. In a conversation with children, a correctly formulated question plays a very important role. As mentioned above, questions are the main elements in the structure of the conversation.

They are most often divided into three groups:

Direct (“Are you afraid of thunderstorms?”);

Indirect (“What do you do when there is a thunderstorm?”);

Projective (“Children are afraid of thunderstorms? Well, how are you?”).

Indirect and projective questions help to reveal such features that are difficult to comprehend. They can be used to exclude socially desirable responses.

When conducting a conversation, it is very important to take the right position in relation to the child, and the principle of non-directive psychotherapy is most suitable here:

The psychologist must create a human warmth, full understanding of the attitude towards the child, allowing you to establish contact as early as possible;

He must accept the child as he is;

By his attitude, he should make the child feel the atmosphere of mutual trust, so that the child can freely express his feelings;

The psychologist must be tactful and careful about the positions of the child, he does not condemn anything, but at the same time he does not justify, but at the same time he understands everything.

Registration of responses should not disrupt communication and hinder children's spontaneity. It is more preferable to use a recording by hand than a tape recorder, since it allows you to preserve the naturalness of the situation, distracts the child less, does not constrain. During the conversation, one should also note such moments as pauses, intonations, tone, tempo of speech, etc.

Analysis of activity products (content analysis)

In psychodiagnostics, there is another way to obtain information about a person - this is quantitative and qualitative analysis of documentary and material sources, which makes it possible to study the products of human activity.

The term "documentary source" means:

Autobiographies;

diaries; Photo;

Recordings on film and videotape;

creative results in different types arts;

Materials of various mass media (newspapers,

Magazines, etc.).

In order to overcome the subjectivity of the researcher when studying documents, identify reliable information and record it accurately enough, a special method was developed, called content analysis (literally, “content analysis”). It was first used in the 1920s. of the last century for the processing of mass media materials.

This is a more or less formalized method of document analysis, when, on the basis of the researcher's hypothesis, special units of information are singled out in documentary materials, and then the frequency of their use is read out. So, for example, in the 20s. 20th century The Russian researcher N. A. Rybnikov, in the course of analyzing the essays, traced how the positive and negative assessments of their lives by schoolchildren are distributed depending on age and gender. Or another example: in the 80s. 20th century N. N. Lepekhin and Ch. A. Shakeyeva conducted a content analysis of episodes of cruelty and aggression in Western and Russian films.

In this way, the main procedure of content analysis is related to the translation of high-quality information into the language of the account. For this purpose, two types of units are distinguished: semantic, or qualitative, units of analysis and units of account, or quantitative. The main difficulty in working with documentary sources is the ability to conduct a qualitative analysis, i.e., to identify semantic units. This largely depends on the personal competence of the researcher, the level of his creative abilities.

Since content analysis is based on the principle of repetition, the frequency of using various semantic units (for example, certain concepts, judgments, images, etc.), it should be used only when there is a sufficient amount of material for analysis .

In content analysis, from a simple calculation of the frequencies of occurrence of certain semantic units, they gradually moved on to more complex statistical techniques (correlation technique and factor analysis). A new stage in the development of this method was its computerization. This is especially widely used in the USA - standard programs for analyzing various documents are being developed there, allowing you to quickly and reliably analyze a huge amount of information and free encoders from the tedious manual method.

In psychological diagnostics, content analysis is most often used as an auxiliary method or procedure for processing data obtained from other studies. With its help, the speech messages of the subject, accompanying almost any diagnostic examinations, especially with an individual procedure.

Specifically, content analysis can be used when processing data obtained through projective techniques (for example, TAT, Rorschach technique, Sentence Completion Technique); interviews, the content of conversations, other speech and written products of the subject; open-ended questions in questionnaires, etc. For example, in methods for diagnosing personality traits (anxiety, neuroticism, etc.), a content analysis of the grammatical and stylistic structures of the subject’s speech is carried out: the number of thematic statements (illness, fear, uncertainty, etc.), verbs, logical blocks, etc.

Such an analysis often makes it possible to reveal and objectify a hidden tendency in the answers of the subject. We should briefly dwell on one more class of methods. Recently, the term “teacher tests” has appeared in Western psychological literature. It means not only traditional tests of accounting and control of school achievements, but the purposeful use by the teacher in his work of low-formalized diagnostics. In particular, the ability to conduct systematic observations aimed at studying the individual psychological characteristics of students and their behavior is highlighted.

In terms of the thoroughness of the development of teacher tests, they lag far behind what has been achieved in formalized diagnostics. However, their very appearance in the psycho-diagnostic literature should be considered as one of the manifestations of dissatisfaction with the formalism that has become an integral feature of psychological diagnosis. Only a combination of formalized diagnostic methods with observations, conversations, teacher tests, etc. forms of studying the subject can give a satisfactory result.

The classification of psychodiagnostic methods given in this chapter is not exhaustive. It can be extended by using other principles for dividing methods into classes. So, in the book "General Psychodiagnostics" a classification of psycho-diagnostic methods is given, based on such a basis as the presence or absence of assessments of the performance of tasks by type correctly - incorrectly.

A class of psychodiagnostic methods, where the answers of the subjects are always evaluated as correct or incorrect, constitute intelligence tests, ability tests, achievement tests and some personality tests of action (for example, the test of Witkin's disguised figures). The class of techniques in which the concept of a correct or incorrect answer does not exist includes most personality questionnaires, projective techniques and psychophysiological techniques. Another basis for the classification of methods may be the degree of involvement in the diagnostic procedure of the psychodiagnostician himself and the degree of his influence on the results of the experiment.

This principle allows us to divide psychodiagnostic methods into the following groups:

The influence of the psychodiagnostic is minimal;

The influence of the psychodiagnostic is expressed to the maximum;

The influence of the psychodiagnostic is expressed to an average degree (an intermediate position between the two poles).

The first group includes tests of intelligence, abilities, achievements, many questionnaires and psychophysiological methods. In them, both the procedure of the experiment and the fixation of the results are a routine operation and can be entrusted to a laboratory assistant or a computer.

The second group consists of various types of interviews, conversations, observations. Here, on the contrary, the psychodiagnostician with his reactions, replies, and behavior can create such working conditions in which obtaining the necessary information will be difficult or even distorted.

The third group includes multidimensional questionnaires, open-ended questionnaires, projective techniques, in which the degree of psychodiagnostic involvement at the stage of interpreting the results is high. The psychodiagnostic conclusion, which is made on the basis of these methods, is not free from the influence of the personality of the diagnostician, his professional competence.

The list of grounds for the classification of psychodiagnostic methods can be continued.

Questions and tasks

1. What is the difference between formalized methods and slightly formalized ones?

2. Name the techniques related to the group of formalized and to the group of slightly formalized diagnostic tools.

3. What is the difference between tests and other diagnostic methods (questionnaires, projective techniques, etc.).

4. What are the tests in form and content?

5. What is the difference between scientific observation and ordinary everyday one?

1. Basov M. Ya. Selected psychological works. - M., 1975.

2. Burlachuk L. F., Morozov S. M. Dictionary-reference book on psychological diagnostics. - Kyiv, 1989.

3. Danilova E. E. Conversation as one of the methods of work of a school psychologist // Active Methods in the work of a school psychologist. - M., 1990.

4. Brief psychological dictionary. - M., 1985.

5. Nose I. N. Introduction to the technology of psychodiagnostics. - M., 2003.

6. General psychodiagnostics / Ed. A. A. Bodaleva, V. V. Stolina. - M., 1987.

7. General workshop on psychology. observation method. - Moscow State University, 1985.

8. Fundamentals of psychodiagnostics / Ed. A. G. Shmeleva. - Rostov n / D, 1996.

9. Psychological diagnostics. Problems and research. - M., 1981.

10. Psychological Dictionary. - M., 1983.

11. Schwanzara J. etc. Diagnostics of mental development. - Prague, 1978.

Federal Agency for Education and Science of the Russian Federation

TEST

ondiscipline:

« Psychodiagnostics»

on this topic: "Classification of methods of psychodiagnostics, their advantages and disadvantages"

Introduction.

1. Classification of methods of psychodiagnostics.

2. Classification of psychodiagnostic methods according to J. Schwanzare; V.K. Gaide, V.P. Zakharov; A.A. Bodalev, V.V. Stolin

Conclusion.

Bibliography:

Introduction

Psychology is a very young science. official registration scientific psychology received a little over 100 years ago, namely in 1879. The emergence of psychology was preceded by the development of two large areas of knowledge: the natural sciences and philosophies; psychology arose at the intersection of these areas, so it is still not defined, to consider psychology natural science or humanitarian. It follows from the above that none of these answers seem to be correct.

This is the science of the most complex that is known to mankind so far. After all, the psyche is “a property of highly organized matter”. If we mean the human psyche, then the word “most” should be added to the words “highly organized matter”: after all, the human brain is the most highly organized matter known to us. Acquaintance with any science begins with the definition of its subject and a description of the range of phenomena that it studies. What is the subject of psychology? The answer involves considering different points of view on the subject of psychology - as they appeared in the history of science; analysis of the reasons why these points of view changed each other; acquaintance with what ultimately remained of them and what understanding has developed today. The word "psychology" in translation into Russian literally means "the science of the soul" (gr. psyche - "soul" + logos - "concept", "teaching").

PSYCHODIAGNOSIS is the area psychological science and at the same time the most important form of psychological practice, which is associated with the development and use of various methods for recognizing individual psychological characteristics of a person. The term “diagnostics” itself is derived from well-known Greek roots (“dia” and “gnosis”) and is literally interpreted as “discriminative knowledge”. Psychodiagnostics is not only a direction practical psychology but also a theoretical discipline.

1. Classification of methods of psychodiagnostics

The classification of psychodiagnostic methods is designed to make it easier for a practitioner to choose a technique that best suits his task. Therefore, such a classification should reflect the connection of methods, on the one hand, with diagnosed mental properties, on the other hand, with practical problems for the solution of which these methods are developed. The criteria for solving these problems should predetermine the choice of the properties to be diagnosed, and after that, the methods aimed at these properties and best suited to the existing conditions.

Of course, there is no one-to-one correspondence between tasks and methods. The most valuable techniques are universal - they can be successfully applied to solve various problems. In mastering these techniques and in the procedures for their implementation, there are technological features that deserve independent consideration. According to these features, the methods are grouped into an independent operational-technological classification.

Basic methods of research and diagnostics.

One of the most accessible and widely used in social psychology research methods is observation. Observation is a scientifically targeted and in a certain way fixed perception of the object under study. The advantages of observation include: naturalness, independence from the ability of the subjects to evaluate their actions, the ability to assess the long-term consequences of educational influences, etc. The disadvantages are: passivity, the presence of elements of subjectivism, the inaccessibility of this method to some hidden manifestations (experiences, thoughts, motives), etc. .P.

The most typical situations in which the use of observation is effective are the following:

Obtaining information about a mental phenomenon in a “pure” form;

Collection of primary information that does not require a large sample of the objects under study;

Evaluation of facts obtained using other methods (for example, questionnaires);

Another effective research method is experiment. An experiment is an active intervention of a researcher in the life of the subject in order to create conditions under which any socio-psychological fact is detected. The advantages of the experiment are: the active position of the observer, the possibility of repetition, strictly controlled conditions. The disadvantages include: artificiality of conditions, high costs to control significant factors.

Experiments are natural, laboratory and emerging. The natural experiment is characterized by minor changes in the usual conditions of education and upbringing. With this type of experiment, they try to minimally change the conditions and context in which the psychic phenomenon of interest to the diagnostician occurs. A laboratory experiment is distinguished by strict standardization of conditions that allow to isolate the phenomenon under study as much as possible, to abstract from changing conditions. environment. The formative experiment involves the introduction of research results into pedagogical practice, followed by the study of the changes that arise as a result of such innovations.

Widespread interview. Interrogation is the receipt of information contained in the verbal messages of the subject. There are the following types of survey: questionnaire, interview, conversation. In the process of questioning information is received in the form of written answers of the respondents (respondents). The interview involves obtaining information through the respondents' oral answers to questions asked orally. The method of conversation is based on obtaining information in the process of bilateral or multilateral discussion of the question of interest to the researcher.

Modeling. This is a research method based on the construction of models of the phenomenon under study. The model is a copy of an object of interest to the researcher, or a phenomenon in some aspect. A model is always a simplification (reduction) of the phenomenon under study. It is intended to highlight the most important (in terms of research objectives) in the object under study. This simplification facilitates the process of qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Testing. Tests provide a systematic enumeration of various symptoms associated with a hypothetical hidden factor. A TEST in psychodiagnostics is a series of standardized brief tests of the same type, which is subjected to the subject - the carrier of the alleged hidden factor. A more rigorous definition: a test is an objective and standardized measurement of a sample of behavior.

Various test tasks are designed to reveal in the subject various symptoms associated with the tested latent factor. The sum of the results of these short tests indicates the level of the measured factor (here, for greater clarity, we mean the simplest scheme for calculating the test score).

Behind the external simplicity of scientific tests lies a great research work for their development and testing. Refers to diagnostic methods, which, unlike research methods, are characterized by an emphasis on the measurement (i.e., numerical representation) of a certain psychological variable. The testing procedure can be carried out in the form of a survey, observation or experiment.

A number of special requirements are imposed on tests as methods of accurate psychodiagnostics. It:

1. Socio-cultural adaptability of the test - the correspondence of test tasks and assessments to the characteristics of the culture that has developed in the society where this test is used, being borrowed in another country.

2. Simplicity of wording and unambiguity of test tasks - in verbal and other tasks of the test there should not be such moments that can be perceived and understood differently by people.

3. Limited time for completing test tasks - the total time for completing psychodiagnostic test tasks should not exceed 1.5-2 hours, because beyond this time it is difficult for a person to maintain his working capacity at a sufficiently high level.

4. Availability of test norms for a given test – representative averages for a given test, i.e. indicators representing a large set of people with which you can compare the performance of a given individual, assessing the level of his psychological development.

The test norm is the average level of development of a large population of people similar to a given subject in a number of socio-demographic characteristics. To be sure of the reliability of the results of psychodiagnostic studies, it is necessary that the psychodiagnostic methods used be scientifically substantiated, i.e., meet a number of requirements. These requirements are

1. Validity - “usefulness”, “suitability”, “correspondence”.

There are several types of validity. Validity is theoretical, empirical, internal, external.

The validity of the methodology is checked and refined in the process of its fairly long-term use.

2. Reliability - characterizes the possibility of obtaining sustainable indicators using this technique. The reliability of a psychodiagnostic technique can be established in two ways:

By comparing the results obtained by this technique by different people

By comparing the results obtained by the same method under different conditions.

3. The unambiguity of the methodology - is characterized by the extent to which the data obtained with its help reflect changes in precisely and only the property for which this methodology is used to assess.

4. Accuracy - reflects the ability of the technique to subtly respond to the slightest changes in the evaluated property that occur during the psychodiagnostic experiment. The more accurate the psychodiagnostic technique, the more finely it can be used to evaluate gradations and reveal shades of the measured quality, although practical psychodiagnostics does not always require a very high degree of accuracy of assessments.

2. Classification of psychodiagnostic methods according to J. Schwanzare; VC. Gaide, V.P. Zakharov; A.A. Bodalev, V.V. Stolin

Psychodiagnostic methods are combined into groups for various reasons. Here are some of the most common classifications of psychodiagnostic methods.

1. Classification of methods according to J. Schwanzare.

J. Shvantsara combines psychodiagnostic methods into groups for the following reasons:

1. according to the material used (verbal, non-verbal, manipulation, "paper and pencil" tests, etc.);

2. by the number of indicators obtained (simple and complex);

3. tests with the "correct" solution and tests with the possibility of different answers;

4. according to the mental activity of the subjects:

Introspective (subject's report on personal experience, relationships): questionnaires, conversation;

Extrospective (observation and evaluation of various manifestations);

projective. The subject projects unconscious personality traits (internal conflicts, hidden inclinations, etc.) onto poorly structured, multi-valued stimuli;

Executive. The subject performs any action (perceptual, mental, motor), the quantitative level and qualitative features of which are an indicator of intellectual and personality traits.

2. Classifications of psychodiagnostic methods according to V.K. Gaide, V.P. Zakharov.

1. by quality: standardized, non-standardized;

2. by appointment:

general diagnostic (personality tests by the type of questionnaires by R. Cattell or G. Eysenck, tests of general intelligence);

professional aptitude tests;

· tests of special abilities (technical, musical, tests for pilots);

achievement tests;

3. according to the material operated by the subject:

blank;

· subject (cubes of Koos, "addition of figures" from Veksler's set);

hardware (devices for studying the features of attention, etc.);

5. according to the form of the answer: oral and written;

6. By leading orientation: speed tests, power tests, mixed tests. In power tests, the problems are difficult and the solution time is unlimited; the researcher is interested in both success and the method of solving the problem;

7. according to the degree of homogeneity of tasks: homogeneous and heterogeneous (they differ in that in homogeneous tasks they are similar to each other and are used to measure well-defined personal and intellectual properties; in heterogeneous tests, tasks are diverse and are used to assess various characteristics of intelligence);

8. In terms of complexity: isolated tests and test kits (batteries);

9. by the nature of the answers to the tasks: tests with prescribed answers, tests with free answers;

10. by scope of mental: personality tests and intellectual tests;

11. by the nature of mental actions: verbal, non-verbal.

3. Classifications of psychodiagnostic methods according to A.A. Bodalev, V.V. Stolin

1. according to the characteristics of the methodological principle that underlies this technique:

Objective tests (in which the correct answer is possible, that is, the correct completion of the task);

standardized self-reports:

Questionnaire tests, open questionnaires

scale techniques (semantic differential of Ch. Osgood), subjective classification

individual-oriented techniques (ideographic) such as role-playing repertoire grids

projective techniques

Dialogic techniques (conversations, interviews, diagnostic games);

2. according to the involvement of the psychodiagnostic himself in the diagnostic procedure and the degree of his influence on the result of psychodiagnostics: objective and dialogic. The former are characterized by a minimum degree of psychodiagnostic involvement in the procedure for conducting, processing and interpreting the result, the latter by a high degree of involvement. The measure of involvement is characterized by the influence of experience, professional skills, the personality of the experimenter and his other characteristics, and the diagnostic procedure itself. Below is a scale on which the entire continuum of psychodiagnostic methods is located from the objective pole to the dialogic pole.

Conclusion

Modern psychological diagnostics is defined as a psychological discipline that develops methods for identifying and studying individual psychological and individual psychophysiological characteristics of a person. Psychodiagnostics also refers to the area psychological practice, the work of a psychologist to identify a variety of qualities, mental and psychophysiological characteristics, personality traits.

There are several classifications of psychodiagnostic methods. However, the leading basis for the methodological classification of psychodiagnostic methods is the measure of "objectivity-subjectivity" that its results possess. In the case of objective methods, the influence of the performer (diagnostic psychologist) on the results is minimal. In the case of subjective methods, the results, on the contrary, depend on the experience and intuition of the performer. When carrying out objective and subjective methods, the performer is required to perform completely different technological operations. Therefore, this classification is called "operational".

There is no hard boundary between two classes - objective and subjective methods. Between the extreme options, there are a number of intermediate options for methods that have both certain signs of objectivity and certain signs of subjectivity.

Bibliography:

1. Stolyarenko L.D. Psychology. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2003

2. Shevandrin N.I. introduction to the psychodiagnostics of personality Rostov n / a, 1996

3. Abramova G.S. Practical psychology: a textbook for university students - 4th ed., Revised. And additional - Yekaterinburg, 1999

4. General psychodiagnostics / Ed. A.A. Bodaleva, V.V. Stolina. - M. : Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1988. S. 10-13.

5. Workshop on psychodiagnostics: differential psychometrics / Ed. V.V. Stolin, A.G. Shmelev. - M. : Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1984. S. 16-17.

6. E-library Gumer.

Currently, there are several fairly well-founded classifications of psychodiagnostic methods.

Firstly, it is possible to distinguish between diagnostic methods based on tasks that require the correct answer, or on tasks for which there are no correct answers. The first group includes many tests of intelligence, tests of special abilities, some personality traits (for example, the Raven test, the procedure for determining Witkin's field dependence-field independence, Luchins' rigidity test, etc.). Diagnostic methods of the second group consist of tasks that are characterized only by the frequency (and direction) of a particular answer, but not by its correctness. These are most personality questionnaires (for example, the 16PF Cattell test):

Secondly, it is possible to distinguish between verbal and non-verbal psychodiagnostic methods.

The former are somehow mediated by the speech activity of the subjects; the components of these task techniques appeal to memory, imagination, belief systems in their language-mediated form. The second ones include the speech ability of the subjects only in terms of understanding instructions, while the task itself is based on non-verbal abilities - perceptual, motor.

The third basis used to classify psychodiagnostic methods is a characteristic of the main methodological principle that underlies this method. On this basis, they usually distinguish: 1) objective tests; 2) standardized self-reports, which in turn include: a) questionnaire tests; b) open questionnaires, involving subsequent content analysis; c) scale techniques built according to the type of semantic differential of Ch. Osgood; and methods of classification; d) individually oriented techniques such as role-playing repertoire grids; 3) projective techniques; 4) dialogical

(interactive) techniques (conversations, interviews, diagnostic games) 1 .

Objective tests are those methods in which the correct answer is possible, i.e., the correct performance of the task.

Common to the entire group of standardized self-report methods is the use of the subject's verbal abilities, as well as an appeal to his thinking, imagination, and memory.

Questionnaire tests involve a set of items (questions, statements) on which the subject makes judgments (as a rule, two or three alternative answers are used).

The same psychological variable is represented by a group of items (at least 6). Questionnaire test items can be direct, appealing directly either to the experience of the subject (for example: Are you afraid of the dark?), Or to the opinions, judgments of the subject, in which his personal experience or feelings (for example: Are most people honest?) Questionnaires are built as one-dimensional or multidimensional, including a number of psychological variables.

Open questionnaires do not provide for a standardized response of the subject; standardization of processing is achieved by assigning random responses to standard categories.

Scale techniques involve the evaluation of certain objects (verbal statements, visual material, specific persons, etc.) according to the severity of the quality given by the scale (for example: “warm - cold”, “strong - weak”). Three-, five-, and seven-point scales are commonly used. A special variant of scaling is a subjective classification, which involves the identification of subjective structuring of objects at the level of the naming scale.

Individually oriented (ideographic) techniques such as repertoire grids may coincide in form with scale, questionnaire methods, resemble a conversation or an interview. Their main difference from questionnaire tests is that the parameters that are evaluated (axes, measurements, constructs) are not set externally, but are selected based on the individual answers of this particular subject. The difference between these methods and the interview method is that repertory grids allow the use of modern statistical apparatus and make reliable diagnostic conclusions regarding individual features subject.

Projective techniques are based on the fact that insufficiently structured material acting as a “stimulus”, with the appropriate organization of the entire experiment as a whole, gives rise to processes of fantasy, imagination, in which certain characteristics of the subject are revealed. In clinical use, projective techniques are often based on the intuition and theoretical training of the psychodiagnostic, which turn out to be necessary at the stage of data interpretation. The research use of projective techniques usually involves the use of content-analytical procedures that standardize data processing.

Dialogic techniques take into account that the psychodiagnostic comes into contact with the subject and achieves the best diagnostic results due to the specific features of this contact that are relevant to the diagnostic task. Thus, confidential contact is necessary in diagnosing family difficulties, the nature of the child's personal development, and in many other cases in which the diagnostician simultaneously acts as both a consultant and a psychotherapist. The situation of a diagnostic pathopsychological examination dictates the construction of communication on the principle of expertise.

Dialogic techniques can be verbal (interviews, conversations) and non-verbal (for example, playing with a child can act as a non-verbal diagnostic procedure).

Various methodological techniques, on the basis of which certain methods are built, can be placed on the same scale, if the measure of the involvement of the psychodiagnostic himself in the diagnostic procedure and the degree of his influence on the result of the examination are taken as a single basis for classification.

Instrumental methods and objective psychological tests have the least involvement of a psychodiagnostic in the psychodiagnostic procedure, minimal influence of the personality of a psychodiagnostic and his experience as a psychologist on the results of the examination. Some forms of standardized self-reports - many questionnaires and scale techniques - also have an almost equally small degree of involvement of a psychodiagnostic. We can say that in these methods the personal qualities of the psychologist were embodied at the stage of developing the methodology; the examination procedure itself, as well as fixing its result, turns out to be a routine operation, which, in principle, can be performed with the help of a non-psychologist laboratory assistant or using a computer program. Diagnostic techniques, on the contrary, are characterized by the maximum degree of involvement of the psychodiagnostic in the process of psychodiagnostics, the maximum influence of his experience, professional skills, and abilities in the field of communication on the results of the examination. These qualities are possessed by various types of conversations, interviews, diagnostic games. For example, a pathopsychological experiment as a special psychodiagnostic method is characterized by a high degree of involvement of a psychodiagnostic: a “motive” for the examination must be created (the subject must understand that, based on his answers, an important diagnostic conclusion will be made for him), the results of individual tests are interpreted depending on how this motive is expressed (according to the psychodiagnostic). No less obvious is the influence of a psychodiagnostic on the results of a diagnostic conclusion made on the basis of a conversation with a client of a psychological consultation. With his reactions, replies, demeanor, a psychodiagnostician can both create optimal conditions for obtaining diagnostically important information, and completely distort this information, its meaning.

All other psychodiagnostic methods occupy an intermediate position between the two poles formed by objective tests and dialogic techniques.

Already multidimensional tests-questionnaires, involving the analysis of the profile and the interpretation of individual scales, depending on the values ​​of others and the nature of the profile as a whole, require the clinical experience of a psychodiagnostic and, therefore, at the stage of psychodiagnostics, whose conclusions are not free from the influence of the personality of the diagnostician. No less significant is this influence and, if necessary, coding the results of the survey obtained using open questionnaires or projective techniques. In the latter case, the creation of an atmosphere by a psychodiagnostic that reveals the subject's ability to imagine and be creative is essential.

If we introduce two bases at the same time - a measure of the involvement of a psychodiagnostic, its influence on the results of the examination, on the one hand, and the subject orientation of the tool, on the other, then the currently known psychodiagnostic methods can be placed in a two-dimensional classification table.

The corresponding methods will be located in the cells of the table, while the columns will be filled unevenly across the rows of the table. So, ability and mental functions are diagnosed mainly by methods in which the influence of a psychodiagnostic is minimally expressed - mainly by objective tests and questionnaire tests. Personality traits are predominantly diagnosed by questionnaire tests; cognitive organization, other individual properties are revealed mainly by medium-level methods (according to the degree of influence of the psychodiagnostic on the diagnostic process) - repertoire grids, projective techniques.

Motivation, attitude are diagnosed mainly by projective techniques. The role of dialogic techniques, which have the maximum degree of involvement of the psychodiagnostic, is especially important in the field of diagnosing relationships, communication (such properties, the actualization of which requires the recreation of real situations of communication).

The classification given in this section reflects rather roughly only common features psychological diagnostic methods - more specifically, the issue of classifications is discussed in the relevant chapters of the book. However, even in this form, the proposed classification has heuristic value. If you fill in all the cells of the table. 1, it will become clear where there is a shortage of methods of a particular type. So, for example, there is clearly a lack of dialogic-type methods for determining abilities (see Chapter 5), since the effective demonstration of abilities in some subjects depends significantly on the conditions of psychodiagnostics and the nature of contact with the psychodiagnostic. The user of psychodiagnostic methods, as well as their developer, can draw and fill out a similar table for himself and enter in the cells the methods known to him.This will allow him to better imagine what methods need to be mastered and where the need arises for the search and scientific development of methods.

To begin with, let us define the range of development of this problem and briefly list the scientists.

Scientists who dealt with the problem of classifying psychodiagnostic methods: B. G. Ananiev, L. Frank and others.

Classification of psychodiagnostic methods according to B. G. Ananiev

Consider the definitions of the method and psychodiagnostic methods.

Definition

A method is a class of techniques that are united by common principles.

The peculiarity of the psychodiagnostic method is measuring and testing orientation, due to which a full assessment of the studied property is possible.

Definition

Psychodiagnostic technique is a private technique aimed at obtaining information about the studied property.

Exists three diagnostic approaches which cover all psychodiagnostic techniques.

1. "objective" approach. Here, diagnostics can be carried out only on the indicators of success and the way tasks are performed. In this approach, tests of intelligence, achievement and ability are observed.
2. “Subjective approach. In this approach, the diagnosis is carried out using the subjective information of the subject. This approach is represented by a variety of personality questionnaires.
3. "projective" approach. Here, diagnostics is based on the study of certain features of the client's interaction with various stimuli that are presented to him. As a rule, projective methods are not standardized enough. It is not easy for them to derive test norms, since they are purely individual for each subject. At the same time, they give a good and deep result, which reflects a part of the client's unconscious.

The main classification of psychodiagnostic methods according to B. G. Ananiev is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. "Classification of psychological research methods according to B. G. Ananiev"

Classification of psychodiagnostic methods according to L. Frank

1. Structuring techniques. The subject is offered meaningless material, which is aimed at forming the subjective meaning of the client. Some projective techniques can serve as an example.
2. Design methods. The subject is invited to construct and interpret from various details.
3. Interpretive methods. The subject is offered an interpretation of situations that do not provide for only a single interpretation.
4. Additive techniques include stories or sentences that need to be supplemented.
5. Expressive techniques include various drawing techniques.
6. Impressive techniques. The subject is asked to rank the presented stimuli.
7. refractive techniques.
8. Methods of catharsis. A separate group is made up of dialogic techniques in which the psychodiagnostic comes into contact with the subject and achieves the best diagnostic results due to the specific features of this contact that are relevant (corresponding) to the diagnostic task. Thus, confidential contact is necessary in the diagnosis of family difficulties, the nature personal development child, personality problems and in many other cases in which the diagnostician acts simultaneously either as a consultant or as a psychotherapist. The situation of pathopsychological examination also dictates the construction of communication according to the type of examination. Dialogue techniques can be

• verbal (interviews,