1

16 PF Personality Test

Chandana S -2337411 (2MPCLA)

Department of Psychology, CHRIST (Deemed-to-be University)

Psychodiagnostic Lab - I (MPS251)

Dr. Deepakkumar S

January 09, 2024

 2
16 PF Questionnaire

The term “personality” is the individual differences in how people think, feel and behave.

According to Allport “personality is the dynamic organisation within the individual of those

psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environment”. Hippocrates, an

ancient Greek physician, is credited with establishing the study of personality. He postulated that

human behaviours and personality traits are derived from four distinct temperaments, each of which

is linked to one of the body's four “humours."

Phrenology involved measuring bumps on the human skull, which were subsequently

associated with various personality traits; this arose in the late 18th century and became prominent

in the 19th century. Later, psychologists tried to figure out the many different personality qualities.

Gordon Allport, for example, argued that there were more than 4,000. Psychologist Raymond

Cattell utilised a statistical approach known as factor analysis to reduce this list to 16 different

personality variables, while Hans Eysenck reduced it to only three. According to Cattell, there is a

spectrum of personality traits. In other words, everyone has some of these 16 traits, although they

may be stronger in some than others.

The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire comprehensively assesses personality in the

normal range. Although it was not designed to detect psychopathology, it has been widely utilised in

clinical settings because of its capacity to provide a comprehensive picture of the whole individual,

including both personal strengths and weaknesses. The 16PF was first published in 1949 and had 12

factors. The additional study resulted in the 16PF Form A in 1956, the enhanced 16PF Form B in

1962, and the 16PF Fifth Edition in 1993. The revisions intended to improve psychometric

qualities, validate the factors, and update item content. There are 105 questions in the questionnaire

that assess 16 primary personality traits and 4 secondary or global personality traits. All personality

scales are bipolar (have clear, meaningful definitions at both ends), and are given in

‘stens’ (standardised-ten scores) ranging from 1 to 10, with a mean of 5.5 and a standard deviation
 3
of 2.0. Because the questionnaire is un-timed and has simple, straightforward instructions,

administration requires minimal supervision in either individual or group settings. Administration

time is about 35–50 minutes for paper-and-pencil format. Warmth, Reasoning, Emotional Stability,

Dominance, Liveliness, Rule-Consciousness, Social Boldness, Sensitivity, Vigilance,

Abstractedness, Privateness, Apprehension, Openness to Change, Self-Reliance, Perfectionism, and

Tension are among the 16 key personality factors assessed by the 16PF. These key characteristics

provide a comprehensive and thorough insight of an individual’s behaviour. Following that, Cattell

and his colleagues conducted factor studies on the primary qualities, which resulted in the formation

of broader ' second-order' or global factors similar to the original Big Five personality traits. These

global variables, which include Extraversion/Introversion, Anxiety, Tough-Mindedness,

Independence, and Openness to Change, provide a higher-level, more theoretical viewpoint on

personality.

For the 16PF primary scales, test–retest reliabilities average 0.80 over a two-week interval

(ranging from 0.69 to 0.87) and 0.70 over a two-month interval (ranging from 0.56 to 0.79). The

five global scales of the 16PF Questionnaire show even higher test–retest reliabilities (they have

more items); they average 0.87 for a two-week interval (ranging from 0.84 to 0.91) and 0.78 for a

two-month interval (ranging from 0.70 to 0.82)(Conn and Rieke, 1994).Internal consistency

estimates for the 16PF primary scales on a diverse sample of 4,660 range from 0.66 to 0.86, with a

mean of 0.75 (Conn and Rieke, 1994).

The 16PF Questionnaire is used in various situations, including industrial, counselling,

clinical, basic research, educational, and medical settings. It is effective for activities like personnel

selection, promotion, coaching, and career counselling. Despite assessing normal-range personality,

it is also useful in clinical contexts because it provides an integrated view of persons, fosters

empathy, promotes self-awareness, and aids in therapeutic techniques and developmental goal

planning.
 4
Demographic Details

Name: CS

Age: 24

D.O.B: 26-04-2000

Gender: Female

Education: [Link]

Referred by: nil

Presenting Concerns: The participant reports being anxious spontaneously in potentially stressful

situations. She will become restless and worried in such scenarios. She also finds it difficult to

initiate and maintain social interaction. The participant would remain silent in situations that require

her opinion to be told, showing her less assertive nature. She is more reserved and introverted,

which contributes to isolation and difficulty in dealing with social situations.

Test Administered: The subject CS was administered the 16 PF Form C

Purpose of Testing: Personality Testing

Behavioural Observations: The subject was excited to do the test. She was attentive through out

while the experimenter briefed about the study and the procedure. The participant was interested in

doing the test and was moving in a fast pace initially. Although towards the end she seemed quiet

tired and exhausted as there were 105 questions to be answered. The participant completed the test

in 35 minutes.
 5
Test Results

Table 1

Results of first-order factors of the test

Factors Raw score Sten score Interpretation Description

Warmth (A) 6 3 Low Reserved, Impersonal,

Distant
Reasoning (B) 4 4 Average Moderately Concrete,
moderate Mental
Capacity

Emotional Stability(C) 5 4 Average Moderately Reactive,

Affected By Feelings

Dominance (E) 6 6 Average Moderately

Dominant, Forceful,
Assertive
Liveliness (F) 4 3 low Serious, Restrained,
Careful
Rule-Consciousness (G) 10 8 High Compliant,
Cooperative,
Pragmatic
Social Boldness (H) 4 4 Average Moderately Shy,
Timid, Threat-
Sensitive

Sensitivity(I) 2 1 Low Tough, Objective,

Unsentimental

Vigilance (L) 4 4 Average Moderately Trusting,

Unsuspecting,
Accepting

Abstractedness (M) 4 4 Average Moderately Practical,

grounded, down-to-
Earth
 6

Privateness (N) 5 6 Average Moderately Private,

Discreet, Non-
Disclosing

Apprehension (O) 12 9 High Apprehensive, Self-

Doubting, Worried

Openness to Change (Q1) 4 4 Average Moderately

Traditional, Attached
To Familiar

Self-Reliance (Q2) 4 6 Average Moderately Self-

Reliant, Solitary,
Individualistic

Perfectionism (Q3) 6 4 Average Moderately Tolerates

Disorder, Unexacting,
Flexible

Tension (Q4) 10 8 High Tense, High Energy,

Driven

Table 2

Results of Second-Order factors of the test

Factors Sten score Interpretation Description

Extraversion 3.6 Low Introverted, Socially Inhibited

Anxiety 7.9 High High anxiety, perturbable

Tough Poise 5.4 Average Moderately Receptive, Open-

Minded, Intuitive

Independence 3.5 Low Accommodating, Agreeable,

Selfless
 7

Test Interpretation

Primary factors

Table 1 shows the STEN scores obtained by the participant on the 16 primary factors

and their [Link] participant had got a Sten score of 6 in motivation distortion which

suggest that the test result is reliable and the responses were not motivated my external factors or

testing situation.

Rule-Consciousness (G)

High-scoring individuals tend to be rule-conscious, dutiful, conscientious, conforming,

moralistic and staid compared to low scorers (Cattell et al., 1970; Drew et al., 2008). The

participant got a Sten score of 8 in Rule-Consciousness (G). This suggests that the participant has a

higher tendency to abide by rules, being conscientious and mindful of societal norms and values.

She might be responsible, organise, and diligent in her approach to tasks.

Apprehension (O)

The participant got a Sten score of 9 in Apprehension (O). Her scoring high on apprehension

suggests that the participant may be prone to experiencing nervousness, stress, or unease in various

situations. She might be more emotionally reactive and sensitive to stressors. The participant might

be anxious about what might happen in the [Link] high-scoring pole indicates a worrying, self-

blaming, insecure and self-doubting nature, whereas the low-scoring pole indicates a self-assured,

unworried, complacent, secure and confident nature (Cattell et al., 1970;

Tension (Q4)

High scorers are tense, energetic, impatient, driven and frustrated, whereas low scorers

appear relaxed, placid, tranquil and patient (Cattell et al., 1970; Drew et al., 2008). The participant
 8
got a Sten score of 8 in Tension (Q4). This indicates that the participant is vulnerable to emotional

stress and strain. This could indicate a disposition towards being more prone to stress-related

reaction.

Warmth (A)

People with low warmth (1 to 3.5) are quiet, calm, sceptical, aloof, and impersonal. A high

warmth score (7.5 to 10) implies a person who is good-natured, easy-going, emotionally expressive,

willing to cooperate, people-oriented, soft-hearted, kind, and adaptable (Zhang L et al., 2013). The

participant got a Sten score of 3 in Warmth (A).A low score in warmth may suggest that the

participant is reserved and less inclined towards expressing affection and empathy. She might be

more task-oriented than relationship-oriented, prioritising logic over emotional connection.

Liveliness (F)

The participant got a Sten score of 3 in Liveliness (F) .Low liveliness suggests that the

individual may not be outgoing or spontaneous in their interactions and prefers a more composed

and measured approach. Low scores are seen as a sign of a tendency to internalize conflicts, and of

high behavior control (Krug, 1981).

Sensitivity (I)

The participant got a Sten score of 1 in Sensitivity (I).The participant might be perceived as

less responsive or empathetic to the feelings of those around them, potentially prioritising

rationality over emotional considerations as she had scored low in sensitivity.

The participant scored average for the factors of Reasoning (B),Emotional Stability (C), Dominance

(E), Social Boldness (H), Vigilance (L), Abstractedness (M) , Privateness (N) , Openness to Change

(Q1) , Self-Reliance (Q2) and Perfectionism (Q3).

The participant has a balanced approach to issue solving, with neither a strong predisposition for

analytical thinking nor a strong preference for intuitive decision-making as indicated by the

moderate score in Reasoning (B). An average score in Emotional Stability (C)indicates level of
 9
emotional resilience and adaptation. The participant may experience a typical range of emotions

with no inclinations towards excessive mood swings or high levels of stress. As the participant has a

moderate Dominance (E) score she might have a balanced attitude to leadership and assertiveness.

The participant might have a modest level of ease in social interactions, neither overly introverted

nor overly outgoing, establishing a balance in their attitude to social situations indicated by an

average score in Social Boldness (H).

Vigilance (L) score implies a balanced amount of attentiveness and caution, participant is neither

extremely suspicious nor overly trusting but maintains a healthy level of alertness.

An average Abstractedness (M) score indicates a balanced thinking style.A moderate Privateness

(N) score indicates the participant appreciate personal space and boundaries are unlikely to be

unduly secretive or overly open about their personal lives.

A moderate amount of adaptability is indicated by an average score in Openness to Change (Q1).A

moderate Self-Reliance (Q2) score indicates that the participant has a healthy amount of

independence. A Perfectionism (Q3) score of medium denotes a moderate approach to setting high

standards and expectations. The participant can strive for greatness without becoming overly

perfectionistic or self-critical.

Second Order Factors

Table 2 shows the STEN scores for the second-order factors along with their descriptions.

Analysis of the second order factors indicate that the participant has a low score in extraversion and

independence, high score in anxiety and average score in tough poise.

Extraversion

The global factor, extraversion, tends to measure personality dimensions across the two

extremes of introversion and extraversion. High scorers usually lack of inhibition in social settings,

as well as strong and long-lasting interpersonal relationships. Individuals with low scores were

typically quiet, independent, and limited in their social activities. The participant has a Sten score of
 10
3.6. This may point to a socially nervous disposition that finds it difficult to build strong

interpersonal bonds and is more likely to enjoy alone activities. According to research, those with

low scores on this factor may exhibit avoidant, schizoid, and schizotypal traits (Schuerger, 2000).

Independence

Independence global factor is organized around traits of assertiveness and influence in the

world (high scorers are dominant, independent-minded and innovative, low scorers are deferential,

cooperative, and agreeable). The participant has a Sten score of 3.5, which suggests a reliance on

others for support or decision-making. The participant might be more dependent on external

guidance or assistance.

Anxiety

This factor gives information regarding emotional adjustment and the types of emotions

experienced and the intensity of these. The participant has a Sten score of 7.9 which indicate that

the participant might experiences elevated levels of worry, fear, or nervousness. This could be

indicative of stress or unease in various [Link] subject has obtained an average score on the

remaining global factors, namely, tough poise.

 11
Impression and Recommendation

A review of the participant’s personality profile reveals a high score on Rule-Consciousness

(G), Apprehension (O) and Tension (Q4) and a low score on Warmth (A), Liveliness (F) and

Sensitivity (I).

Acute physical activity, noncultic meditation, and a quiet rest session are equally effective in

reducing state anxiety (Bahrke & Morgan, 1978). Meditation and exercise it has been found to

alleviate apprehension and mental tension. The participant may choose among these diverse

strategies based on personal preference and circumstances to scheme similar anxiety-reducing

[Link] person scored low on extraversion. Recent research indicates that CBT and MCT are

useful in increasing extraversion (Kennair et al., 2021).

Summary

The 16 PF questionnaire was administered for the purpose of personality testing following

the instructions mentioned in the 16 PF manual. The scoring was done based on the instructions and

the obtained raw scores were converted to Sten scores. The participant was truthful and honest in

the responses which was indicated by a low motivational distortion score. The test interpretation for

the primary factors revealed that the participant high score on Rule-Consciousness (G),

Apprehension (O) and Tension (Q4) and a low score on Warmth (A), Liveliness (F) and Sensitivity

(I) and an average score on all other factors. The test interpretation of the second-order factors

revealed that the participant scored high on anxiety and low on extraversion and independence and

an average score in tough poise. Overall, the personality profile shows a reserved, anxious

individual who prefers discipline and regulations, with low extraversion and [Link] and

MCT were recommended for improving the scores on extraversion. Meditation and acute exercise

has been suggested to improve the anxiety and apprehension.

 12
References

Bahrke, M., & Morgan, W. (1978). Anxiety reduction following exercise and meditation. Cognitive

Therapy and Research, 2, 323-333. [Link]

Cattell, H. E. P. (2001). The Sixteen Personality Factor (16PF) questionnaire. In Springer eBooks

(pp. 187–215). [Link]

Cattell, H. E., & Mead, A. D. (2008). The sixteen personality factor questionnaire (16PF). The

SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment, 2, 135-159.

Kennair, L. E. O., Solem, S., Hagen, R., Havnen, A., Nysæter, T. E., & Hjemdal, O. (2020). Change

in personality traits and facets (Revised NEO Personality Inventory) following metacognitive

therapy or cognitive behaviour therapy for generalized anxiety disorder: Results from a

randomized controlled trial. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 28(4), 872–881. https://

[Link]/10.1002/cpp.2541

Personality assessment. (n.d.). [Link] [Link]

personality#:~:text=Personality%20Assessment%20is%20a%20proficiency,and%20inform%20p

sychological%20interventions%3B%20and

Personality. (n.d.). [Link] [Link]

Schuerger, J. M. (2000). The sixteen personality factor questionnaire (16PF). Testing and

assessment in counseling practice, 73-110.

Zhang, L., Liu, B., Rong, H., Liu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2013). The personality profile of excellent

nurses in China: The 16PF. Contemporary Nurse, 43(2), 219–224. [Link]

conu.2013.43.2.219