The Experimental HIV Vaccine

The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, two of the most puissant media outlets, informed us of the new experimental HIV Vaccine that inflamed the hopes of many.

“An experimental vaccine regimen has shown a modest ability to protect people exposed to the HIV virus, the first time an investigational HIV vaccine has been shown to have this effect. The results from the trial, which involved more than 16,000 adult participants in Thailand, indicated that the vaccine regimen lowered the rate of contracting HIV by 31% compared with those taking a placebo, according to the U.S. National Institute of Health, which helped fund the study” (Gautam Naik, WSJ).

Out of the 8,198 people who received a placebo drug, 74 became infected with HIV.
Out of the other 8,198 people who received the real vaccine, 51 got affected.

The numbers might not be impressive or compelling, but the difference suggests a statistical difference of 31%.
This really is a “piece of good news” and gives hope in the battle against HIV. Yet, why is it that the press does not cite the actual scientific article? I find this deeply flawed. The scientific method relies on methodological and well documented studies in a strictly controlled environment. A scientific article has to be peer reviewed and approved in order to be published. Evidence for none of this was provided in either of the newspapers. This makes me wonder if the study has been peer reviewed and published in a scientific journal. It makes me question the authenticity of the results and the validity and reliability of the whole experiment.

It is worth acknowledging the limitations that researchers face when attempting to experiment with people. When people’s lives are being affected, we cannot really apply the scientific method and conduct a true empirical experiment. There is a moral code that scientists ought to follow. We cannot divide the participants in two groups and infect one of them with HIV in order to test the vaccine. In this sense, it is impossible to have completely manipulated experimental setting. Still, scientists are trying to do the best they can and control the conditions of the experiment as much as possible. This is not the subject of my concerns. My concerns are that such experiments have a lot of limitations and possible alternative explanations that might explain the observed results. An experiment of this sort does not, by any means, imply a cause and effect relationship. My fear is that such data can be simply be interpreted the wrong way. If a pharmaceutical company sees opportunity for profit and starts to sell such vaccine, typing the warnings in small font, hidden in a corner, people might be in danger. A single wrong message from the powerful media empire can convince many that a successful vaccine has been found and scientists have the results to prove it. Yet, no one is quoting the scientific study.

In this particular case, the statistically significant results can be explained by a number of unmentioned reasons. Possibly, the participants, who took the experimental vaccine did not have as many (or any) sexual relationships. Perhaps, the people who had the placebo had unprotected sex with people who were infected, whereas most participants in the other group did not. These are only a few examples of alternative explanations for the results. However, we cannot know for sure if researchers have considered these, because the media is not providing the scientific information. Unsubstantiated by the scientific facts, such reports and statements could be very equivocal or even misleading.

Commercials tell us: “Ask your doctor about … Cymbalta, Ambien, Lunesta… Ask your doctor it it’s right for your”. The easiest thing for your doctor would be to give you the prescription you are looking for. That is probably why we are on the way of becoming an overmedicated nation, if we are not one already.

I encourage each and every one of you to be more skeptical. Ask the right questions and demand an answer. Beware the small font warnings hidden in the bottom. Whenever someone tells you a ‘fact’ and makes a promise, ask him/her to state her source. Know what is in the product that you are consuming, from the prescription drugs you’re taking, to the dinner you’re having.

About 50% of first marriages for men under age 45 may end in divorce, and between 44 and 52% of women’s first marriages may end in divorce for these age groups.

Rose M. Kreider and Jason M. Fields, “Number, Timing, and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 1996″, U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Reports, February 2002, p. 18.

What do these numbers tell us?
My interpretation is that marriage is no longer the rock-solid and unyielding sacrament it was invented to be. Yes – invented. Holy matrimony and monogamy, for that matter, are human creations that made a lot a sense in a brutish and nasty world, where one faced a myriad of enemies and hardships. However, that was a totally different time: in 1900 the average lifespan was 47 years; in 2000 it is 77. In the past, many men lost their wives to childbirth and getting remarried was very common. Fortunately, short life and perilous delivery are no longer the norm. So, are we unreasonable in expecting monogamy to work for all of us, all the way through our long life?

Does monogamy work? Statistics show that Americans, at least, are not very good at it, and the divorce rate wavers around 50% (just compare it with Japan’s 2% divorce rate).

We can ask: “Why are so many people getting divorced?” We can also ask: “Why are people getting married in the first place?” I am not trying to disacknowledge the institution of marriage, but I am afraid many people have unrealistic expectations, or simply get married because it is the norm. Just like so many other things, getting married and having children is what is expected of you, at one point in your life. If one enjoys a ’single life’ for ‘too long’, or relishes polygamy, people start asking, ‘What’s wrong with you? When are you gonna come to your senses and settle down?’ Well, maybe it is worth considering not everyone is the marrying kind. Marriage and monogamy certainly work for many, but not all people. The sooner we realize this, the better. In our western society, getting married is still a very sensible practice (tax benefits for marriage, joined savings accounts and so on), but it makes no sense whatsoever if it doesn’t involve an exclusive, committed relationship. Yet, some people manage to save their marriage while being engaged in polyamory or swinging. Still, it is very rare, because this peculiar lifestyle cannot be stomached by all. The alternative for those who cannot abide monogamy, but do get married, is cheating and/or divorce. Hence, the 50% divorce rate and we are still asking: “Why are people getting married in the first place?”

Another problem for marriage, monogamy and relationships in general is the unrealistic portrayal of romance in the media. Many people are enthralled with the myth that they are going to meet one special person (or maybe a soul-mate) who is going to share their dreams and ideals, and satisfy them on every level (emotional, intellectual, sexual). It would be wonderful if you meet this truly special someone, but, realistically, isn’t this too much to ask from one person? Is it really plausible to expect your spouse or partner to be your best friend, your fervent supporter, to share your hobbies, interests and goals, but also to be gorgeous and, umm of course, the best sex you’ve ever had?

Wild and passionate love that conquers all is commonplace in Hollywood. The message in most movies is that romance, passion, love and happiness are the key components to a relationship. Commitment, friendship, cooperation and forgiveness sink in the background.

Many, I’m afraid, begin to believe that romance and passion are supposed to rule and define a relationship. However, when you are caught up in a stressful routine, overwhelmed with duties and worries, there is very little room left for romance. All of a sudden, your heart is not racing when you see your significant other. All of a sudden, you don’t wish to cuddle until noon on Saturday. At this point many people grow worried that the love is dying, because the passion and romance are gone. Many people think that it is probably time to move on – the marriage is not working. Don’t get me wrong, I am a big fan of passion and romance, but it is fallacious to expect them to last very long, they are just the ephemeral joys of young love. They might be what brought two people together, but are not what will keep them together. Naturally, over time, your significant other is no longer new, exotic and unfamiliar and you cannot expect your hearts to race every time you see each other. You have adapted. It is not necessarily a herald for dying love or a failing relationship. It is evidence that we are creatures who adapt to their surroundings. The contrary would be unhealthy.

We have become love junkies with serious commitment problems. This is not surprising, considering we are a consumerist society that is used to satisfying its every craving. Leased cars are only good until the next model is available. Presents come with gift receipts. Goods can be returned, or exchanged. You can enjoy a free trial of most games, programs, services, massage chairs, mattresses and most other products. Imperfectly, there is no free trial in marriage. There are no guarantees, or your money back. No option for return, or exchange and nothing is risk free. On the contrary, you have a lot to risk and a lot to compromise. Have we lost grasp of these concepts? The overabundance of products makes us capricious and easily bored, and explains our commitment issues.

Does monogamy work? Does marriage work?

Don’t expect to find a single right answer, just keep an open mind and , possibly, understand that one lifestyle is not for all.

Reactive Attachment Disorder:

Etiology, Symptoms, Affected Brain Areas and Treatment

Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) is characterized by considerably disturbed and inappropriate social interaction, across situations, that is manifested before the age of five (DSM-IV-R). Evidence for the disorder is usually seen in continuous failure to respond appropriately in social situations (being hypervigilant, inhibited, or ambivalent) and/or inability to develop and exhibit selective attachment to primary caregiver(s) (DSM-IV-R). The causes for the disturbed behavior in Reactive Attachment are associated with the developmental stages of Infancy and Early childhood, when pathogenic care can have profound and lasting effects. DSM-IV outlines three aspects of pathogenic care that explain the disturbance in normal development and behavior: persistent disregard for the child’s physical and emotional needs, as well as repeated changes of primary caregiver and/or surroundings. The connection between pathogenic care and disrupted behavior is compelling and reminds of the critical importance of nurture and effective parenting. Many psychologists have studied in depth child development during the first years of life and reveal that this is an extremely sensitive period for both physical and emotional development and maturation. It is a critical time for cultivating attachment, social skills, developing empathy and understanding basic values.

Maltreatment, no matter whether it is abuse, neglect, abandonment, or witnessing violence, can lead to enduring negative changes in the still developing brain of a child. Each time there is some sort of traumatic experience, the brain suffers a particular change. Many of the brain abnormalities that have been studied in abused and neglected children are located in the left hemisphere. Very often, in children, victims of abuse, there were fewer dendritic connections between different areas in the left hemisphere (Gunnar & Vazquez, 2001). Children that had showed such abnormal results demonstrated self-destructive or aggressive behavior, as well as certain disturbances in behavior, thinking and physiology (higher blood pressure, heart rates temperature, hyper vigilance) (Gunnar & Vazquez, 2001). Studies of neglected children found that their cortex was about 20 percent smaller than that of a control group of subjects (children) who have not suffered neglect (Gunnar & Vazquez, 2001). The data is compelling and reveals that providing stable environment of nurture is of utmost importance. About 1% of children who have developed insecure-ambivalent attachment develop RAD (Lehman and Jegtvig, 2004) and without intervention, support and help, many of these children might grow up to develop Antisocial Personality Disorder and live a disruptive life. Eventually, many of these individuals end up in correctional facilities. This compels helping professionals to promote and teach effective parenting and explain the implications of early childhood stress. In addition, the issue has to be considered within the context of adoption and foster care where, very often, children would be moved often and are being exposed to very different/inconsistent treatment and living conditions.

The non-pharmaceutical treatment of RAD appears to be more successful and beneficial than the behavioral medical model (Lehman and Jegtvig, 2004). It utilizes the attachment model as described by Dr. Daniel Hughes in his book “Building the Bonds of Attachment: Awakening Love in Deeply Troubled Children.” The emphasis is on effective parenting - nurturing holding, eye-contact, providing opportunities for enjoyment, encouragement, unconditional love and being a model for self-regulation abilities (Daniel Hughes). Parents and caregivers are to love, nurture, accept and respect the child, so that he/she can grow healthy and happy. Also, professionals in the helping field need to unite their efforts in attempt to educate people and advocate affective parenting and children’s well-being.

Prozak (fluoxetine) is among the Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs), aka. second-generation antidepressants. As all SSRIs, Prozak blocks the reuptake transporter for serotonin, preventing it from being taken back to the axon terminal. Since this transporter is blocked, serotonin remains in the synaptic cleft for long periods, continuing to have its effect on the postsynaptic neuron. Although this effect takes place very quickly, depression symptoms take long periods to be alleviated. This phenomenon is not fully understood, but it’s interesting to note that Prozak increases the production of new neurons in the hippocampus – a limbic structure that is very vulnerable to stress-induced damage. Therefore, it is suspected that this renewal in the hippocampus is exactly the reason behind this antidepressant’s effect.

The danger is found in drugs’ effect on GABA receptors.

Drugs like alcohol, barbiturates, and benzodiazepines all seems to affect the same target – the major inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA. Neurons containing GABA receptors are very common in the nervous system and their function is to inhibit other neurons. One such receptor that is affected by GABA is the GABAa receptor that contains chloride channels. When the receptor is excited, an influx of Cl ions takes place, increasing the negative charge on the inside – hyperpolarization – making initiation, or propagation of an action potential much more difficult. However, this GABAa receptor has not only a binding site for GABA, but two other binding sites as well. One is the sedative-hypnotic site, the other is the anxiety site. That’s why it is possible that both sedative-hypnotic drugs (alcohol and barbiturates) and antianxiety drugs (benzodiazepines) can bind to the same receptor, amplifying their effects. Sedative-hypnotic drugs (alcohol or barbiturates) have precisely this effect -making it hard for action potential to take place and, therefore, sedating the body and affecting bodily functions. Antianxiety drugs (benzodiazepines) enhance binding effects of GABA and so alcohol, or barbiturates will have an even stronger sedative effect, possibly leading to coma, or even death.

The threat of mixing drugs and alcohol is not just a myth, it is a deadly cocktail that you don’t want to be experimenting with.

Until recently, the study of deafness has been viewed within a deficit model, with focus on the “almost invariably negative effects of a sensory impairment or deficit” (Gregory, Hartley, Constructing Deafness). In my opinion, this has been a largely distorted view of professionals who have had no experience within the deaf community and have only viewed deaf people as a group who is deviating from the norm. In a primarily male-dominated society, many events and medical conditions have not been properly studied and documented, simply because they have concerned and affected only women. Similar is the ignorance, misunderstanding and disregard for issues concerning deaf individuals in a primarily hearing world. In fact, the first attempts, at least in the field of Cognitive Psychology, to study deaf people have been done in effort to understand the functioning of the hearing. Throughout human history, there is a myriad of examples when minorities, or underprivileged people have been labeled as ‘different‘ and, therefore, not worth too much effort to be understood, or helped. Sadly, this appears to be a challenge even for scientists and researchers who, above all, should be dispassionate and objective observers and analyzers of phenomena and human behavior. Following the evolutionary perspective in Psychology, we can allude there is an inborn instinct in species to avoid something that is new, foreign and unfamiliar, as it might hurt us. Even if this is the case, humanity has walked a long way in this process of evolution and if we are to take pride in being highly civilized and humane, we are to try to understand the unfamiliar better before putting any sort of label. The population of the United States includes more than 1 million deaf people, most of whom chose to identify themselves as part of the Deaf culture. People within this culture really do share unique values and norms, and use American Sign Language as a primary way of communication (Stebnicki, Coeling, 1999). These are not people who want to be victimized, ignored or viewed as impaired and in many situations the only difference between a hearing and a deaf individual can be the different treatment that we have.

A lot of what has been discussed in the field of Psychology regarding deaf culture and the issues of deaf people has been observed by hearing professionals. Further, many of these psychologists have assumed a distant and principally negative stance towards deaf people. Within this deficit model, many clinical psychologists in the 1960s and 1970s have described characteristics of deaf people, inferring that deafness has a negative effect on personality. Some of the characteristics imagined at the time to describe deaf people are: egocentric, rigid, impulsive and lacking in insight (Rainer and Altshuler, 1967), aloof, disengaged and isolated from other people (Myklebust, 1960). As outraging and absurd these statements might seem to us today, they have still influenced the field of Psychology, mental health and helping professions (but also, probably, education and sociology). Opinions of the sort have dominated the science journals for the past few decades and have received the proper amount of criticism only about a decade ago. As more recent studies indicate, the perspective of the deaf person is critical and cannot be undermined (Andrews, Leigh & Weiner, Deaf People: Evolving Perspectives from Psychology, Education and Sociology). On the contrary, it is precisely deaf people and the deaf community that are being influenced and affected by the work of psychologists, therapists, counsellors and teachers.

Communication is a dominant characteristic for human kind and psychologists believe it plays a critical role in formulating one’s personality. The psychiatrist David Farber explains that children use language in their identification process, by adopting the parents’ style and vocabulary. In the case of a deaf child, many things can be different. However, the belief that deaf children are not capable of developing literacy abilities is no more that a myth and misunderstanding. On the contrary, with much earlier identification of hearing loss and appropriate intervention and education, deaf children can excel in their literacy. Yet, it is still the case that many children fail to develop “age-appropriate reading and writing abilities” (Mayer C, 2007). I wonder why this is? Is it really the child’s ‘failure’ or our failure as professionals and educators to provide the appropriate methods, strategies and, above all, support?  Regardless  of whether parents use sign language, or not, the deaf child is prone to focus more on their expressions and body language in order to be able to evaluate emotional tone and context. However, if the parents do not use sign language, the child is trapped in a complicated situation where the crucial component of effective communication is absent. This can be a source of frustration, or lack of trust in others. In 1959 Sharoff explains how demanding the child’s need for communication with the parents is. He also targets our attention to understanding an issue of incredible difficulty for deaf children: “how great a rejection it must be for the child who suddenly finds all his attempts to communicate with his parents denied him.”  Many deaf children live in a “verbal vacuum” for 3 to 8 years in their early life and if they go to a traditional kindergarden, ruled by the old motto: ”Sit on your hands”, this can cause considerable crisis (Gregory, Hartley, Constructing Deafness, 1991). This might greatly hinder the development of the child – before ever having the chance to learn and communicate in a language of his/her own (Sign language) – the child is already forbidden the freedom of expression. These are all issues that have to be considered by people in the educational system, not merely in the deaf pedagogical system. Early childhood is a specifically vulnerable time for the development of brain structures, normal functioning and habits. It is also the time to develop empathy, attachment and basic trust for people and care for humanity. If communication is virtually nonexistent and the child feels isolated, with his/her freedom of expression repressed, many of these integral traits might not develop properly. Research also indicates that language and communication can have an important influence on the emergence of certain behavioral problem in young children and yet, not much is done to take this into account in the practical setting. In a study by Barker et.al, 2009, a sample of 116 severely and profoundly deaf children and 69 normally hearing children, ages 1.5 to 5 years were observed. Researcher took into consideration parent reports, videotaped observation and performance. In the study, hearing-impaired children showed more language, attention, and behavioral difficulties, and spent less time communicating with their parents than normally hearing children. It is hypothesized this is precisely because the child feels misunderstood, ashamed, or frustrated with the lack of understanding. In addition, if educators do not provide the necessary sensual/visual input (body language, facial expressions and so on), so that the child can take full advantage and understand emotional nuances, the child is more likely to be distracted or simply not interested in the process. That is why, student counselors, psychologist, educators and even nurses need to be aware of possible challenges and complications for the child.

The American Psychological Association (APA) lists and explains 10 main Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2002). Among these are described ‘2.01. Boundaries of Competence’:

1. Psychologists provide services, teach, and conduct research with populations and in areas only within the boundaries of their competence, based on their education, training, supervised experience, consultation, study, or professional experience.
2. Where scientific or professional knowledge in the discipline of psychology establishes that an understanding of factors associated with age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, or socioeconomic status is essential for effective implementation of their services or research, psychologists have or obtain the training, experience, consultation, or supervision necessary to ensure the competence of their services, or they make appropriate referrals.
3. Psychologists planning to provide services, teach, or conduct research involving populations, areas, techniques, or technologies new to them undertake relevant education, training, supervised experience, consultation, or study.

In addition, Cooperation with other professionals (“3.09. When indicated and professionally appropriate, psychologists cooperate with other professionals in order to serve their clients/patients effectively and appropriately.”) and the Bases for scientific and professional judgments (“2.04. Psychologists’ work is based upon established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline.”). Yet, the sad fact is that a great percentage of the counselors and psychologists do not have the necessary credentials, or experience. The few who possess such cannot possibly be available to all the people who might need their help or services. As a matter of fact, most deaf people who are treated in psychiatric settings are being placed in hearing psychiatric units, where the mental workers have no experience of working with deaf patients (Glickman & Black, 2009). This is the case not only in the United States, but in other parts of the world as well. Studies in Great Britain, for example, reveal that the needs of people who use British Sign Language as their first/preferred language are not being met in the clinical setting (McAleer, 2006).

Obviously, awareness has to be raised for this issue and the demand for qualified professionals. This goes hand in hand with a more general understanding of deaf culture among all the helping professions. It also demands awareness for possible challenges, especially for deaf children, whose parents may not be capable of providing the necessary exposure to sign language and other stimulation. Just about ten years ago, the science of Psychology realized the need for a dedicated field of Deaf Psychology as a discipline with its own rights (Pollard, 1996). The APA realized its fundamental role and responsibility, as it can either hinder or improve services and advancement in the field (Pollard, 1996).

Deaf Psychology certainly deserves its place among specific subcategories within general Psychology. This is certainly not implying the brain and mind of deaf people is different from that of hearing individuals. Quite the contrary, we need this field to show us we are not this different after all – all that might be causing an existent gap and lack of communication – is the lack of better understanding.

The Achievement Motivation Inventory AMI (Schuler, Thornton, Frintrup & Mueller Hanson, 2004) is based on a new trait-oriented concept of Achievement Motivation that assumes it is build up of multiple interrelated components. Specifically, the Inventory employs 17 scales of measurement, 170 items total (each scale has ten items). The inventory is intended for use in work and employment context.

Accepting that achievement motivation is a personality construct, the authors of the AMI attempt to measure its different aspects that, expectedly, manifest themselves across situations. However, I am not convinced that achievement motivation is a rigid personality construct.

There is not much evidence to prove the theoretical background of the research and the inventory. People might be highly motivated in one situation, while uninterested in another. That is why the inventory could not be used in all situations with different populations. For example, it would not be a valid indicator of achievement motivation among students, who might be motivated in athletic performance, while not particularly involved in academic achievements. The opposite could be easily true, as well. Yet, an individual attending a job interview is expected to be interested in getting the position. In this scenario, the Achievement Motivation Inventory could accurately examine if the candidate scores high on certain dimensions of personality that are generally considered indicators of Achievement Motivation (Mental Measurement Yearbook).

One strength of the inventory is its multidimensional approach and multiple measurements. Instead of studying achievement motivation as a single universal personality construct, the authors view it as an intricate interplay of multiple aspects.

The inventory consists of 170 items that measure 17 different dimensions of Achievement Motivation. The items are presented in a Likert format, where the likert scale ranges from 1 (“does not apply at all”) to 7 (“applies fully to me”). The 17 dimensions that the authors use are: Compensatory effort, Competitiveness, Confidence in success, Dominance, Eagerness to learn, Engagement, Fearlessness, Flexibility, Flow, Goal Setting, Independence, Internality, Persistence, Preference for Difficult Tasks, Pride in productivity, Self-control and Status orientation. Each dimension is addressed by ten questions (Schuler, et.al., 2004). Scores can be quickly processed and plotted on a scale that signifies the relationship between dimensions, for each participant. In addition, the score profile can be immediately compared to percentile scores from a norm group from Germany and USA (N=2,178) (Mental Measurement Yearbook). The scores from the norm group are reported separately for males and females, which is necessary, because the relationship between gender and achievement motivation has not been studied.

Based on the norm sample, the authors analyze the reliability and validity in the Inventory Booklet. The test has a sufficiently high reliability. Total score reliability is very high (.96) and internal consistency reliability for different subscales range from α=0.66 (on Independence scale) to α=0.83 (on Confidence in Success and Preference for Difficult Tasks). Yet, it is important to keep in mind that the total score is not of much importance. The complete profile of a participant could give a better understanding when examined by a psychologist or the test administrator, who is familiar with the variety of dimensions and their relationship. Only three out of the 17 subscales had an internal consistency estimates less than α=0.70: Goal Setting α=0.69, Independence α=0.66 and Internality α=0.66. The test-retest reliability is considerably high, ranging from r=0.81 to r=0.89, for the different scales. These estimates are based on a two-week interval between trials. The overall reliability of the test is sufficient for research purposes. However, more attention and caution are recommended when assessing scores and making a placing, or employment decision. A professional who is familiar with the inventory, its theoretical background and the process of interpreting the score profiles should make such decisions.

The authors of the book provide a considerable body of data for the inventory’s validity. Again, it has been assessed on the basis of scores form the norm sample. The authors discuss content validity in the inventory’s manual. Content validity is supported by a brief literature review that indicates the theoretical basis for the different subscales. This examination of Content validity is hardly satisfactory, or totally convincing. Some of the scales, such as Confidence in success are not always positively correlated with achievement motivation (Feather, 1963).

The authors of the AMI also discuss criterion-related validity and construct validity. Expressly, they examine the relationship between certain AMI subscales and aspects of social desirability, as measured by the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR). The correlation between AMI subscales and Self-Deception and Impression Management (BIDR) is not conclusive and cannot be considered strong evidence for Criterion or Construct Validity. The authors also examine the relationship between AMI scales and personality characteristics measured by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. The existing correlations suggest the convergent and discriminant validity of the AMI subscales, as they are examined as personality constructs. Furthermore, the creators of the inventory examine criterion validity by correlating test scores with individual demographic characteristics, like age, gender and ethnicity. Overall, the validity of the Achievement Motivation Inventory is adequate, with certain limitations that have to be considered, especially when administering the test for practical purposes.

The factor structure of the AMI is analyzed as the interrelationship among the 17 dimensions, not as interrelationship among separate items. Factor analysis indicates the 17 subscales could be further organized as three main, more general constructs (Mental Measurement Yearbook).
Probable weakness of the AMI is rooted in the questionable, at times, reliability and validity. Measurements regarding three of the subscales (Self-Assurance, Ambition and Self-Control) are never presented. Furthermore, the lack of such data is not addressed and explained by the creators of the test.

Overall, the AMI is a new inventory design that enriches our understanding of achievement motivation and suggest it is a personality construct. Although such conclusion might be questionable, the approach is still efficient and effective in testing the concept when the need occurs (Krumboltz, 1957).
I would recommend the inventory for research purposes. It provides opportunity for multiple measures on a broad spectrum of personality constructs that can greatly increase the existing body of knowledge. The test could also be appropriate for measuring “job-related achievement Motivation” (Schuler et. Al, 2004). The inventory could be helpful to employers for personnel selection, personnel development and even professional counseling. Yet, this requires the test to be administered by a competent psychologist, or assessment specialist who is familiar with the constructs and the limitations of the inventory. I would not consider the AMI appropriate for the educational setting. The norm sample does not include students and the authors do not discuss achievement motivation in the academic field. Existing body of research indicates, academic performance could be influenced by other factors, such as Test Anxiety, Internal/External Locus of Control (Smith, 1975). Neither of these are found among the personality constructs that the AMI addresses. Therefore, its use in education is not recommended.

In studying Intelligence, researchers noticed that two correlated factors emerge: Crystallized and Fluid Intelligence. Charles Spearman, in particular, was the first to develop the concept of Fluid g (fg) and Crystallized g (cg). These two, in combination, appeared to explain one’s Intelligence. 

Fluid ability is a basic reasoning ability which is generally a function of our neural structures. On the other hand, Crystallized ability consist of specific abilities and tasks, as we demonstrate them in our life and culture. Therefore, it is only logical to conclude that crystallized abilities would be greatly influenced by the norms and values that define our culture. Generally, we are not too eager to develop, or study and master skills, and abilities that would condemn us in our own society. In addition, Crystallized intelligence, as defined, is shaped to a large extent by the formal education we receive. This explains why it is not easy, if possible at all, to have a single test that could accurately measure cg across the globe. In addition, cg might differ greatly in different periods of time. Only a few decades ago, being able to work with a computer and utilize software effectively was not the norm. Now it is a general expectation for virtually all people. Researchers agree that the best single measure of crystallized ability is the vocabulary test. Yet again, you could see how this might introduce difficulties across different linguistic and cultural groups.

By contrast, if we attempt to measure Fluid Ability we would have to challenge the individual with a task that is completely unfamiliar and requires no prior knowledge (such as number, or letter sequence).

Testing both fg and cg reveals that the two are most strongly correlated in infancy. As children grow up and become more and more affected by personal experiences, family  and cultural norms, as well as school, these two abilities start to diverge.

The Five Factor Theory was first introduced by McCrae and Costa (1984) and is based on the assumption that personality is relatively stable in adulthood. Generally, the traits that we show at the age of 30 would remain essentially unchanged into old age. (McCrae & Costa, Personality in Adulthood) Therefore, assessing personality based on the core traits what will not change through adult life seemed like a reliable method. There have been a lot of multi-cultural, cross-sectional and longitudinal studies throughout the past two decades. All of this research has confirmed the reliability and validity in the NEO Personality Inventory, or NEO-PI (Costa & McCrae, 1985, 1989a) and has postulated there are indeed universal personality traits that characterize people all over the world.

Based on this extensive research and years of observing and interviewing people, McCrae and Costa identified the five core traits what describe a personality: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness (to experience), Agreeableness and Consciousness. These are the basic dispositions that endure through adulthood and shape our behavior and lives.

Neuroticism
Calm – Worrying
Even-tempered – Temperamental
Self-satisfied – Self-pitying
Comfortable – Self-conscious
Unemotional – Emotional
Hardy – Vulnerable

Extraversion
Reserved – Affectionate
Loner – Joiner
Quiet – Talkative
Passive – Active
Sober – Fun-loving
Unfeeling – Passionate

Openness to Experience

Down-to-earth – Imaginative
Uncreative – Creative
Conventional – Original
Prefer routine – Prefer variety
Uncurious – Curious
Conservative – Liberal

Agreeableness                                           Conscientiousness

Ruthless – Softhearted                                 Negligent – Conscientious
Suspicious – Trusting                                   Lazy – Hardworking
Stingy – Generous                                        Disorganized -Well-organized
Antagonistic – Acquiescent                        Late – Punctual
Critical – Lenient                                          Aimless – Ambitious
Irritable – Good-natured                             Quitting – Persevering