Rosenzweig PF

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Rosenzweig ( Rosenzweig Picture Frustration or PFT ) is a projective psychometric test that measures frustration tolerance , i.e. H. can grasp the resilience of a personality in social conflict situations. It was developed in 1948 by Saul Rosenzweig and adapted to the German-speaking area by Hans Hörmann and Wolfgang Moog.

The test currently exists in two versions, an adult version, which is used on test persons aged 14 and over, and a children's version , which can be carried out by the evaluator together with children aged 6 and over.

Application of the rose branch

The aim of the Rosenzweig is to recognize the behavior of a test person in stressful situations in everyday life. It determines how a person reacts in frustrating situations.

Broad application base, to supplement individual treatment, for psychiatric and somatic diseases, also for group therapies. Psychological symptoms relevant to hypertension are also recorded with it. School, educational and career counseling, marriage counseling as well as military and traffic psychological examinations as well as exploratory preliminary examinations which serve to put together groups of test subjects. An application in the MPU is less common today.

Structure of the test

This test consists of 24 cartoon-like situations in which two characters can usually be seen. The drawings are deliberately kept abstract and hardly show any expressive behavior. Both characters have a large speech bubble , with one character's bubble filled with a phrase that may seem frustrating to the other. The other figure's bladder is empty and must be filled in by the respondent with an answer or a phrase.

The test person is instructed to look at the pictures and to fill in the answers that come to mind first. He shouldn't think twice, but rather make a kind of comic. To do this, the test person identifies himself with the figure who has to answer. The situations range from everyday occurrences that can happen all the time and are frustrating to unusual, norm-breaking situations.

Examples:

  • The figure comes to the librarian in the library with 5 books under his arm, whereupon he says: "Everyone is only allowed to borrow three books."
  • The figure is standing with a taxi driver in front of the train station, whereupon he says: "If I had only driven a little faster, you would not have missed your important train."
  • The character meets another character who says: "Because you don't have time, your wife has promised me to go dancing with me tonight."

The images are designed in such a way that they are immediately understandable. The figures are missing the faces, the test subject is not given any information on how the frustrated figure should behave in the test. This enables the test person to put himself in the situation and react as he sees fit.

evaluation

Evaluating the Rosenzweig is not easy and requires experience. The verbal answers of the test persons are classified into categories (forms of reaction) based on an evaluation instruction in which explanations can be found for each figure, including:

  • aggressive reactions
  • Self-blame
  • resigned behavior
  • Evasion tendencies
  • Initiative

The test has a well-developed theoretical background and the results are presented in a profile. This test is particularly appealing for the evaluator because the respondents' answers often lead to bizarre or humorous comics that can be measured in terms of frustration . Personality types can also be assigned.

Advantages and disadvantages

One advantage is that the subject does not need to demonstrate introspective skills in order to be assessed. Many other aggression and conflict questionnaires do not have this advantage. One disadvantage is the complex, non-automatable evaluation. The respondents' answers are always verbal and open. One of the few projective methods that has a normalization (quartile and median values ​​n = 300).

Quality criteria

  • Residual reliability (split-half): regularly between r = .50 and .90
  • Validity: to date there are around 600 publications discussing the value of the scales