Individual Difference in Personality - Case Study Report

This case study report explores the characteristics of an individual in terms of personality traits, academic self-regulated learning, tertiary engagement, implicit theories of intelligence, perfectionism, achievement striking, academic expectations, and academic achievement goals.

Running Head: INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE IN PERSONALITY
Topic- Individual difference in personality- case study report
Student name
University name
Author notes

2INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
CASE STUDY REPORT EXPLORING THE CHARACTERISTICS OF AN INDIVIDUAL
Psychology case report
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
Confidential report prepared for
Name: Jenny Nicks
Address: Queensland, Australia
Gender: Female
Date of Birth: 5 January 1998
Case report prepared by: Tim Tom, 2nd Year Psychology student (PSYC 213)
Address: ABC School of Psychology
Queensland, Australia.
Date of Interview: 25th March 2019
Declaration: a completed transcript of the interview proceedings is provided in the appendix
section.
Date of report: 28th March 2019
Details of the report
Client:
The report was prepared for Jenny Nicks a resident of Queensland who has completed her
primary academics and has recently joined university.
The report is basically a reflection of the personality test and interview on the same conducted
to provide the client a clear outlook of her stand in future professional world. The major
personality factor considerations for the report are as follows.
IPIP measure of the Big Five Personality traits
Big five personality traits acronym-ed as OCEAN (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion,
agreeableness and neuroticism or emotional stability) are used for evaluating the perception,

3INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
cognition and action of people’s behavior (Baltes, Reese & Nesselroade, 2014). Each factor
score is based on 1-5 range on the Likert scale. The degree of reliability of the factors were
good in most cases and were also very good in some. In regard to validity the client was asked
to answer 25 questions (5 from each traits) and the results of Big five were evaluated and
compared with the Five Factor Model. And it is found that the degree of extraversion is high
for Jenny and is same in both cases and thus unique factor co-relation is supported.
Academic self-regulated learning and self-efficacy
This assessment scale is used for measuring the key academic performances and behaviors of
the client (Berliner & Calfee, 2013). Scores ranged between 1 to 7 where response is collected
by averaging each sub-scale items. The results demonstrated good internal consistency levels
and reliability is quite higher. The range of alpha in the client is .82 and .79 which is close to
original standard of alpha deviation that is .85 to .70. The validity of result is supported by
demonstrating strong positive co-relation between self-efficacy and academic performance.
Tertiary engagement scales
This assessment is specially designed for tertiary students who have crossed school education
and is in universities. Here students can self-access their involvement in university life in
terms of learning, teaching activities, peer-support and other social activities (Bonanno &
Burton, 2013). Scores range from 1 to 5 and responses are simply averaged. Reliability factor
of internal consistency for the client is adequate and she the ranges of alpha for her academic
engagement, peer engagement, intellectual engagement and beyond class social engagement
are .68, .71, .80 and .73 respectively. The validity of results is clearly shown by the close
relation of intellectual engagement and academic performance.
Implicit theories of intelligence
This assessment is based on perception assessment of fixed and flexible intelligence (Dörnyei,
2014). Entity belief and incremental belief are used for assessment where responses are
averaged and scores range from 1 to 6. The results show that the internal consistency of the

4INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
client is good for both entity and incremental belief and has alpha value lesser that .85 which
supports consistency of goodness. The learners’ outcomes are significantly influenced by the
implicit theories and here the client adopts mastery strategies and upward social comparison to
perform better in future.
Perfectionism
Here multidimensional perfectionism is measured by the help of a six-factor scale and the 5
Likert scale that is a total of 35 items need to be accessed. The orthogonal factor support
contributes to setting of excessively high-performance standard which are more often
unrealistic and the level of being critically judgmental also increases and third-party concern
rises strikingly (Gollwitzer, Christ & Lemmer, 2014). Average of each factor score is
considered for response evaluation. Validity of results is supported by the internal consistency
which is quite impressive and alpha ranged in between .79 to .91. there is a well-constructed
pattern in between perfectionism and other variable factors like depression, procrastination and
psychopathological symptoms.
Achievement striking
Here two factors of personal and comparative achievement are considered for assessment.
Personal achievement includes independent action goals and comparative achievement
includes goals in reference to other’s performances (Magnusson, 2015). 1-5 Likert scale is
used for response evaluation where average method is used. The scale is good in reliability and
provides a good knowledge of the Psychology students in general which is same as the case of
the client considered here. The internal-external frame of refence validates the results.
Academic expectations
It is somewhat similar to the previously mentioned academic self-efficacy assessment but here
student’s expectation in current academics is emphasized and is evaluated by the help of a 7
item self-report proforma (Nesselroade & Cattell, 2013). The scale demonstrated excellent
reliability on the part of the client’s current academic goals and validates overall empirical

5INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
study support on undergraduate students in Australia.
Academic achievement goals
Here a 2X2 framework is used to support theoretical interaction and mastery goal performance
and motivation of the approach vs avoidance tendencies is also evaluated. Better student
orientation in studies is supported and genuine feedback response is expected from participants
(Thorndike, 2013). The score ranges from 1 to 7 and the four scales have demonstrated
excellent reliability to support the personality of the client. The validity of the results is
supported by mastery approach and performance avoidance by the client where she uses
mastery approaches to make performances easier. Thus, correlation among the four factors of
mastery approach, mastery avoidance, performance approach and performance avoidance
support academic achievement to a great extent.
Purpose of the report
The major purpose of the case report is to provide the client the details of her personality
measures so that she could use her strengths to overcome her weak areas. Various norms are
considered on her part and evaluated to make her understand the importance of individual
differences and results are qualitatively evaluated based on the client scores.
Limitations of the report
The report has a major limitation as it interprets only the scores and it does not explore the
possible implications of the required scores. As a result, the accuracy of results was somewhat
influenced.
References

6INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
Baltes, P. B., Reese, H. W., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2014). Life-span developmental psychology:
Introduction to research methods. Psychology Press.
Berliner, D. C., & Calfee, R. C. (2013). Handbook of educational psychology. Routledge.
Bonanno, G. A., & Burton, C. L. (2013). Regulatory flexibility: An individual differences
perspective on coping and emotion regulation. Perspectives on Psychological
Science, 8(6), 591-612.
Dörnyei, Z. (2014). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second
language acquisition. Routledge.
Gollwitzer, M., Christ, O., & Lemmer, G. (2014). Individual differences make a difference: On
the use and the psychometric properties of difference scores in social
psychology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(7), 673-682.
Magnusson, D. (2015). Individual Development from an Interactional Perspective (Psychology
Revivals): A Longitudinal Study. Psychology Press.
Nesselroade, J. R., & Cattell, R. B. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of multivariate experimental
psychology. Springer Science & Business Media.
Thorndike, E. L. (2013). Education Psychology: briefer course. Routledge.

7INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
Appendix
Interview schedule
Hi, I am Tim Tom and I will be conducting your interview today. If I ask any question you are
not comfortable answering, please let me know. This interview is intended to support the
assessment and provide further insight into your academic motivation and goals.
1. What are you currently studying?
I am studying Psychology as a part of my graduation curriculum.
2. When did you begin your studies?
I started last year only.
3. Is this your first degree?
Yes, it is.
(prompt for clarification as needed)
4. What are your long-term academic goals?
I would like to complete my graduation with high distinction and then opt for honors course
and then wish to complete PhD in psychology.
5. What are your academic goals for this unit?
To pass every subject with higher marks.
6. What do you do to achieve your academic goals in this unit?
I will focus on every possible area of study like lecture notes, tutorials, join in group studies
and will individually complete all assigned readings.
7. How motivated are you to achieve your academic goals?
5- very motivated
How likely are you to achieve your academic goal in this unit?
4-likely
8. What if anything, do you think stands in the way achieving you goal in this unit?
I will try to overcome them as per my convenience and will self-motivate myself in doing
better.
9. What can you do to prevent or overcome obstacles that could stand in the way of
achieving your goals in this unit?
I will analyze the root cause of obstacle and try to overcome it holistically both by intrinsic

8INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE-CASE REPORT
and extrinsic motivational help.
10. Are there any other issue or factors that affect your studies that you think is important
to acknowledge at this time?
Not any such.