Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.



No description

Anthony Thomason

on 9 April 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of RISB

Template by Missing Link
Images from Shutterstock.com Administration of the RISB The administration of the RISB is quite straightforward for the administrator. After gaining informed consent and explaining confidentiality to the client then administrator usually repeats the instructions that are printed on the assessment form. The instructions on the form read as follows: “Complete these sentences to express your real feelings. Try to do every one. Be sure to make a complete sentence.” The administrator may tell the respondents that more items are on the back of the paper and that there are no right or wrong answers. The administrator should encourage the responder to complete all of the items and they can skip ones and come back to them. The manual also mentions that the assessment can be given in groups or just with individuals. Scoring of the RISB When scoring the responses on the RISB, there is a scoring manual for women and a scoring manual for men.
Diving into the: Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank Assessment [RISB] "The Rotter Incomplete Sentence test is a projective test where you are given a series of incomplete sentences that you are to complete, or finish (The rotter incomplete)."

The rationale behind the RISB is nicely illustrated in the manual as such: “The sentence-completion method of assessing personality adjustment is a semi-structured projective technique that requires the respondent to finish a sentence for which the first word or words are provided. As with other projective techniques, it is assumed that the responses reflect the individual’s wishes, desires, fears, attitudes and so forth in the sentences he or she produces (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).”

What is the RISB? Development of the RISB, Purpose & Additional Information "The original version of the test was developed in 1950 by Rotter and Rafferty. The main objective of the test was to create a version of the sentence completion method that could be administered and scored easily to permit a widespread use. They also wanted to provide specific diagnostic criteria so the results of the exam could be obtained more quickly. However, the test was not intended to give a full view of personality, but more of a starting point for clinicians to take direction from (History of Projective)."

The RISB-2, which will be addressed in this presentation simply as the “RISB”, is the second edition and revision of the original 1950s version. However, only two changes were made in the revision of the RISB (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).

There are currently three different forms of the RISB; each version of the assessment has a different target population. The first being High School, the second, College and the third being the Adult form.

The RISB includes a list of forty of these incomplete sentence, or stems, for the client to elaborate on. The 40 completed sentences of the client are evaluated with objective scoring examples in order to obtain an overall adjustment score. Additionally, the purpose is not just to measure adjustment by a lack of psychopathological symptoms but in defining adjustment as “the relative freedom from prolonged unhappy/dysphonic states of the individual, the ability to cope with frustration, the ability to initiate and maintain constructive activity and the ability to establish and maintain satisfying interpersonal relationships (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).” The assessment can be given orally but the administrator is advised to do so with caution. The manual explains that “such variations affect the testing situation and might affect individual’s responses and the scores obtained on those responders (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).” The administration of the assessment only takes around 10 minutes on average to complete. However, the interpretation of the assessment can take longer than 20 minutes to do. The scoring manuals go through each individual sentence stem and provide example responses for each stem. When using the objective scoring system, the manual makes it very clear that “scoring manuals are to serve as guides to be followed as closely as possible (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).”

When scoring the responses, the scores are put into one of two main categories. The first being conflict and the second being positive. There are 3 different degrees of these categories, mild, moderate and strong. Each completion is ranked from 0 [most positive] to 6 [most conflict].

For example, if a completion is scored as mild conflict it might be indicated as such: 4 C1. The 4 indicates the score the response receives on the conflict-positive scale and C1 indicates that it falls within the mild conflict degree. Here, the number 1 represents mild, 2 moderate and 3 strong.

There are also additional categories for responses that are neutral in content and omitted/incomplete completions are also taken into account in factoring an individual’s score.

Once the administrator goes through the appropriate scoring manual and compares the responses to the example responses, the administrator adds up the total amount of points that are associated with each response. This total amount of points is then compared to the measurement’s cut-off scores. An overall score of 145 is generally seen to be the adjustment cut-off score (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992). Reliability and Validity of the RISB Reliability:
Interscorer Reliability: In the original validity
study of the RISB, scores of 50 males and 50 females were compared between different psychologists with the resulting correlation of .90 and mean scores only differing by 2.3 points on average.
Internal Consistency: In 1954, Rotter showed that the RISB had a high degree of internal consistency by using the odd-even split-half method to test its reliability. The anallyses of the scores on the two half-sets yielded corected split-half coefficients of .84 for the 124 males and .83 for the 71 females (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).” Validity:
The RISB has also been claimed to be “the most valid of all the projective techniques in literature (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).”

For example, in 1949, initial studies conducted by Rotter indicated that the RISB was able to correctly identify 78% of the adjusted respondents and 59% of the maladjusted respondents for women and 89% of adjusted respondents and 52% of maladjusted respondents for men. Personal Reflection Ease of Use
Small Time Requirement
Amount of Information Gathered
Multi-Dimensional Nature
Objective scoring system
Special scoring systems
Openness to various means of interpretation
References The rotter incomplete sentence blank (risb). (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.deltabravo.net/cms/plugins/content/content.php?content.39 History of projective testing. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://projectivetests.umwblogs.org/popular-tests/sentence-completion-test/ Rotter, J. B., Lah, M. I., & Rafferty, J. E. (1992). Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank Manual. San Antonio, Texas: The Psychological Corporation.
Full transcript