SUMMARY.
The HBDI, although
reportedly receiving a uniformly positive response from participants of Herrmann's management training workshops, cannot make claims for meeting test standards that would recommend it
to the public domain. Appropriate
reliability and validity studies are not available. The instrument's format itself would appear to present problems for
establishing the former, whereas the variety of claimed purposes and constructs
would present difficulties for demonstrating the latter. Despite
decades of research, there is only minimal credible evidence that the HBDI
results in scores that are temporally stable and that the scores relate to
meaningful nontest behavior. Otherinstruments, with established psychometric properties,
are better suited for the individual applications that the HBDI claims. For instance, the Myers-Briggs Type
indicator is a better instrument for assessing more general personality
type or style. For
career or occupational decision-making, the Hogan Personality Inventory (Hogan
& Hogan, 1995) or the System of Interactive Guidance Information
(SIGI-Plus; Katz, 1993), updated for adults, are better suited. Cognitive style is perhaps best
assessed by the more established perceptual tasks such as the Embedded Figures
Tests (Witkin, Oltman, Raskin & Karp, 1971) or by exploring more complex
processes, such as Sternberg's thinking styles (1994).
[...]
References:
Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and employment
decisions. American
Psychologist, 51(5), 469-477.
Katz, M. R. (1993). Computer-assisted career decision
making: The
guide in the machine. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Thinking styles: Theory and assessment at the interface between
personality and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg & P. Ruzgis (Eds.), Intelligence and Personality. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E.,
& Karp, S. A. (1971). A manual for the Embedded Figures Tests. Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.