# Taking a personality test at orientation



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 4, 2010)

I just received the schedule for my orientation and I will be taking a two hour personality test.

I have no clue why I am taking it and why it even matters. 

Anyone else ever have to do this?


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 4, 2010)

Nope. It is Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). I have to take this thing again to come under care of presbytery.

I took the Briggs at CHBOLC.


----------



## Zenas (Jan 4, 2010)

You're both horrible people. 

You don't have to take the test anymore because I have successfully evaluated your personality.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 4, 2010)

According to those tests I should be on medication for being Manic.

Needless to say I hardly am Manic in any stretch of the word.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 4, 2010)

The one for orientation is for Dallas Theological Seminary and the second is for coming under care. 

We did the meyers briggs at CHBOLC as a way of showing how certain people approach the same set of information differently. It was pretty interesting.


----------



## PMBrooks (Jan 4, 2010)

The MMPI is often used as a way of measuring the growth of students at seminaries. Normally such a test is recommended by ATS or other accreditors as a measuring stick. Our seminary uses a similar assessment. Are they a pain? Yes. Are they necessary for theological education? No, but when used in the correct way they can be insightful into a person's emotional and personality growth.


----------



## Pergamum (Jan 4, 2010)

These tests are helpful in that they identify trends in your personality and how you fit best into certain roles. A mismatch between your personality and your job makes for burnout later on.

Most mission agencies also administer psychological tests as well.

No one thinks these tests are infallible, but they are helpful human tools.


----------



## smhbbag (Jan 4, 2010)

I wonder how Luther would have performed on the MMPI.

It purportedly measures:



> Concern with bodily symptoms, Depressive Symptoms, Awareness of problems and vulnerabilities, Conflict, struggle, anger, respect for society's rules, Stereotypical masculine or feminine interests/behaviors, Level of trust, suspiciousness, sensitivity, Worry, Anxiety, tension, doubts, obsessiveness, Odd thinking and social alienation, Level of excitability, People orientation



One may be an excellent pastor and have any combination of red/green flags on these points in the eyes of the unbelievers who made it. Having the mental health of seminary students evaluated by unbelievers is......well, unbelievable. 

Seminarians are under the care of their churches and presbyteries. Many of them get to know their professors. I should assume that most know their local church leadership pretty well. Many are assuming or have assumed some teaching responsibility in Sunday Schools and other areas. They do practicums and internships.

Are we seriously to believe that the testimony of a standardized test, written by unbelievers, will be more informative about a student's fitness than even simple forms filled out by pastors and elders?

Hogwash, I say.

I can _almost_ understand the worth of an agency/church/denomination making its own assessment (partially) through a standardized form, if it is evaluated with maturity and understanding, and in consultation with the flesh and blood people involved. But this is preposterous.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jan 4, 2010)

Virtually all major (and most minor) denominations, seminaries, and judicatories require psychological assessment as part of the process of vetting candidates for ordination. The theory is that we have learned so much from the social sciences that it behooves us to employ their insights in doing the various good things that several posts have articulated. It might, for example, assist in identifying a predatory personality or a psychopathological one. 

Usually, denominations require a full panoply of psychometrics coupled with actual interviews with therapists. Some tests are little better than the quiz in Parade magazine to see what you like and don't like. Others are geared toward assessing various degrees of psychopathology.

In my work with ordinations in my group, we have used the psychological assessment to guide us in asking more pointed and penetrating questions of candidates. For example, a person with a depressive tendency might be asked what spiritual, physical, social, and medical steps he takes to mitigate some of the effects of the depression. We have also used the results for exploring boundary issues, guilt, anger, etc. in the context of pastoral practice. 

In your case . . . be afraid . . . be very afraid. From your posts on the PB, I have already assembled quite a dossier on you to forward to DTS. And, which presbytery were you going with again?


----------



## Curt (Jan 4, 2010)

In the 1970s we took psychological testing as part of the process at Covenant Seminary. I don't remember the specific test. But after all these years I remember one response that david Clark made. When asked to complete the sentence "My mother ...." He wrote (according to him) "...would not make me take this stupid test."


----------



## smhbbag (Jan 4, 2010)

> In my work with ordinations in my group, we have used the psychological assessment to guide us in asking more pointed and penetrating questions of candidates. For example, a person with a depressive tendency might be asked what spiritual, physical, social, and medical steps they take to mitigate some of the effects of their depression. We have also used the results for exploring boundary issues, guilt, anger, etc. in the context of pastoral practice.



How would it be handled if the test indicated a tendency toward depression, anger, guilt, etc., and the candidate disagreed with the assessment? If he said he does not struggle from depression, or significant anger issues, would he be pressed on that point? Would he be asked to explain the inconsistency?

I guess I'm asking where the burden of proof is, in the mind of such committees, and whose word carries the most weight. I understand that nobody calls them infallible, but there are varying levels of credibility. If the test showed something about the person that had been missed by his pastors, elders, professors, and even his wife, how seriously would that be taken?


----------



## Curt (Jan 4, 2010)

smhbbag said:


> How would it be handled if the test indicated a tendency toward depression, anger, guilt, etc., and the candidate disagreed with the assessment? If he said he does not struggle from depression, or significant anger issues, would he be pressed on that point? Would he be asked to explain the inconsistency?


 
Depends on how angrily he presents his case.


----------



## smhbbag (Jan 4, 2010)

I'm sure that's true


----------



## py3ak (Jan 4, 2010)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> According to those tests I should be on medication for being Manic.
> 
> Needless to say I hardly am Manic in any stretch of the word.


 
Isn't that the point of getting an external perspective? 

I'm sure taking the tests can be a pain, and having them administered by unbelievers might sometimes result in some awkwardness; but understanding that the test doesn't *replace* but rather supplements other forms of evaluation, and given the way that acclimatized people can use the right words and exhibit the right reactions, it seems like it's not a bad idea to add another line of defense. But I enjoy taking personality tests.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 4, 2010)

DMcFadden said:


> Virtually all major (and most minor) denominations, seminaries, and judicatories require psychological assessment as part of the process of vetting candidates for ordination. The theory is that we have learned so much from the social sciences that it behooves us to employ their insights in doing the various good things that several posts have articulated. It might, for example, assist in identifying a predatory personality or a psychopathic one.
> 
> Usually, denominations require a full panoply of psychometrics coupled with actual interviews with therapists. Some tests are little better than the quiz in Parade magazine to see what you like and don't like. Others are geared toward assessing various degrees of psychopathology.
> 
> ...



I plead the fifth, or is it I drink a fifth?


----------



## BJClark (Jan 4, 2010)

I've taken some of these tests before and they are interesting..

Even as far as anger issues go, the person may say they don't struggle with anger but they could very well be 'passive/aggressive' or just passive in how they deal w/ things that make them angry.

I have a friend that took one and it showed he is very angry, even though he claims he's not..but knowing the man, his anger boils just under the surface and comes out in indirect ways..(unless you know the man...then you see it) like his wife will ask him to help with something..he's says he will, then he doesn't..he knows she likes the worldly things in life, Tiffany's Jewelery, fancy clothes and new cars, a large house to entertain friends..so he under performs at work, so that his income in not the same as his associates..so what is he so angry about?? The fact she blew $100k of their savings and have nothing to show for it..that she has gained over 100 lbs since they married,and her refusal to do anything about it--yet she constantly complains about her weight,..instead of telling his wife how he feels about those things..he just lets them simmer and acts out his anger/resentment in these other ways...

So while some may think those tests are foolish, and such..if something shows up on the test like an anger issue, they could certainly know to watch how someone reacts to various things..be it in a passive or aggressive manner..most ppl see anger issues only from the aggressive side, hitting walls, screaming, yelling, hitting others, while failing to realize anger can come out in other ways as well..


----------



## smhbbag (Jan 4, 2010)

> I have a friend that took one and it showed he is very angry, even though he claims he's not..but knowing the man, his anger boils just under the surface and comes out in indirect ways..(_unless you know the man...then you see it_)



So what was the benefit of the test?

If those who know the man could see it, then that aspect of his character would be revealed in interviews with his elders, professors, peers, or his wife.


----------



## BJClark (Jan 4, 2010)

smhbbag;



> So what was the benefit of the test?



For his counselors, it was helpful to know what to address in his counseling..even in getting him to admit he is angry, and even now while he may admit yes he's angry and resentful, he refuses to work on those issues--he'd rather nurse his anger/resentment than deal with it..(and no he's not a Christian) but for someone who professes Christ, the situation would defer to church discipline..




> If those who know the man could see it, then that aspect of his character would be revealed in interviews with his elders, professors, peers, or his wife.



but in this case...His wife doesn't look at it that he's angry she just thinks he's lazy and has no desire/drive to get ahead at work as do his peers..so even there if they were Christian's and he were in Seminary, or talking w/ elders his pastor or even his peers at work they wouldn't necessarily acknowledge his lack of desire/drive to 'get ahead' in the corporate world as something that could have a sinful motive behind it..when it could be viewed as "he just doesn't want to work longer hours and be away from his family all the time" which is a good thing..or merely that he's content where he is, and with what he's doing, and with the level of income he's making..

If his employer were to see the test results and desire to use them, they could insist on counseling and that he work out his anger issues or lose his job--as it affects their business with his lack of performance at work...not everyone shares their personal lives with ppl they work with, professors or even classmates..so they wouldn't necessarily know the underlying reasons a person does or doesn't do something..

Truth be told, I know many women, Christian's included that would not be honest with their session about things their husbands do/don't do at home--because they don't want their husbands to 'look bad'..for example..a friend of one my daughters, her father is a deacon at their church, yet this man constantly criticizes and belittles his daughter, do you think his wife told those who interviewed him and her before he took on that position he does that??? There is no way she did, or they would have addressed it with him, and I doubt he would be deacon. Even if they interviewed children, the kids aren't necessarily going to be honest about such things either, out of fear of how their parent may respond when they get home..so even those things can be hidden from people..would the propensity to be verbally abusive like that come out on a personality test? Possible..given they show someone doesn't handle anger very well..

But each of those issues are a heart/sin problem that need to be addressed...and can only be addressed if there is honesty--honesty on the first husbands part w/ his wife about how he really feels about what she has done with their finances and why he refuses to do more at work and get ahead in business, honesty with the father, and church about the fathers verbal abuse towards his child..

So without total honesty the best they can hope for is a general idea of how a person with a certain personality type may respond in a given situation..


----------



## westminken (Jan 4, 2010)

Chaplainintraining said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > Virtually all major (and most minor) denominations, seminaries, and judicatories require psychological assessment as part of the process of vetting candidates for ordination. The theory is that we have learned so much from the social sciences that it behooves us to employ their insights in doing the various good things that several posts have articulated. It might, for example, assist in identifying a predatory personality or a psychopathic one.
> ...


 
If you are going to DTS, You are going to have to abstain while you are there.


----------



## Scott1 (Jan 4, 2010)

These kinds of tests can be greatly helpful.

This seems to cut two ways-

One, it is a good tool for understanding your basic behavioral pattern.

Second, it can be used "against" you by an employer, or someone.

I wish there was a way you could take the test privately and go over them independently with someone and not have it go in your file, etc.

But, since this will be held for Dallas Theological Seminary (where Dr. Sproul's books were banned a few years ago and now are the hottest thing in their bookstore) and for your presbytery, you're in good hands. I think this will be fine.


----------



## Edward (Jan 4, 2010)

westminken said:


> If you are going to DTS, You are going to have to abstain while you are there.


 
Glad I kept scrolling down. I was going to mention that.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 4, 2010)

I don't know...if he has to abstain, he might get angry.


----------



## Scottish Lass (Jan 4, 2010)

We had to do them for evaluation as potential church planters...


----------



## BJClark (Jan 5, 2010)

Scott;




> This seems to cut two ways-
> 
> One, it is a good tool for understanding your basic behavioral pattern.
> 
> ...



The friend I mentioned above had his done by a private counselor when he went in for counseling, it wasn't by an employer and the counseling wasn't mandated by his employer, he started counseling at the encouragement of friends who seen these things and called him out on them...and given his counseling is private, his employer doesn't have access to the test....

however, more employers are requiring such tests be done, so they would have access to them..and in my friends case, HAD his employer required they be done before he started working there, they may have recommended counseling..but even then the counseling itself and what is discussed there would be confidential
between doctor and patient..and depending on if his attitude and work changed after so long in counseling they could certainly make a decision on whether or not to keep him on as an employee..His counselor desired to use the results as a base for counseling..not to use it against him in anyway..

So having them done privately where they don't go in your file is an option..


----------

