The design of a repertory grid involves a general planning phase that is determined by the investigator's objectives. Entry into this phase requires a good knowledge of how the repertory grid is administered and analysed. This is because a series of decisions must be made that will determine the scope or focus of the grid. The repertory grid technique is therefore not completely standardized like other psychological tests but must be adapted to the type of assessment to be carried out and to its general aims.
Basically, a repertory grid consists of (a) a series of elements that are representative of the content area under study, (b) a set of personal constructs that the subject uses to compare and constrast these elements, and (c) a rating system that evaluates the elements based on the bipolar arrangement of each construct. As a result, the parameters that are to be set in the design phase of a grid assessment are the selection of elements and constructs, the rating system to be used and the number of grids to be administered. These decisions will determine the type of information obtained. Therefore, the aims of the assessment must be closely considered.
The elements selected for the grid depend on which aspects of the interviewee's construing are to be evaluated. Elements can be elicited by either asking for role relations (e.g., your mother, employer, best friend) or by focusing on a particular area of interest. A market research study might, for example, use products representative of that market as elements (e.g., cleaning products, models of cars, etc.).
In the clinical field, elements are usually those people who are representative of the subject's world or of a particular problem domain. If, for example, the subject's problem relates to a particular group of people, as in the case of sports psychology consultation, then the elements could be restricted to the members of a team (Feixas, Martm & Villegas, 1989). In most cases, however, most of the central constructs related to the clinical problem often lie in the construing of the self and others. This type of grid is usually known as the Personal Others Grid, the aim of which is to select a representative sample of the most significant people with whom the subject relates. Kelly (1955) suggested a long list of roles for his reptest (a standardized grid form). An adaptation of the test is provided in Table 1.
Generally, a smaller sample of significant other roles that may be related to the problem are selected; self, parents, siblings (if they are numerous, the closest and the most significant are chosen), current partner, former partner (if he/she was significant), two or three friends, a work companion/colleague, a superior (if the problem is work-related), and a persona non grata (someone who the subject knows but does not like).
Also of great interest are the self-elements that represent specific aspects or roles of the subject. Examples are IDEAL-SELF (or "me as I would like to be"), SOCIAL SELF (or "me as seen by others"), SELF BEFORE THE PROBLEM, SELF-AT-THE TERMINATION-OF-THERAPY, SELF-IN-A-YEAR'S-TIME. They can also represent roles such as SELF-AS-PARENT, SELF-AS-HUSBAND, SELF-AS-EMPLOYEE, etc. These type of elements allow for specific types of design depending on the problem presented, for example: SELF-WHEN-PREGNANT, SELF-WHEN-ON-DRUGS, SELF-OUT-OF-CONTROL, SELF-STAMMERING, etc. However, only one or two of the self-type of elements are included (generally ACTUAL-SELF and IDEAL-SELF) in the design of the personal others grid. This is because too many self elements would result in a specific type of design focused on the self-system which would exclude significant others altogether.
The selection of elements for a clinical grid typically involves some knowledge relating to the background and problem of the person to whom the grid is being administered. A relatively extensive interview must have been held prior to administering the grid in order to obtain this information. Creating a genogram (family tree) is also very useful as a means of generating relevant elements.
Other less common elements are the following:
To preserve the validity of a grid's design, the following must be taken into account:
When selecting the constructs to be used, the investigator must decide whether to provide previously selected constructs or to elicit them directly from the subject. The latter is usually the option chosen for individual clinical assessments in which the focus is idiographic; i.e., learning about the person's constructs. If the researcher provides the constructs for the study, then it is likely that his or her interest lies in discovering commonalities within a group of respondents. If this is the case, the authors recommend carrying out a series of pilot studies involving the free elicitation of constructs in order to facilitate the selection of the most representative ones, as was done in the construction of the Threat Index (a personal construct-based measure of death attitudes, see R. Neimeyer, 1993, for a review). A more theoretically-oriented option is the selection of constructs on purely conceptual grounds. In this case, design validity depends exclusively on how operable and valid the theory is upon which the constructs are based.
It is worth considering whether the constructs that have been selected beforehand are relevant to the area under study or whether they are part of the researcher's system of professional constructs. In the latter case, use of the repertory grid technique would be more of a test, in the conventional sense, than a phenomenological tool. In our opinion, it is difficult to assess the personal constructs of one or various persons based solely upon labels chosen by the investigator. Most idiographic clinical studies use elicited constructs, as they are directly related to the subject under study and are probably more representative of his/her personal meanings. This manual has adopted such an approach when referring to the administration of the repertory grid method. However, standardised grids using provided constructs may be more appropriate for nomothetic studies aiming to discover or replicate particular patterns of construing in large groups of respondents (Adams-Webber, 1990).
|
|