The Inwald Personality Inventory
The Inwald personality inventory (IPI) is a personality assessment tool that was originally designed in 1980 by Dr. Robin Inwald. According to Detrick, Ben-Porath & Sellbom (2015), the main intention was the pre-employment assessment of public safety and law enforcement employees. However, it has been extended to include workers of high-risk jobs. In 2011 it was revised from IPI to IPI-2 to by the institute of personality and testing (IPAT). The main changes to the revision included the inclusion of a diagnostic tool, although most of the original items were reorganized. For instance, the IPI constituted the Guardness scale for measuring social responsibility and twenty-five clinical scales that were contained in 301 true or false questions (Inwald, 2008) . However, the revision reduced the questions to 202, maintained the Guardedness validity scale, and condensed the clinical scale to 16 content scales. The IPI-2 has a seven steps evaluation criteria whose report guides legal judgment on the test takers. Its emphasis on pre-employment and lack of diagnosis capability makes it not contravene God's will on man.
The current version of IPI-2 takes 30 to 45 minutes. It is designed to measure the pattern and behavior of individuals whose job relates to high-risk environments. As such, it guides on their suitability and exhibition of deviant behavior patterns. Persons that have attained a minimum fifth-grade education and age of 16 years can take the test. The test is administered manually by writing, or through an online portal on the IPAT website. Another alternative to getting the assessment is using the on-site pro software.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The IPI-2 assessment requires test-taker to respond to 17 scales that comprises of one validity scale and 16 content scales. The sixteen clinical content scales of the IPI -2 are as follows. First, IPI-2 tests the Rigid-type content scale. It has 19 items that test among things the irritability of the person, ways of handling trouble, and patience. Secondly, is the IPI-2 tests on alcohol. The alcohol content scale has 13 items that seek to establish admission of alcohol use. Then the tool uses the drug content scale. The drug content scale has 13 items that also asses the admission on drug usage. Forth the IPI-2 uses the substance abuse content scale. The substance abuse content scale has 20 items that establish behavioral patterns such as gambling, risk-taking, impulsiveness, and thrill-seeking behaviors. The IPI also identifies the motor vehicle and driving difficulties through the application of the driving violation content scale that has six items. The sixth content scale is job difficulties. It has 22 items and assesses the history of past jobs that may reveal job difficulties and interpersonal issues. The IPI-2 then tests law abidance through the trouble with law and society content scale that has 21 items. An assessment of the antisocial traits of an individual is then established using a 27 item content scale. Antisocial behavior includes being skeptical and possessing behavior that encourages one to think that the world is always unfair.
Other IPI-2 concept scales include hyperactivity, absence abuse, illness concern, and treatment programs. Hyperactivity is a concept scales that consists of 42 items. They determine the individuals’ energy level, level of being outspoken, patience, and level of impulsiveness. Absence abuse, on the other hand, is a 19 item concept scale that seeks to evaluate the person's history of absenteeism or lateness to duty. The illness concern then establishes the individual’s vulnerability to diseases. The illness concern concept scale has 14 items. After treatment, the individual is subjected to an evaluation of whether they have ever received counseling by subjecting them to a three-item treatment program concept scale. A set of 15 items then follows. The sets of 15 items constitute the anxiety concept scale that establishes the person's limit to stress and anxiety levels. Other concept scales of the IPI-2 scales are type, phobic personality, lack of assertiveness, obsessive personality, and depression. The final set of content scales are the loner type, interpersonal difficulties, family conflict, sexual concern, spouse concern, and undue suspicious.
The main intention of developing the Invalid personality test was to evaluate employees in law enforcement and public safety. However, as a forensic psychological tool, it qualifies to provide an insight into the person's past present and possible future. Just like most forensic psychological tools, the tested individual has little consent on taking the test because the recruiting agency requests it. As such, it is prone to the persons being evaluated, trying to influence the outcome of the examination. Furthermore, test-takers privacy is not guaranteed. However, according to "The Civil Rights Act of 1991" (2020) , the evaluation using IPI-2 is bound by the bound by the civil rights Act of 1991. Hence, it is illegal to adjust the scores or use the cutoff score based on ethnicity, race, sex, or religion.
The interpretation process consists of seven steps ( McIntire & Miller, 2007) . All the seven steps are relevant for the interpretation of results that can be useful in any legal setting that seeks the services or witness of a forensic psychologist ("The Inwald Personality Inventory," 2011) . The first step involves a review of the validity measurement. Validity measurement on the IPI-2 assessment relies on the Guardedness social desirability scale. The scale provides an insight into how the candidate approached the testing process by highlights the level of honesty. The second step is a review of the norms profile graph for public safety and security officers. An evaluation of the norms profile graph seeks to establish elevated and significantly elevated scores of the raw and the t-scores. For instance, a t-score of 59, is considered elevated and requires further insight. On the other hand, a t-score of 69 is considered highly elevated and points to a potential problem. As such, the graph gives a quick impression of the area that the assessed individual could be potentially having problems by the possession of high t-scores above 59. The third step involves the review of the description on the scale. The description provides a narrative on the objective of every item and how to interpret high t-score. As such, the forensic psychologist is presented with a mechanism of putting the test-takers t-score to the relevant behavioral traits.
The fourth step is the organization and conceptualization. It involves organizing the report into the four most common categories that include social interaction, abnormal behavior, dependability, and legal concerns. Although it was not the initial construct of the IPI-2 tool, the four categories provide an untestable framework for people who are non-psychologists. The social interactions are based on scores of four IPI-2 scales; they include rigidity, social difficulties passivity, and irritability. Abnormal behavior, on the other hand, is constructed using results from seven content scales. They are elevated mood, health concern, abnormal thoughts, anxiety, depressed mood, substance use, and volatility. A high score on the seven scales is an indicator of possible mental instability. A such, the individual should be recommended for a further mental evaluation using approved tools for diagnosis. The dependability of the person being assesses is then constructed using results from three content scales. The three content scales are risk-taking tendencies, unreliability, and non-conformity. A high score in the three scales points to a possible difficulty in working within set rules. Finally, the legal concerns are constructed from the results of the criminal accusation and admitted illegal behavior. The section provided an insight over the individual’s wellness to abide by the law and explore historical interaction with the law.
The fifth step is a review of the critical items for follow up evaluation. The endorsement of 11 items or more presents a high risk of the persons possessing behavioral and mental difficulties. Thus the result can provide evidence for termination. Nonetheless, the results of the critical items should initiate an exploration of the endorsed items. The sixth step of the interpretation of the IPI-2 results is the review of the estimated psychologist and Field-training-officer prediction score. The psychologist prediction score is aggregated with the training officer’s prediction on control of a conflict, report writing, public relations, and overall field training. The overall results provided an insight into the security officer's future performance. Finally, the interpretation of the IPI-2 results requires the interpretation of the item printout. The printout consists of a summary of the responses provided in the assessment of the various items ("The Inwald Personality Inventory," 2011) . As such, it provides visualization of omitted responses, elevated t-score, and endorsements.
The IPI-2 assessment tools can be useful in making two main legal decisions. First, it can guide the identification of law enforcement or public safety officer that require further evaluation of various items. Further evaluation and subjection to other psychological assessment tools such as the mental disorder test to facilitate a possible diagnosis on areas that have high t-scores of more than 69 (Lowe, 2005) . The main focus of the recommendation base on the four categories than include social interaction, legal concerns, dependability, and abnormal behavior. Secondly, the results can also be used to process an individual’s dismissal. The processing, however, involves the incorporation of other evaluation results from different evaluation techniques since the IPI-2 alone cannot be used soles to dismiss job applicants.
From a personal perspective, the performance of the Inwald Personality Inventory -2 does not go against my faith. I believe in the existence of GOD. The human being, the creation of God, exhibit different personalities. The structure of the IPI-2 enables the identification of behavioral patterns that the individual needs help. As such, the IPI-2 does not recommend a specific remedy for the high scoring content scales ( McIntire & Miller, 2007) . The openness and binding by law enhance my confidence in its ability to deliver in forensic psychological assessment.
In conclusion, IPI-2 is a forensic assessment tool that was developed for the assessment of law-enforcement officers and people working in high-risk areas. It seeks to establish its personality and behavioral patterns prior to employment. The tool uses 17 scales that consist of the Guardedness validity scale and 16 content scales. The test is administered to individuals that have attained at least 16 years of age and have an educational background of at least 5 th grade. Test-takers are required to respond to 202 true or false questions. The answers are then structured and analyze using seven steps. They provide four assessment groups that include; social interaction, abnormal behavior, dependability, and legal concerns. A report generated using the assessment report can help in a legal decision by recommending a further analysis of high scoring content scales. Furthermore, it can be combined with other assessment criteria to facilitate a dismissal. The IPI-2 by itself is, however, in line with my faith because it tries to explain God's diversity.
References
Detrick, P., Ben-Porath, Y., & Sellbom, M. (2015). Associations between MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) and Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI) Scale Scores in a Law Enforcement Pre-employment Screening Sample. Journal Of Police And Criminal Psychology , 31 (2), 81-95. DOI: 10.1007/s11896-015-9172-7
Inwald, R. (2008). The Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI) and Hilson Research inventories: Development and rationale. Aggression And Violent Behavior , 13 (4), 298-327. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2008.04.006
Lowe, B. (2005). The sentence completion test for depression can distinguish between people with and without a major depressive disorder. Evidence-Based Mental Health , 8 (4), 99-99. DOI: 10.1136/ebmh.8.4.99
McIntire, S. A., & Miller, L. A. (2007). Foundations of psychological testing: Practical approach. London: Sage Pub.
The Civil Rights Act of 1991. (2020). Retrieved 1 February 2020, from https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/history/35th/1990s/civilrights.html
The Inwald Personality Inventory. (2011). Retrieved 1 February 2020, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5c27/465dfb896005e18a9ed21a48db2e4e7031ad.pdf
