ChapterPDF Available

Assessment of Individual differences in India

Authors:
Girishwar Misra ·Nilanjana Sanyal ·Sonali De
Editors
Psychology in Modern India
Historical, Methodological, and Future
Perspectives
Contents
1 Introduction: Perspectives on Psychology in Modern India ........ 1
Girishwar Misra, Nilanjana Sanyal, and Sonali De
Part I Historical Perspectives
2 Modern Psychology in India: Reminiscences and Reflections ...... 27
H. S. Asthana
3 History of Psychology at Calcutta University Across
the Century ................................................... 35
Nilanjana Sanyal
4 Applied Psychology at the University of Calcutta: Heritage
and State of the Art ........................................... 61
Jayanti Basu and N. K. Bhattacharyya
5 Eminent Teachers of the Department of Psychology
at Calcutta University ......................................... 85
Somnath Bhattacharya
6 Shall the Twain Ever Meet? The Cultural Politics
of Psychoanalysis in India ...................................... 93
Arvind Kumar Mishra
7 History of the Development of Psychology in Bangladesh .......... 119
Hamida Akhtar Begum
8 Development of Psychology in North East India .................. 137
Indranee Phookan Borooah
9 Psychology in the North India: An Overview ..................... 149
Akbar Husain
xxi
xxii Contents
Part II Disciplinary Perspectives
10 Re-envisioning Psychology: A Critical History of Psychology
in India ...................................................... 163
Arvind Kumar Mishra and Divya Padalia
11 Indian Psychology in Prospect .................................. 203
K. Ramakrishna Rao
12 Thematic and Theoretical Moves in Psychology in Modern
India ......................................................... 221
Girishwar Misra and Anand C. Paranjpe
13 Past and Present Research Methodologies in India ............... 249
Damodar Suar
Part III Developments in Sub-fields of Psychology
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical
Roots, Current Status, and Future Directions .................... 267
Jitendra K. Singh and Indiwar Misra
15 Human Development Research in India: A Historical Overview . . . 281
Rachana Bhangaokar and Shagufa Kapadia
16 Hundred Years of Social Psychology in India .................... 301
Janak Pandey
17 Understanding Organizational Behavior in India:
An Indigenous Perspective ..................................... 315
Anand Prakash and Alka Bajpai
18 Mental Health and Healing in India: A Retrospect ............... 345
Ajit K. Dalal
19 Clinical Psychology in the Contemporary Indian Context ......... 361
Vishnu Sharan and Ravikesh Tripathi
20 Holistic and Holigrative Approaches to Psychology ............... 381
V. George Mathew
21 Perspectives on Educational Psychology in India ................. 393
Ashok K. Srivastava
22 Emergence of Quantum Mechanics, Human Mind,
and Happiness ................................................ 405
Jagadindra Mandal
Part IV Critical Appraisal and Future Perspectives
23 Psychology in India: A Discipline in Search of Its Identity ......... 417
Parul Bansal
Contents xxiii
24 Psychology in India: A Glance on Paradigmatic
and Methodological Perspectives ............................... 435
Raghubir Singh Pirta and Girishwar Misra
25 Toward a Culturally Grounded Human Science: Prospects
of Psychology for India ........................................ 469
Nandita Chaudhary and Sujata Sriram
26 Situating Systems of Psychology Within the Traditional
Indian and Modern Western Knowledge Systems ................. 487
Anand C. Paranjpe
27 Reflections on Nurturing the Tree of Psychology in India .......... 503
Girishwar Misra, Shivantika Sharad, Nivida Chandra,
and Indiwar Misra
28 Postscript .................................................... 527
Ajit K. Mohanty
Chapter 14
Assessment of Individual Differences
in India: Historical Roots, Current
Status, and Future Directions
Jitendra K. Singh and Indiwar Misra
Abstract The study of individual differences, particularly its assessment, has
immensely broadened the scope of psychology as a science as well as an applied
enterprise. Its beginning can be noticed in the attempts to address institutional
requirements during the first half of the twentieth century. The psychologists trained
in British and American traditions pursued test development for the purposes of
personnel selection, training, guidance, and counseling in educational, industrial,
and military settings. The psychometric approach was extended to map personality
traits, motives, aptitudes, values, interests, abilities, etc. Also, projective tests of
personality were adapted and developed. Several institutions were entrusted with the
task of test development for various settings. More recently, some private agencies
and publication houses have also entered the arena of test development. The advent
of data analysis software has further shaped the psychometric tradition. As there is
no official agency to monitor the standardization of psychological tests, the quality of
tests has become a major issue. In recent years, the scope of testing has broadened by
the inclusion of indigenous constructs, modalities, domains, and analytic procedures.
The challenge of human resource development and training in contemporary India
requires innovative ways to respect international standards and address the issues of
recognizing merit as well as social justice.
Keywords Adaptation ·Assessment ·Individual difference ·Indigenous
constructs ·Measurement ·Psychological test ·Test Commission ·Traits
The study of understanding and assessing individual differences often termed as
“psychometry” constitutes a key domain of psychological research and application.
It comprises designing, developing, administering, and interpreting tests, techniques,
and procedures/devices such as tests, checklists, questionnaires, rating scales, inven-
tories, and schedules for measuring a wide variety of psychological attributes. Indeed
the scientific nature of psychology owes a lot to measurement. While “behavior” is
J. K. Singh (B)
Defence Institute of Psychological Research, DRDO, Delhi, India
I. Misra
B. R. Ambedkar College, University of Delhi, Delhi, India
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021
G. Misra et al. (eds.), Psychology in Modern India,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981- 16-4705- 5_14
267
268 J. K. Singh and I. Misra
often considered to be observable and measurable action, the notion of “measure-
ment” stands for the process of assigning numerals to objects and events according
to some rules. In course of time, this field has evolved to measure a variety of
psychological attributes such as abilities, adjustment, aptitudes, attitudes, beliefs,
coping, creativity, emotion, interests, intelligence, leadership, memory, motivation,
personality, self-concept, and values. Building on the initial contributions of Galton
and studies in psychophysical methods initiated by Fechner, Weber, and Wundt and
contributions by Cattell, Spearman, and Thurstone, the field has established itself
as an important ingredient of professional psychology training. The methods for
developing normative and criterion-referenced tests along with standards pertaining
to fairness in testing and test use, rights and responsibilities of test takers and test
users, and issues of cross-cultural differences and test bias have received the attention
from researchers. More recently, idiometric approaches to assessment are receiving
attention.
While the use of psychometric measures has proliferated in many directions and
adequately developed psychometric tools when used by competent assessors is found
advantageous in decision making, diagnosis, and intervention in areas like recruit-
ment, selection, career choice, job placement, educational testing, and understanding
health and illness. Inadequate tools and untrained users may create serious problems.
During its journey of more than one hundred years, psychology in India has
covered a vast conceptual, methodological, and empirical terrain. Since its inception
during the early part of twentieth century, the study of individual differences in terms
of assessment of personality traits, intelligence, aptitude, creativity, achievement,
etc., has remained one of the core areas of academic training of Indian psychologists.
Perhaps, this is one area which sustained the claim of psychology as an applied
discipline. This chapter tries to provide an overview of the developments in the field
of psychological assessment and bringing out the challenges faced in its growth.
Assessment of Individual Differences in Colonial India
The establishment of Applied Psychology Section/Department at Calcutta Univer-
sity in 1915 was a major step in this direction (see Ghosh in this volume). However,
the beginning of assessment can be noticed during colonial India in the form of
personality assessment for the purpose of personnel selection, training, and adjust-
ment in educational, industrial, hospital, and military settings (see Barnette, 1955;
Laskin, 2013). The assessment tradition began with mental testing and construc-
tion of psychological tests at Calcutta (1915) and Mysore (1924) Universities.
Thereafter, the prominent departments or centers involved in the development of
adapted tests were located in the Bureau of Educational Research, Ewing Christian
College and Bureau of Psychology at Allahabad; St. Christopher Training College
and Psychology department in Madras University, Central Institute of Education,
and Psychological Research Wing (Now DIPR) in Delhi; Institute of Psychological
Research and Services in Patna; Parsi Panchayat Vocational Guidance Bureau and
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical 269
Vocational Guidance Bureau in Bombay and Departments at Lucknow University
and Banaras Hindu University. During this period, the beginning was made with a
comprehensive project on the development of Hindustani-Binet Performance Scale
by Rice who started the project on psychological testing of school children of Lahore
in 1922 (Rice, 1929). He developed Hindustani and Punjabi versions of the Terman-
1916 Revision of the Binet Scale with the addition of some nonverbal items from
Pinter and Peterson (see Barnette, 1955). In order to assess the intelligence of school
children, Kamat developed Kannada and Marathi versions of the 1937 Terman–Merill
Scale under the sponsorship of Godfrey Thomson (Kamat, 1951).
At Calcutta University, the applied psychology branch of the department devel-
oped a Bengali version of the Terman–Merill Scales in addition to the adaptation
of other tests of intelligence, scholastic abilities, and temperament. It also devel-
oped tests of educational and vocational guidance, clinical examination, industrial
relation, and student training. The Psychology department at Mysore focused on the
development of tests of general ability, aptitude, achievement as well as inventories
of personality and interest. Notable among these were adaptations of Collins and
Drever general ability measure, manual dexterity tests, a test of temperament, and
neurotic inventory (an adaptation of Woodworth inventory).
At Banaras Hindu University, Jalota (1952) developed group verbal test of intel-
ligence in both Hindi and English. At Allahabad, Bhatia (1952) the then director of
the Bureau of Psychology developed Bhatia Performance Battery. An Indian version
of TAT and a free association test in Hindi and several tests of group verbal and
nonverbal mental ability in Hindi (e.g., Shohan Lal Allahabad Intelligence Test)
were also developed at the Bureau of Psychology. During the period, two-stage
selection process was introduced at Vellore Christian Medical College under the
supervision of Dr. E. B. Harper. Stage I included tests of aptitude and achievement
mainly for the screening of candidates and was administered in different centers of
India, Pakistan, and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). In stage II, certain situation-type tests
and Group Rorschach were used to administer on 75 most promising candidates
selected in Stage I (see Barnette, 1955).
Efforts were also made to examine the quality of test development works in
different universities. Pal (1942) in his presidential address at the Indian Science
Congress at Baroda highlighted the progress in the assessment of individual differ-
ences and shared concerns about future endeavors in this area. He highlighted the
need for identifying individual differences constructs that were supposed to be native
or indigenous in nature and the use of rigorous steps to establish psychometric prop-
erties of the tests. Dayal (1951) and Menzel (1952a,1952b) reviewed the status of
assessment work on aptitude and achievement. Mitra (1952) published a review of
the developments in the use of the Rorschach test. Prakash (1952) highlighted the
difficulties in adapting and translating mental tests in other cultures. Efforts were also
made to document the progress of psychology including its contribution in assess-
ment of individual differences during colonial India (Bose, 1938; Mitra, 1937). N.
S. N. Sastry (1932) tried to bring out the history of psychology in India from ancient
to the early period of 20th century.
270 J. K. Singh and I. Misra
It seems that adaptation of the tests developed in British and American settings was
the most preferred strategy to map individual differences in urban areas. The devel-
opment of tests to map intelligence with an emphasis on IQ testing dominated the
test construction endeavor (Mehrotra, 1952). The period witnessed rigorous involve-
ment of scholars to establish psychometric properties of the adapted tests with a
view to yield the desired outcome under Indian conditions. The majority of the tests
developed during this period are still used in various institutions in India.
Assessment of Individual Differences in Independent India
The tradition of adapting European and American tests continued during the initial
years of politically independent India. The development of psychological tests
became one of the most preferred academic endeavors in the universities (see Pandey,
1969). Test development also shifted from the academic domain to government insti-
tutions primarily for the purpose of selection, diagnosis, and guidance. Accordingly,
government institutions such as the National Council of Educational Research and
Training (NCERT), Indian Statistical Institute (ISI), Defence Institute of Psycholog-
ical Research (DIPR) which was earlier known as Psychological Research Wing,
National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS) and other such
institutions took special interest in test construction. Whereas academic research on
test development mostly confined to doctoral dissertations, the priority of government
institutions was to carry out problem-oriented research in the domain of test devel-
opment. In postcolonial India, the personality assessment system was developed by
Psychological Research Wing (Now DIPR) under the guidance of Lall (1952). The
system was developed to select the commissioned officers for Indian armed forces.
The system is still in vogue and successfully yielding the desired outcome (see Sinha,
1972 for a review of military psychology).
At NCERT, New Delhi, the National Library of Educational and Psychological
Tests (NLE&PT) was established in 1978 to procure educational and psycholog-
ical tests in the areas of intelligence, ability and aptitude, personality, achievement,
learning, interest, creativity, self-concept/self-esteem, attitude, counseling, guidance,
etc. Earlier it was called National Test Development Library (NTDL). The latest cata-
logue of NLE&PT published in 2019 enlists as many as 817 Indian tests developed in
15 different areas, namely intelligence, ability and aptitude, achievement, creativity,
personality, etc. The maximum number of tests is developed in the area of person-
ality (244) followed by intelligence (97), attitude (90), and ability and aptitude (78).
However, creativity constitutes one area where one of the lowest numbers of tests (15)
has been developed. The Department of Educational Psychology and Foundations
of Education of NCERT is primarily involved in the development of such tests.
NLE&PT has also published three handbooks, namely Indian Mental Measure-
ment handbook: Intelligence and Aptitude Tests (1991), Handbook of Personality
Measurement in India (1998), and Handbook of Value, Attitude and Interest Measure-
ment in India (2001). The handbook on intelligence and aptitude has 32 intelligence
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical 271
tests and four aptitude tests. The intelligence tests are mainly verbal and nonverbal,
creativity and creative thinking, social intelligence, concept formation, etc. The
majority of these tests are either in Hindi or in English. The second handbook on tests
developed in the area of personality contains a list of 85 tests. These tests are mainly
in the area of traits, self-concept, self-esteem, locus of control, temperament, adjust-
ment, etc. The third handbook enlists a total of 57 tests in the area of attitude, interest,
and value. In addition, it also publishes bulletins on intelligence, personality, interest,
attitude, aptitude, intelligence, and creativity. In 2019, NCERT has developed an
aptitude test for senior school students. It is called “Try And Measure Aptitude And
Natural Ability” the acronym of which is TAMANNA. It assesses aptitude in seven
different areas including Language Aptitude (LA), Abstract Reasoning (AR), Verbal
Reasoning (VR), Mechanical Reasoning (MR), Numerical Aptitude (NA), Spatial
Aptitude (SA), and Perceptual Aptitude (PA). The test has a total of 240 items (30
items in each area except perceptual aptitude which has 60 items). The maximum
time to complete all the tests of TAMANNA is 70 min (see Technical Manual, Test
Booklet, Guide for Teachers and Parents, etc., on Web site www.ncert.nic.in/tam
anna/tamanna.html, NCERT, 2019). A perusal of NCERT initiative regarding the
assessment of individual differences particularly in the domain of school education
indicates significant progress within the institutional context.
The Psychological Research Unit established in 1996 at Indian Statistical Institute
(ISI) is engaged in the development of psychological tests in the areas of aptitude,
achievement, managerial skills, memory, etc. The focus of the unit is primarily on
looking at the psychometrics of the tests. The other government instructions which are
mandated to conduct assessment test for the purpose of recruitment in various services
are Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), State Public Service Commissions,
Staff Selection Commission (SSC), Railway Recruitment Board (RRB), and National
Institute of Banking and Management (NIBM). These institutions conduct written
tests and Interviews for recruitment purposes. These tests generally assess reasoning
abilities, general knowledge, language proficiency, etc. Ministry of Railway has a
separate unit called Research Design and Standard Organization (RDSO) which was
established in 1957. It has a “Psycho-technical Directorate” which is involved in the
development of cognitive tests, personality tests, psycho-motor assessment, human
managerial studies, stress management, and interactive counseling for the railway
personnel.
A National Testing Agency (NTA) was established in 2017 to conduct various
entrance examinations for admission/fellowship in higher educational institutions
of the country. The agency is mandated to conduct Joint Entrance Examination
(JEE) Main for engineering, National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for
Medical, Common Management Admission Test (CMAT) for management, Graduate
Pharmacy Attitude Test (GPAT) for pharmacy, and UGC National Eligibility Test
(NET) for college/university teaching and fellowship. It also conducts admission
tests for hotel management. NTA has launched a Study Web of Active Learning
by Young and Aspiring Minds (SWAYAM) to provide online e-learning teaching–
learning resources for UG, PG, and management test.
272 J. K. Singh and I. Misra
In the academic domain, the First Handbook of Psychological and Social Instru-
ments (Pareek & Rao, 1974) was a major resource to consolidate the accomplishments
in this area. It dealt with tests and instruments developed in the area of personality,
education, organizational behavior, adjustment problems, anxiety, self-concept, and
motivation. The section of education has tests on student problems, interests and
preferences, attitudes as well as general instruments. The section on organizational
behavior lists tests and instruments in different organizations such as industrial,
hospital, military, and other settings. The last section dealing with social phenomena
has a list of tests on values, stratification, social distance and group attitude, modern-
ization and social change, religion and morality, and other social attitudes. The hand-
book contains only those test or instruments which were developed in English. Udai
Pareek’s Training Instruments for Human Resource Development contains test and
instruments developed in the area of personal orientation and behavior, personal and
interpersonal styles, the role, the organization, and non-corporate sector (see Pareek,
1997).
Another handbook of similar nature was prepared by Pestonjee (1988)
which enlists tests and instruments developed in the area of personality
(129 tests/instruments), education (70 tests/instruments), organizational behavior
(58 tests/instruments), and social phenomena (69 tests/instruments). The
tests/instruments in the area of personality are organized under five sections, namely
general, adjustment, anxiety, self-concept, and motivation. The tests/instruments in
the area of education have also been organized under five sections such as general
instruments, student problems, and adjustment, interests and preferences, attitudes,
and institutional characteristics. Industrial organizations and health organizations are
the two sections which constitute tests/instruments developed in the area of organiza-
tional behavior. Finally, the tests/instruments in social phenomena deal with a variety
of social dimensions and have been organized under six sections including values,
stratification, social distance and group attitudes, modernization and social change,
religion and morality, and other social attitudes. Overall, this handbook provides a
good resource to assess a range of individual differences dimensions (see Pestonjee,
1988).
ICSSR Reviews
The ICSSR review chapters in the last six research surveys (Das & Thapa, 2000;
Jerath & Sibia, 2009; Kulkarni & Puhan, 1988; Mitra, 1972; Mukherjee, 1980; Singh
& Tung, 2019; Suar & Puhan, 2010) indicate that the trend of test/scale development
to map individual differences has taken many twists and turns. It started with the
adaptation of psychological tests and measures developed in Euro-American tradi-
tion. The serious concerns highlighted by the reviewers have gone unnoticed. For
example, Kulkarni and Puhan (1988) advocated for carrying out problem-oriented
research instead of tool-oriented to develop the test and measures. They were very
dissatisfied over the inadequacy of tools to help to solve day-to-day problems. They
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical 273
emphatically asserted that “psychological assessment is not for its own sake but for
decision making, it could be for classification, selection, guidance, remedial or social
action, or for any such relevant problem solving” (Kulkarni & Puhan, 1988, p. 65).
In another review carried out by Srivastava et al. (1996) to look into the status of
intelligence testing in different setups of India during 1980–89 revealed that out of
31 intelligence tests, Jalota’s Group Test of Mental Ability (21.93%) was one of
the most frequently used tests followed by Cattell’s Culture Fair Intelligence Test
(10.53%) and Bhatia’s Performance Battery (8.77%). On the other hand, 13 intelli-
gence tests were used least frequently such as Ahuja’s Group Test of Intelligence,
Hundal’s General Mental Ability Test, and The P. S. M. General Intelligence Test.
Das and Thapa (2000) reviewed progress in the area of cognitive assessment and
intelligence testing. Jerath and Sibia (2009) focused on different aspects of person-
ality assessment. Suar and Puhan (2010) raised some of the pertinent concerns after
examining the quality of individual differences studies and its assessment. They
suggested revamping the course on research methodology, theory-driven research,
preference for longitudinal studies, use of secondary data, integration of qualita-
tive and quantitative methods, and using a multidisciplinary perspective. The recent
survey in this area by Singh and Tung (2019) indicates widening of the scope of
personality assessment in terms of measurement approach as well as conceptual
focus.
The practice of naïve adaptation and translation of alien tools to investigate cultur-
ally loaded constructs such as intelligence, personality traits, creativity, aptitude, and
achievement have been critically examined and commented by several researchers
(see Misra et al., 1997,2005; Nandy, 1974; Puhan, 1982; Sinha, 1983,1986; Suar &
Puhan, 2010; Venkatesan, 2010), and the need for adopting culturally adequate theo-
retical frameworks and concepts has been advocated (Bhawuk, 2010;Misra,2013;
Misra & Gergen, 1993; Paranjpe, 2004). These concerns deserve attention while
conducting doctoral courses, writing and publishing research papers. The advent of
statistical software and access to them has facilitated data analysis. For instance,
the advances in item response theory (IRT) are yet to gain attention in teaching and
research which continue to follow earlier theoretical psychometric tradition. Since the
use of psychological tests has proliferated in many areas, it has become an attractive
commercial enterprise.
On the other hand, there have been several important contributions in the area of
test development. Notable among these are Manifest Anxiety Scale (Sinha, 1961,
1965), Thematic Apperception Test (Chowdhury, 1960a,1967), Children’s Apper-
ception Test (Chowdhury, 1960b), Madras Picture Frustration Test (Muthayya, 1961,
1962), Jodhpur Multiphasic Personality Inventory developed by Malik and Joshi
(see Hasan, 1997), and Projective Inventory (Puhan, 1995). Effort was also made
to explore the way lay people construct the meaning of intelligence in India. It was
found that competence in four areas. namely cognitive, social, action, and emotion,
emerged as the broad dimensions. Based on the analysis, intelligence was conceptu-
alized as socio-affective regulation of one’s conduct and was considered as one of the
key attributes contributing to the well-being of the individual and the society (Srivas-
tava & Misra, 2001). Some notable studies published in the recent past that include
274 J. K. Singh and I. Misra
standardization of Holtzman Inkblot Technique (Darolia & Joshi, 2004), Cattelian
T-data (Singh, 2007), emotional intelligence (Emmerling et al., 2008; Sibia et al.,
2005), creativity (Misra et al., 2005; Nair & Dharmangadan, 2007; Panda, 2011;
Panda & Yadava, 2005; Singh, 2006), and temperament (Darolia & Arora, 2005)are
also considered significant developments in this tradition.
Apart from test development, several indigenous constructs of individual differ-
ence have received considerable conceptual and empirical attention. Among these,
triguna has been studied extensively (see Asthana, 1950; Kapur et al., 1997;
Marutham et al., 1998; Mathew, 1995; Murthy & Salagame, 2007; Pathak et al.,
1992; Shilpa & Murthy, 2012; Uma et al., 1971;Wolf,1998,1999). The robust-
ness of trigunas (Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas) as an indigenous personality construct
has been also established in a lexical study using Hindi language. The study offers
a critique to the universality of “big five factors” (Goldberg, 1981) of personality
and claims that the so-called big five factors may not describe personality in Indian
cultural context, instead triguna constituting of Rajas,Tam a s , and Sattva dimensions
better explain personality in India (see Singh & De Raad, 2017; Singh & Misra,
2013; Singh, Misra & DeRaad, 2013). In addition to triguna, the constructs studied
in indigenous tradition are ahamkar (egoism) (Salagame, 2011; Salagame et al.,
2005), anasakti (non attachment) (Pande & Naidu, 1992), karma (Dalal, 2000), and
santosh (contentment) (Singh & Misra, 2000).
Future Perspectives
A close perusal of studies carried out in academic and institutional domains indi-
cates that during the colonial period and the initial years after independence from
the British colonial rule, adaptation remained as one of the most preferred method-
ological strategies to develop tests or rather adapt the tests for the Indian population.
However, the same strategy witnessed a rather degrading trend in later years with the
development of tests with the rudimentary conceptualization of construct, selection
of weak or rather irrelevant items to measure the construct and poor psychometric
properties of the final test. The trend has further deteriorated in the contemporary
period. The tradition of adaptation has been replaced by imitation and application
of tests of individual differences in educational, industrial, organizational, and clin-
ical/hospital settings. The advent of data analysis software has further strengthened
the trend in the form of development of tests and measures in a very short span of
time and making an erroneous conclusion about the potential presence of the indi-
vidual difference variables in the population. Moreover, the preoccupation with the
use of tests of European and American origin indicates the pervasiveness of the era
of intellectual colonization.
There appears an urgent need to make the study of individual difference and its
assessment a culturally sensitive endeavor. Instead of adaptation, method replication
would be a relatively better strategy. Development of test using method replication
follows the same conceptual foundation and methodological strategy (used earlier
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical 275
to develop a test in a particular cultural setup) to develop a test of similar nature
in a different cultural setup. In the case of method replication, the same steps are
followed in different cultural settings, but the outcome (e.g., test) is different. This
approach is similar to the decentered research strategy proposed by Van de Vijver and
Leung (2001). This methodological strategy might be used to empirically establish
various constructs of mainstream psychology and operationalizing them in the Indian
context.
Majority of the tests developed in India uses the term “validity” to convey that
the developed test yields the desired outcome. Thereafter, authors rarely make any
attempt to revisit the psychometric properties of the test in a certain time interval
with a view to addressing the periodical changes in society. In this regard, periodical
revision of tests is perhaps a better approach to make it relevant to the changing
scenario. Validation of tests across different samples and settings within the country
is a rather more appropriate strategy to establish the individual differences construct.
Such endeavor should be a continuous process that ultimately may lead to the theo-
rization of the very construct. Thus, antique tests should be revalidated. Attention
should also be paid to the growing rural–urban, rich–poor divide, multiplicity of
castes, linguistic plurality, and religious differences (see Misra et al., 2019).
The indigenous constructs of individual differences need to be explored, and their
relevance in the contemporary period should be examined with a view to studying
its appropriateness and applicability. In this regard, a combined emic-etic approach
offers a suitable vantage point for building a culturally sensitive model and measures
of individual differences (see Cheung & Fetvadjiev, 2016). Strategies of online
assessment need to be seriously explored. There is a need to establish Assessment
and Testing Accreditation Agency” which should be mandated to monitor, evaluate,
and certify tests and instruments of individual difference. On the whole, the test
development endeavors particularly in the academic and institutional domains need
to be carried out to create a space in the policy framework.
References
Asthana, H. S. (1950). Indian typological theories in an historical and experimental approach to
personality (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Lucknow.
Barnette, W. L. (1955). Survey of research with psychological tests in India. Psychological Bulletin,
52, 105–121.
Bhatia, C. M. (1952). Educational and vocational guidance for students at the Bureau of Psychology,
Allahabad. Shiksha, 5, 62–72.
Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2010). Methodology for building psychological models from scriptures: Contribu-
tions of Indian psychology to indigenous and universal psychologies. Psychology and Developing
Societies, 22, 49–94.
Bureau of Psychology, Uttar Pradesh. (1952). U. P. Government.
Bose, G. (1938). Psychology. In B. Prashad (ed.), The progress of science in India in the past
twenty-five years. Calcutta.
Calcutta University, Department of Psychology, Applied Psychology Section. (1953). Report on
the working of the section, 1943–1952. University College of Science.
276 J. K. Singh and I. Misra
Cheung, F. M., & Fetvadjiev, V. H. (2016). Indigenous approaches to testing and assessment. In F. T.
L. Leong, D. Bartram, F. M. Cheung, K. F. Geisinger, & D. Iliescu (Eds.), The ITC international
handbook of testing and assessment (pp. 333–346). Oxford University Press.
Chowdhury, U. (1960a). An Indian modification of Thematic Apperception Test. Journal of Social
Psychology, 51, 245–265.
Chowdhury, U. (1960b). Children Apperception Test (CAT) (Indian Adaptation). Book Land Private
Ltd.
Chowdhury, U. (1967). An Indian modification of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)- Manual.
Book Land Private Ltd.
Dalal, A. K. (2000). Living with a chronic disease: Healing and psychological adjustment in Indian
society. Psychology and Developing Societies, 12, 61–81.
Darolia, C. R., & Arora, B. S. (2005). Behaviour temperament inventory: A normative study.
Psychological Studies, 50, 331–335.
Darolia, C. R., & Joshi, H. L. (2004). Standardization of Holtzman inkblot technique on Indian high
school students. Psychological Studies, 49, 52–58.
Das, J. P., & Thapa, K. (2000). Intelligence and cognitive processes. In J. Pandey(Ed.), Psychology in
India revisited—Developments in the discipline. Volume 1: Physiological foundation and human
cognition (pp. 151–207). Sage.
Dayal, I. A. (1951). Note on psychological tests in India. Journal of Education and Psychology, 8,
195–197.
Emmerling, R. J. V. K., Shawwal, V. K., & Mandal, M. K. (Eds.). (2008). Emotional intelligence:
Theoretical and cultural perspectives. Nova Science Publishers.
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universal personality
lexicons. In L. wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 141–165).
Sage.
Hasan, Q. (1997). Personality assessment: A fresh psychological look. Gyan Publishing House
Jalota, S. (1952). Text-book of psychology. Banaras Hindu University Press.
Jerath, J. M., & Sibia, A. (2009). Trends in personality research: An overview. In G. Misra (Ed.),
Psychology in India. Volume 1. Basic psychological processes and human development (pp. 263–
306). Pearson Education.
Kamat, V. V. (1951). Measuring the intelligence of Indian children. Oxford University Press.
Kapur, M., Hirisave. U., Reddy, M.V., Barnabas, I., & Singhal, D. (1997). Study of infant
temperament: An Indian perspective. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24(2), 171–177.
Kulkarni, S. S., & Puhan, B. N. (1988). Psychological assessment: Its present and future trends.
In J. Pandey (Ed.), Psychology in India: The state-of-the-art. Volume 1: Personality and mental
processes (pp. 19–91). Sage.
Lall, S. (1952). Personnel selection. Second Defence Science Conference (Paper Read on April 28,
1952).
Laskin, A. (2013). The Indian Psychological Association, the birth of the modern discipline and
“the destiny of one nation”, 1905–1947. Modern Intellectual History, 10, 415–436.
Marutham, P., Balodhi, J. P., & Mishra, H. (1998). Sattva, Rajas, Tamas (SRT) inventory. National
Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences (NIMHANS) Journal, 16, 15–19.
Mathew, V. G. (1995). Mathew IAS rating scale manual. University of Kerala.
Mehrotra, S. N. (1952). Intelligence tests for selection purposes. Shikslta, 5, 74–81.
Menzel, E. W. (1952a). Suggestions for the use of new-type tests in India (3rd ed.). Oxford University
Press.
Menzel, E. W. (1952b). Do’s and don’t’s for intelligence tests in India and Pakistan. Teaching, 25,
48–52. (Oxford Press, Bombay)
Misra, G. (2013). Indigenous personalities. In K. D. Keith (Ed.), The encyclopedia of cross-cultural
psychology (1st ed.). Wiley.
Misra, G., & Gergen, K. J. (1993). On the place of culture in psychological science. International
Journal of Psychology, 28, 225–243.
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical 277
Misra, G., Pandey, N. M., & Misra, I. (2019). Psychology of subpopulations in the Indian society.
In R. K. Chaddha, V. Kumar, & S. Sarkar (Eds.), Social psychiatry: Principles and clinical
perspectives (pp. 122–129). Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers.
Misra, G., Sahoo, F. M., & Puhan, B. N. (1997). Cultural bias in testing: India. European Review
of Applied Psychology, 47, 309–316.
Misra, G., Srivastava, A. K., & Misra, I. (2005). Culture and facets of creativity: The Indian expe-
rience. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), International handbook of creativity (pp. 421–455). Cambridge
University Press.
Mitra, S. C. (1937). History of the psychology department of the University of Calcutta.Indian
Journal of Psychology, 12(3), 151–162.
Mitra, S. K. (1952). Evaluation of psychotherapy by means of the Rorschach test. Patna University
Journal, 6, 42–47.
Mitra, S. K. (Ed.). (1972). A survey of research in psychology. Popular Prakashan.
Mukherjee, B. N. (1980). Psychological theory and research methods. In U. Pareek (Ed.), Asurvey
of research in psychology, 1971–1976 (Part I, pp. 3–135). Popular Prakashan.
Murthy,P. K., & Salagame, K. K. K. (2007). The concept of triguna: A critical analysis and synthesis.
Psychological Studies, 52, 103–113.
Muthayya, B. C. (1961). The Madras Picture Frustration Test (MPF) and its development. Manas,
2, 29–35.
Muthayya, B. C. (1962). An experimental validation of the Madras Picture Frustration study.
Psychological Studies, 7, 10–15.
Nair, B. P., & Dharmangadan, B. (2007). Psychological concomitants of mathematical creativity
among young adults. Psychological Studies, 52, 210–215.
Nandy, A. (1974). The non-paradigmatic crisis in Indian psychology: Reflection on a recipient
culture of science. Indian Journal of Psychology, 49, 1–20.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (1991). Indian mental measurement
handbook: Intelligence and aptitude tests. Author.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (1998). Handbook of personality instrument
in India. Author.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2001). Handbook of value, attitude and
interest measurement in India. Author.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2019). Try and measure aptitude and
natural ability (TAMANNA). Author.
Pal, G. (1942). Measurement in psychology. Indian Journal of Psychology, XVII, 1–28.
Panda, M. (2011). Cultural construction of creativity: Dualism and beyond. In R. M. M. Cornelissen,
G. Misra, & S. Varma (Eds.), Foundations of Indian psychology: Volume 1 (pp. 468–482). Pearson
Education India.
Panda, M., & Yadava, R. (2005). Implicit creativity theories in India. An exploration. Psychological
Studies, 50, 32–39.
Pande, N., & Naidu, R. K. (1992). Anasakti and health: A study of non-attachment. Psychology
and Developing Societies, 4, 89–104.
Pandey, R. E. (1969). Psychology in India. American Psychologist, 24, 936–939.
Paranjpe, A. C. (2004). Building tall on solid foundations: Directions for indigenous personality
research in India. Psychological Studies, 49, 6–13.
Pareek, U. (1997). Training instruments for human resource development. Tata McGraw Hill.
Pareek, U., & Rao, T. V. (1974). First handbook of psychological and social instruments. Popular
Prakashan.
Pathak, N. S., Bhatt, I. D., & Sharma, R. (1992). Manual for classifying personality on tridimensions
of gunas—An Indian approach. Indian Journal of Behaviour, 16, 1–14.
Pestonjee, D. M. (1988). Handbook of psychological and social instruments (2nd ed.). Concept.
Prakash, R. (1952). Difficulties in adapting and translating mental tests in other cultures. Indian
Journal of Educational Research, 3, 299–307.
Puhan, B. N. (1982). Issues in psychological measurement. National Psychological Corporation.
278 J. K. Singh and I. Misra
Puhan, B. N. (1995). Projective-inventory: An indigenous approach to personality assessment.
Psychology and Developing Societies, 7, 115–131.
Rice, C. H. (1929). A Hindustani-Binet performance scale. Princeton University Press, Humphrey
Milford.
Salagame, K. K. K., Raj, A., Murthy, K. P., Partimala, N., Rekha, K., & Gaur, S. (2005). Concept of
ahamkara: Theoretical and empirical analysis. In K. R. Rao (Ed.), Towards a spiritual psychology:
Essays in Indian psychology. Samvada Publishers.
Salagame, K. K. K. (2011). Ego and ahamkara: Self and identity in modern psychology and Indian
thought. In R. M. M. Cornelissen, G. Misra, & Varma, S. (Eds.), Foundation of Indian psychology
(pp. 133–145). Pearson.
Sastry, N. S. N. (1932). Growth of psychology in India. Indian Journal of Psychology, 7(1), 1–40.
Shilpa, S., & Murthy, C. G. V. (2012). Development and standardization of Mysore triguna scale.
Sage Open Journal, 1–10.
Sibia, A., Misra, G., & Srivastava, A. K. (2005). Assessing emotional intelligence in Indian context.
Psychological Studies, 50, 263–271.
Singh, J. K., & De Raad, B. (2017). The personality trait structure in Hindi replicated. International
Journal of Personality, 3, 26–35.
Singh, J. K., & Misra, G. (2000). Understanding contentment in everyday life. Indian Psychological
Review, 54 & 55, 113–124.
Singh, J. K., & Misra, G. (2013). A psycholexical study of personality trait structure of Hindi
speaking Indians. In Y. Kashima, E. Kashima, & R. Beatson (Eds.), Steering the cultural
dynamics: Selected papers from the 2010 Congress of the International Association for Cross-
Cultural Psychology (pp. 154–159).International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology.
Accessed via www.iaccp.org
Singh, J. K., Misra, G., & De Raad, B. (2013). Personality structure in the trait lexicon of Hindi, a
major language spoken in India. European Journal of Personality, 27, 605–620.
Singh, J. K., & Tung, N. S. (2019). Personality studies in India. In G. Misra (Ed.), Psychology
(Vol.2). Individual and the social: Processes and issues (pp 1–52) ICSSR Research Survey and
Exploration. Oxford University Press.
Singh, U. (2006). Novelty and meaning context of creativity as related to Gf and Ge. Psychological
Studies, 51, 52–63.
Singh, U. (2007). Cattelian T-data primary personality factors in an Indian sample. Psychological
Studies, 52, 163–170.
Sinha, D. (1961). Development of two anxiety scales. Manas, 8, 1–10.
Sinha, D. (1965). An analysis of anxiety areas and manifestation: A factorial study. Journal of
Psychological Researches, 9, 55–63.
Sinha, A. K. P. (1972). Military psychology: A trend report. In ICSSR (Ed.), A survey of research
in psychology (pp. 218–265). Popular Prakashan.
Sinha, D. (1983). Human assessment in Indian context. In S. H. Iwine & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Human
assessment and cultural factors (pp. 17–34). Plenum Press.
Sinha, D. (1986). Psychology in a third world country: The Indian experience. Sage.
Srivastava, A. K., & Misra, G. (2001). Lay people’s understanding and use of intelligence.
Psychology and Developing Societies, 13, 25–49.
Srivastava, A. K., Tripathi, A. M., & Misra, G. (1996). The status of intelligence testing in India.
Indian Educational Review, 31, 1–11.
Suar, D., & Puhan, B. N. (2010). Quantitative methods in psychology. In G. Misra (Ed.), Psychology
in India: Theoretical and methodological developments (pp. 273–338). Pearson.
Uma, K., Lakshmi, Y. S., & Parameswaran, E. G. (1971). Construction of a personality inventory
based on doctrine of three gunas. Research Bulletin, 6, 49–58.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (2001). Personality in cultural context: Methodological issues.
Journal of Personality, 69, 1007–1031.
Venkatesan, S. (2010). Indian scales and inventories. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 52, 378–385.
14 Assessment of Individual Differences in India: Historical 279
Wolf, D. B. (1998). The vedic personality inventory: A study of three gunas. Journal of Indian
Psychology, 16, 26–43.
Wolf, D. B. (1999). A psychometric analysis of the three gunas. Psychological Reports, 84, 1379–
1390.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
The present study has tried to delineate the notion of 'santosh' (contentment) in the everyday discourse taking gender variations and developmental stages into consideration. The study was conducted on subgroups of young adults, older people and saints (N = 100). The data were obtained through an open ended measure pertaining to different experiences related to contentment. The findings indicated that the dynamics of contentment had somewhat different connotation for common people particularly young adults in comparison to the group of saints. Saints emerged as an exclusive category of people who shared a rational worldview while viewing contentment in different facets of life. Younger as well as older adults construed the understanding of contentment in their collective life style dominated largely by emotional bonding. It was also observed that materialistic desires still prevail while pursuing the goals of pleasure, enjoyment, happiness and contentment. It seems that in the years to come the centrality of contentment will play a leading role in safeguarding human existence and social equilibrium.
Article
Full-text available
We replicated an earlier psycho-lexical study of personality traits in Hindi. The previous study gave results that deviated from the mainstream of lexical studies. This time an extended list of 357 trait descriptors was administered to 1,250 participants. Half of them provided self-ratings and the other half provided peer-ratings on these same participants. Principal Components Analyses were performed on the combined self- and peer-ratings, both with raw data and with ipsatized data. The resulting trait-structure was strongly evaluative in character, with the ancient personality system, the so-called triguna, seemingly largely determining its content. That structure, built on the three concepts rajasic, representing ambition and friendliness, tamasic, representing egoism and concealment, and sattvic, representing competence and harmony, was identified using triguna marker scales. It is unclear, however, whether it is the triguna that defines the structure, or whether it is mainly information of moral and evaluative character. Although the factors explained the variance in Big Five markers pretty well, the Big Five did not emerge as distinct factors.
Article
Full-text available
The norms for the Hindi version of FCB-TI adapted for India were developed (n-400). Percentile norms were developed for an adult population. Though there is a possibility of some variation in normative data across cultures, the distributions of FCB-TI scale scores in the Hindi version were comparable with those of polish and Italian versions.
Conference Paper
This study adopted a psycholexical approach to uncover the personality trait structure of Hindi speaking Indians. The endorsement for personality descriptive adjectives was obtained from young adults (n=240) using a Likert-type 5-point rating scale. The principal component analysis using varimax rotation revealed a six-factor structure comprised of (I) rajasic (passion and mobility), (II) sattvic (goodness and harmony), (III) tamasic (dullness and inertia), (IV) competence, (V) neuroticism, and (VI) extraversion. The six-factor structure of personality in Hindi language has broader psycholexical space than what is proposed in the “Big Five” personality theory.
Article
This chapter discusses the need for culturally relevant tools for testing and assessment in non-Western countries, where it has been a common practice to adopt and translate psychological tests originally developed in Western countries. This etic approach assumes that Western theories and tools are universally applicable. Apart from the challenges of establishing equivalence between the original Western tests and the translated tests, the etic approach has been queried on the lack of relevance of some universal constructs that may be imposed on the local population. The indigenization movement in psychology arose in response to the imposed etic approach. Several indigenization responses in cognitive and personality assessment are presented to illustrate the introduction of emic constructs and measures. Using the combined emic-etic approach, two large-scale indigenous personality measures have been developed in China and South Africa: the Cross-cultural (Chinese) Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI) and the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI).
Chapter
The challenge of understanding the nature of self and others has long occupied the attention of psychologists as well as lay people. Both deploy “personality” as an integrated whole of attributes to explain the causes of behaviors. Indigenous personality concerns itself with the behavior and the related body of knowledge that derives its theories from the people of a particular culture. Hippocrates described personality typologies based on the four fluids: blood, yellow bile, phlegm, and black bile. Similarly, ayurvedic medicine proposed three metabolic types: vata (wind), pitta (bile), and kaph (phlegm). Cultures have evolved many ways to appraise personality in their efforts to make sense of life (e.g., analyzing blood type, reading horoscopes, and techniques of fortune telling). Psychological scholars have considered personality critical to the understanding of holism, motivation, and individual differences in behavior.
Chapter
One of the most pervasive activities of psychologists has been the use of different kinds of measures in appraising intellectual and personality characteristics of the individual as well as of his attitudes and opinions. Various kinds of psychometric and projective measures have been devised and are in widespread use not only among research psychologists but also by those who are concerned with different practical problems that require the assessment of psychological qualities of the individual. Demand for such professional appraisal has led to the development of an infinite variety of psychological tests for measuring intellectual, cognitive, motivational and personality qualities of the individual, and ascertaining with the help of attitude scales and schedules, his opinions and dispositions towards an infinite array of issues. These measures have become the chief source of psychological data both for research and practical purposes.