13. METHOD OF OBSERVATION AND SELF-OBSERVATION IN PSYCHOLOGY. EXPERIMENT IN PSYCHOLOGY Observation is a systematic and purposeful recording of psychological facts in the natural conditions of everyday life. There are certain requirements for the organization and conduct

12. Observation as a method of social psychology Observation is one of the oldest methods, consisting in the deliberate perception of environmental phenomena in order to collect data of a certain kind. Differences between scientific observation and everyday observation: 1) purposefulness; 2) clear

15. Testing as a method of socio-psychological diagnostics Testing is a standardized, usually time-limited test, with the help of which the level of development or degree of expression of certain mental properties of an individual, group or

Testing “I got the highest score on the test”Testing is carried out in schools to compare the level of education of children of the same age group in Western countries. Parents are anxiously awaiting the announcement of grades. A “well-bred” child should not only be

Tests usually contain questions and tasks that require a very short, sometimes alternative answer (“yes” or “no”, “more” or “less”, etc.), a choice of one of the given answers, or answers using a point system. Test tasks are usually diagnostic; their execution and processing do not take much time. At the same time, as world practice has shown, it is very important to see what tests can actually reveal in order not to replace the subject of diagnosis. Thus, many tests that claim to identify the level of development actually reveal only the level of preparedness, awareness or skill of the test takers.

When preparing test tasks, a number of conditions must be observed. First, you need to define and focus on a certain norm, which will allow you to objectively compare the results and achievements of different subjects. This also means that the researcher must accept a certain scientific concept of the phenomenon being studied, focus on it and, from this position, justify the creation and interpret the results of completing tasks. For example, test-tasks to identify the level of development of knowledge, abilities and skills in certain academic subjects are compiled and applied on the basis of certain ideas about the criteria for assessing the knowledge, abilities and skills of students and the corresponding standards of grades or can only be designed to compare subjects with each other by success. completing their tasks. Secondly, the subjects must be in the same conditions for performing the task (regardless of time and place), which allows the researcher to objectively evaluate and compare the results obtained.

The norm of each test is determined by the compiler-developer by finding the average indicator corresponding to the results of a large population of people belonging to a certain culture (standardization sample). This indicator is taken as the average indicator of the development of the property revealed by the test, which is statistically characteristic of the average person. This could be, for example, the age norm of intellectual development or some personal characteristic. This indicator is determined empirically and taken as a starting point. The results of each subject are compared with the norm and evaluated accordingly: each test is accompanied by a method for processing the data and interpreting the results. For example, in a test to determine character accentuation (K. Leonhardt), the test taker can score a maximum of 24 points for each type of accentuation; a sign of strong expression (accentuation) is considered to be an indicator exceeding 12 points (the researcher himself, based on accumulated experience, can further clarify the characteristics of the measure of the expression of a property with indicators up to 24 points).

Tests focused on determining average statistical norms and accepting them as evaluation and integration criteria allow for normatively oriented testing (NORT). Such normative evaluative actions are often used in pedagogical practice. For example, there are criteria for assessing knowledge, abilities and skills and standards for grades in certain academic subjects; educational test assignments are used in various subjects with established standards for assigning grades. NORT can be carried out using many tests (Raven's test, Cattell's test, methods for diagnosing the level of subjective control, etc.).

There are many cases when it is important to take into account changes in the performance of the same subject over a certain period of time, for example, before the start of training and after completing training in some educational material. This allows us to record the capabilities of the subject, and periodic diagnostics and comparison of his indicators with previous ones allows us to identify the pace and direction of development of the property being studied. In such cases, interpretation of test results is carried out from the perspective of selected criteria that show the characteristics of the test subject’s progress in mastering the content of educational material and developing certain mental qualities. Many intellectual tests, achievement tests, etc. allow you to use them in the above sense. The test norm in such cases is individual.

It is also possible that the test norm is determined on the basis of content, based on an analysis of the logical and psychological structure of the task material, when the success of the test is interpreted in terms of the qualitative characteristics of the property being studied. Such qualitative characteristics act as criteria for assessing the test taker’s achievements, and the testing itself becomes criterion-oriented. Criteria-based testing (CORT) allows you to quite successfully combine testing, interpretation of the result and correction of the course of learning (formation). Let us recall once again that the results of completing tasks in CORT are correlated with the qualitative characteristics of the content of the task (test), and not with some average statistical level of success in completing it, as in NORT.

An example is the use of the “ARP Methodology” and the corresponding block of techniques proposed by one of the authors of this manual. Completing this block allows you to determine the level of development of the subject's thinking - a school student, which can be empirical, analytical, planning and reflective. Since the formation of one or another level of development of thinking is a prerequisite for the possible formation in the future of the next level of development, there is therefore the possibility of: 1) accepting these levels as criteria for assessing the property under study; 2) accepting the next level beyond the established level as the direction for the subsequent development of thinking and determining the immediate zone of development of the student’s thinking; 3) compiling an adequate set of exercises for one or a number of academic subjects, the implementation of which should lead to the student achieving the appropriate level of development of thinking1.

There are certain rules for conducting testing and interpreting the results obtained. These rules are quite clearly developed, and the main ones have the following meaning: 1)

informing the subject about the purposes of testing; 2)

familiarizing the subject with the instructions for performing test tasks and achieving the researcher’s confidence that the instructions are understood correctly; 3)

ensuring a situation where subjects can perform tasks calmly and independently; maintaining a neutral attitude towards the test takers, avoiding hints and help; 4)

compliance by the researcher with the methodological instructions for processing the data obtained and interpreting the results that accompany each test or corresponding task; 5)

preventing the dissemination of psychodiagnostic information obtained as a result of testing, ensuring its confidentiality; 6)

familiarizing the subject with the test results, providing him or the responsible person with the relevant information, taking into account the principle “Do no harm!”; in this case, there is a need to solve a series of ethical and moral problems; 7)

accumulation by the researcher of information obtained by other research methods and techniques, their correlation with each other and determination of consistency between them; enriching your experience with the test and knowledge about the features of its application.

As already noted, each test is accompanied by specific instructions and guidelines for processing and interpreting the data obtained.

There are also several types of tests, each of which is accompanied by corresponding testing procedures.

Ability tests allow you to identify and measure the level of development of certain mental functions and cognitive processes.

Such tests are most often associated with the diagnosis of the cognitive sphere of the individual, the characteristics of thinking and are usually also called intellectual. These include, for example, the Raven test, the Amthauer test, the corresponding subtests of the Wechsler test, etc., as well as task tests for generalization, classification and many other tests of a research nature.

Achievement tests are aimed at identifying the level of formation of specific knowledge, skills and abilities and as a measure

1 See: Atakhanov R.A. Mathematical thinking and methods for determining the level of its development // Scientific. ed. V.V. Davydova. - Riga, 2000.

success of implementation, and as a measure of readiness to perform some activity. All cases of test examinations can serve as examples. In practice, “batteries” of achievement tests are usually used.

Personality tests are designed to identify the personality traits of subjects. They are numerous and varied: there are questionnaires of states and emotional makeup of the individual (for example, tests of anxiety), questionnaires of motivation for activity and preferences, determinations of personality traits and relationships.

There is a group of tests called projective, which allow us to identify attitudes, unconscious needs and impulses, anxieties and a state of fear. The subject is offered various stimulus materials such as plot-undefined pictures, unfinished sentences, plot drawings with conflict situations, etc. with a request to interpret them. The mechanism for performing such tasks is manifested in the fact that the subject in some way arranges the elements of the stimulus material and gives them a subjective meaning, reflecting his personal experience and experiences. In other words, projective tests are based on the recognition of the existence of a mechanism for a person to “project” his inner world onto the outer world, when he involuntarily attributes to other people those drives, needs and desires that are normally suppressed. This means that projective tests allow us to diagnose a person’s unconscious experiences with a sufficient degree of objectivity. Such tests are the thematic apperception test, the Rorschach “ink blot” test, the widely used Rosenzweig frustration test, etc. Graphic projective techniques are also used, where the researcher puts the subject in a situation of projecting his state, personality traits and relationships onto reality by depicting a house, tree, family, person, non-existent animal and its interpretation. For example, the test “Constructive drawing of a person from geometric figures” reveals individual typological differences by analyzing a drawing of a person made up of ten figures (triangles, squares and circles, and their combination can be any): the test subject may turn out to belong to the “leader” type, “anxious and suspicious individuals”, etc.

The use of tests is always associated with measuring the manifestation of one or another psychological property and assessing the level of its development or formation. Therefore, the quality of the test is important. The quality of a test is characterized by the criteria of its accuracy, i.e. reliability and validity.

The reliability of a test is determined by how stable the results obtained are and how independent they are of random factors. Of course, we are talking about comparing the testimony of the same subjects. This means that a reliable test must have consistent test performance across multiple tests and can be confident that the test is detecting the same property. Various methods are used to check the reliability of tests. One way is the retesting just mentioned: if the results of the first and subsequent retesting show a sufficient level of correlation, then this will indicate the reliability of the test. The second method is associated with the use of another equivalent form of the test and the presence of a high correlation between them (some tests are offered to users in two forms; for example, the Eysenck EPI questionnaire - by definition of temperament - has equivalent forms A and B). It is also possible to use a third method of assessing reliability, when the test allows it to be split into two parts and the same group of subjects is examined using both parts of the test. Test reliability shows how stable the test results can be, how accurately psychological parameters are measured, and how high the researcher’s confidence in the results obtained can be.

Test validity answers the question of what exactly the test reveals and how suitable it is for identifying what it is intended to do. For example, ability tests often reveal something different: training, the presence of relevant experience or, conversely, the lack thereof. In this case, the test does not meet the validity requirements.

In psychodiagnostics, there are different types of validity. In the simplest case, the validity of a test is usually determined by comparing the indicators obtained as a result of testing with expert assessments about the presence of this property in the subjects (current validity or “simultaneous” validity), as well as by analyzing data obtained as a result of observing the subjects in various situations. life and work, and their achievements in the relevant field. The question of the validity of a test can also be resolved by comparing its data with indicators obtained using a technique associated with a given technique, the validity of which is considered established.

Like the development process, the subsequent software testing process also follows a specific methodology. By methodology in this case we mean the various combinations of principles, ideas, methods and concepts that you resort to while working on a project.

There are quite a variety of testing approaches available today, each with its own starting points, execution times, and methods used at each stage. And choosing one or another of them can be quite a difficult task. In this article, we will look at different approaches to software testing and talk about their main features to help you navigate the existing diversity.

Cascade model (Linear sequential software life cycle model)

The Waterfall Model is one of the oldest models that can be used not only for software development or testing, but also for almost any other project. Its basic principle is the sequential order of completing tasks. This means that we can move on to the next development or testing step only after the previous one has been successfully completed. This model is suitable for small projects and is only applicable if all requirements are clearly defined. The main advantages of this methodology are cost-effectiveness, ease of use and document management.

The software testing process begins after the development process is completed. At this stage, all necessary tests are transferred from units to system testing in order to monitor the operation of components both individually and as a whole.

In addition to the advantages mentioned above, this testing approach also has its disadvantages. There is always a possibility that critical errors will be discovered during testing. This may lead to the need to completely change one of the system components or even the entire design logic. But such a task is impossible in the case of the waterfall model, since returning to the previous step is prohibited in this methodology.

Learn more about the waterfall model from the previous article.

V-Model (Verification and Validation Model)

Like the waterfall model, the V-Model technique is based on a direct sequence of steps. The main difference between these two methodologies is that testing in this case is planned in parallel with the corresponding development stage. According to this software testing methodology, the process begins as soon as the requirements are defined and it becomes possible to start static testing, i.e. verification and review, which allows you to avoid possible software defects at later stages. An appropriate test plan is created for each level of software development, which defines the expected results, as well as the entry and exit criteria for a given product.

The diagram of this model shows the principle of dividing tasks into two parts. Those related to design and development are located on the left. Tasks related to software testing are located on the right:

The main steps of this methodology may vary, but typically include the following:

• Stage defining requirements. Acceptance testing refers to this stage. Its main task is to assess the readiness of the system for final use
• The stage at which it occurs high-level design, or High-Level Design (HDL). This stage relates to system testing and includes assessment of compliance with the requirements for integrated systems
• Detailed Design Phase(Detailed Design) parallels the integration testing phase, during which interactions between various system components are checked
• After coding stage Another important step begins - unit testing. It is very important to ensure that the behavior of individual parts and components of the software is correct and meets the requirements

The only drawback of the considered testing methodology is the lack of ready-made solutions that could be applied to get rid of software defects discovered during the testing stage.

Incremental model

This methodology can be described as a multi-stage software testing model. The work process is divided into a number of cycles, each of which is also divided into modules. Each iteration adds certain functionality to the software. The increment consists of three cycles:

1. design and development
2. testing
3. implementation.

In this model, it is possible to simultaneously develop different versions of a product. For example, the first version may be undergoing testing while the second version is under development. The third version may be going through the design phase at the same time. This process can continue until the end of the project.

Obviously, this methodology requires detecting as many errors as possible in the software under test as quickly as possible. So is the implementation phase, which requires confirmation that the product is ready for delivery to the end user. All these factors significantly increase the weight of testing requirements.

Compared to previous methodologies, the incremental model has several important advantages. It is more flexible, changing requirements leads to lower costs, and the software testing process is more efficient because it is much easier to test and debug through the use of small iterations. However, it is worth noting that the overall cost is still higher than in the case of the cascade model.

Spiral model

The spiral model is a software testing methodology that is based on an incremental approach and prototyping. It consists of four stages:

1. Planning
2. Risk analysis
3. Development
4. Grade

Immediately after the first cycle is completed, the second begins. Software testing begins at the planning stage and continues until the evaluation stage. The main advantage of the spiral model is that the first test results appear immediately after the test results appear in the third stage of each cycle, which helps to ensure correct quality assessment. However, it is important to remember that this model can be quite expensive and is not suitable for small projects.

Even though this model is quite old, it remains useful for both testing and development. Moreover, the main goal of many software testing methodologies, including the spiral model, has changed recently. We use them not only to find defects in applications, but also to find out what caused them. This approach helps developers work more efficiently and fix bugs quickly.

Read more about the spiral model in the previous blog post.

Agile

The methodology of flexible (Agile) software development and testing can be described as a set of approaches focused on the use of interactive development, dynamic formation of requirements and ensuring their implementation as a result of constant interaction within a self-organizing working group. Most agile software development methodologies focus on minimizing risk by developing in short iterations. One of the main principles of this flexible strategy is the ability to quickly respond to possible changes, rather than relying on long-term planning.

Learn more about Agile(note - article in English).

Extreme Programming (XP, Extreme Programming)

Extreme Programming is one example of agile software development. A distinctive feature of this methodology is “pair programming,” a situation where one developer works on code while a colleague constantly reviews the written code. The software testing process is quite important because it begins even before the first line of code is written. Each application module should have a unit test so that most errors can be corrected at the coding stage. Another distinctive feature is that the test determines the code, and not vice versa. This means that a certain piece of code can only be considered complete if all tests pass. Otherwise, the code is rejected.

The main advantages of this methodology are constant testing and short releases, which helps ensure high quality code.

Scrum

Scrum is part of the Agile methodology, an iterative incremental framework created to manage the software development process. According to Scrum principles, the testing team should participate in the following stages:

• Participation in Scrum planning
• Unit testing support
• Testing User Stories
• Collaborate with the customer and product owner to determine acceptance criteria
• Providing automated testing

Moreover, members of the QA department should attend all daily meetings, as well as other team members, to discuss what was tested and done yesterday, what will be tested today, and overall testing progress.

At the same time, the principles of Agile methodology in Scrum lead to the emergence of specific features:

• Estimating the effort required for each user story is mandatory
• The tester must be attentive to the requirements as they may constantly change
• The risk of regression increases with frequent code changes
• Simultaneous planning and execution of tests
• Misunderstanding between team members when customer requirements are not completely clear

Learn more about the Scrum methodology from the previous article.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is important to note that today the practice of using one or another software testing methodology implies a multiversal approach. In other words, you should not expect that any one methodology will be suitable for all types of projects. The choice of one of them depends on a large number of aspects, such as the type of project, customer requirements, deadlines, and many others. From a software testing perspective, some methodologies tend to start testing early in development, while others tend to wait until the system is fully ready.

If you need help with software development or testing, a dedicated team of developers and QA engineers is ready to go.

In modern practical activities of psychologists of all directions, test methods are widely used for psychological diagnostics. Test (English test - sample, trial) is a standardized, usually time-limited, meaningful and standardized test (task, survey), intended to study the individual mental and socio-psychological specifics of a person. Psychodiagnostic tests identify individual-typical and socio-typological characteristics of people and groups.

Psychodiagnostics is represented by various tests. For individual testing (when the interaction between the experimenter and the subject occurs one-on-one) and group testing, including children, subject tests are used.

In subject tests, the material of test tasks is presented in the form of real objects: cubes, cards, parts of geometric shapes, structures and assemblies of technical devices, etc. The most famous are the Koos cubes and the test of addition of figures from the Wechsler set, the Vygotsky-Sakharov test, non-verbal tasks for testing personality, intelligence, abilities, achievements, action tests, tests for self-esteem of personality, studying the characteristics of motor development of children, vocabulary, etc.

Individual subject testing has its advantages: the ability to observe the subject (his facial expressions, other involuntary reactions), hear and record statements not provided for in the instructions, which allows one to assess the attitude towards testing, the functional state of the subject, etc. This allows subject testing to be widely used in the psychodiagnostics of children .

Children differ from each other in intellectual, moral, interpersonal development, and they can react differently to the same instructions and psychodiagnostic situations.

The level of psychological development of children is different, and therefore some children have almost complete access to tests intended for psychodiagnostics of adults, while others - less developed - only have access to methods designed for preschool children. Therefore, it is advisable to use testing that is intellectually accessible and not too simple in order to assess the real level of psychological development achieved by the child.

Many children entering school, being ready for learning by their physical age, are at the level of a preschool child in terms of their level of psychological development. If such a child is offered a rather difficult, in principle accessible, but of little interest to him, a serious psychological test that requires developed will, voluntary attention, memory and the same imagination, then it may turn out that he will not cope with the task. And this will happen not due to a lack of intellectual abilities and inclinations, but due to an insufficient level of personal and psychological development. If, on the contrary, the same test tasks are offered to the child in a playful, externally and internally attractive form, then, in all likelihood, the test results will turn out to be different, higher.

Also, children, unlike adults, are not able to consciously, with the help of appropriate volitional efforts, control their behavior during testing, therefore, test results may be underestimated.

To be confident in the reliability of the results of psychodiagnostic research, it is necessary that the psychodiagnostic methods used be scientifically substantiated, that is, meet a number of requirements. These requirements are: validity, reliability, unambiguity of the methodology, accuracy.

In children, involuntary attention predominates. The use of items in the test allows you to reduce the testing procedure to 5-15 minutes, while meeting all the requirements of the scientific method of research.

The system of psychodiagnostic methods for children is intended for a comprehensive assessment of the level of psychological development of children entering school, as well as primary school students, including the characteristics of their cognitive processes, personality and interpersonal relationships, assessment of their practical skills and abilities, including intellectual abilities .

With the help of subject tests it is possible to explore:

• - mental state and personal properties, level of development of the child’s psychological functions, taking into account age,
• - dynamics of development (longitudinal sections),
• - rate of development,
• - neoplasms of age.

The use of subject tests in child psychology allows us to become more thoroughly acquainted with the structure and functions of a number of mental processes that ensure the successful development of children, as well as to understand the reasons for possible difficulties in the child’s learning process. They may be insufficient volitional regulation of attention and action, excessive impulsiveness of cognitive activity, rapid fatigue of the child under intellectual and emotional stress, low pace of activity, and much more. This can be revealed in individual psychological testing with objects.

By observing how a child uses an object during testing, it is possible to reliably assess a wide range of issues that clarify their role in solving the following problems: the world of fantasy, symbolization of children's fears and desires, diagnostic and prognostic indicators of the mental development of children in normal and pathological conditions, family and school environment.

Subject testing is based on a unified psychological mechanism of projection. The essence of projection is the transfer of the mental properties of the child being tested onto the task material, which makes it possible to identify his hidden personal characteristics. Unconscious experiences, feelings, thoughts generated by the child’s unconscious drives are accessible to objective diagnosis. They are reflected in the nature of verbal associations and involuntary slips of the tongue; in the content of fantasies, in the features of drawings or the perception of paintings.

Also, objects in psychological tests act as stimulus material for the test subject. The use of stimulus material is based on the principle of uncertainty or task instructions. It is assumed that in a situation of uncertainty, the subject more freely expresses (projects) his own “I”, the features of his inner world and personal experiences.

In the literature on psychodiagnostics one can find different classifications of testing methods. Testing with objects refers to projective methods of psychodiagnostics. Let's consider the classification that most fully characterizes the projective testing technique with the help of objects, proposed by L. Frank.

• 1. Constitutive. The techniques included in this category are characterized by a situation in which the subject is required to create some kind of structure from unstructured material, that is, some amorphous material is offered to which it is necessary to give meaning. Examples of such techniques for completing a task include:
  • - Unfinished sentences;
  • - Unfinished drawings.
• 2. Constructive. Designed details are offered (figurines of people and animals, models of their homes, etc.), from which it is necessary to create a meaningful whole and explain it. An example that falls into this category is Edwin Shneidman’s “Make a Story Picture” test. Stimulus material - a form with background drawings and 67 figures cut out from cardboard, living and inanimate objects. The subject's task is to arrange the figures that fit the image as if on a stage and tell the story of what happened. This is then interpreted and a diagnosis of personality traits is given.
• 3. Interpretive methods- the subject must interpret some stimulus based on his own considerations. It is assumed that the subject identifies himself with the “hero” of the story, which makes it possible to reveal his inner world, his feelings, interests and motives. The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) is a good illustration of this type of technique. The subject is offered cards with black and white pictures of ambiguous content, from which he must compose a story and establish the sequence of the events depicted.
• 4. Cathartic. It is proposed to carry out gaming activities in specially organized conditions. For example, psychodrama, performed in the form of an impromptu theatrical performance. With the help of this, the researcher can detect conflicts, problems, and other personally rich products that the subject brings to the outside.
• 5. Expressive. Analysis of handwriting, features of speech communication. The subject carries out visual activities, drawing on a free or given topic, for example, the “House-Tree-Man” technique. Based on the drawing, conclusions are drawn about the affective sphere of the personality, the level of psychosexual development and other characteristics.
• 6. Impressive. These methods are based on studying the results of choosing stimuli from a number of proposed ones. The subject selects the most desirable, preferred stimuli. For example, the Luscher test, consisting of 8 colored squares. All squares are presented with a request to choose the most pleasant one. The procedure is repeated with the remaining squares until a row is finally formed in which the colors are arranged according to their attractiveness. The psychological interpretation comes from the symbolic meaning of color.
• 7. Additive. The subject is required to complete a beginning sentence, story or story.

All of these methods are united by the ability to reflect the most essential aspects of personality in their interdependence and integrity of functioning. As a result, the task of diagnostic activity is solved: to assess the current state of the child, classifying his development as either conditionally normative or deviant.

One of the main psychological processes, the characteristics of which determine the assessment of a child’s cognitive readiness for learning at school and the success of his educational activities, is attention. Many problems that arise in learning, especially in the initial period, are directly related to shortcomings in the development of attention.

A universal tool that can be used to study the attention of children of different ages is the test using Landolt rings.

This test allows you to give a practical assessment of stability, distribution and switching of attention, using the same sheet of paper with Landolt rings, turning with each new task to that part of it that was left blank during the previous task.

Determining the child’s memory capacity (short-term visual memory, visual operational memory, indirect memory) is also possible using subject testing. For example, to determine the volume of short-term visual memory, the child is alternately presented with two drawings. After presenting each part of the drawing, A and B, the child receives a stencil frame with a request to draw on it all the lines that he saw and remembered on each part. Based on the results of two experiments, the average number of lines that he reproduced correctly from memory is established.

A correctly reproduced line is one whose length and orientation are not significantly different from the length and orientation of the corresponding line in the original drawing. The resulting indicator, equal to the number of correctly reproduced lines, is considered as the volume of visual memory. To assess operational visual memory, the child is sequentially, for 15 seconds each, given task cards, presented in the form of six differently shaded triangles. After viewing the next card, it is removed and instead a matrix is ​​offered, including 24 different triangles, among which are the six triangles that the child just saw on a separate card. children's psychodiagnostic test

The task is to find and correctly indicate in the matrix all six triangles depicted on a separate card. An indicator of the development of visual operative memory is the quotient of the problem solving time per minute divided by the number of errors made during the solution process, plus one.

Errors are considered triangles that are incorrectly indicated in the matrix or those that the child could not find for any reason. In practice, to obtain this indicator proceed as follows. Using all four cards, the number of triangles correctly found on the matrix is ​​determined and their total sum is divided by 4. This will be the average number of correctly indicated triangles.

This number is then subtracted from 6, and the result obtained is considered the average number of errors made. Then the average time the child worked on the task is determined, which in turn is obtained by dividing the total total time the child worked on all four cards by 4.

The end of the child’s time working on finding triangles in the general matrix is ​​determined by the experimenter by asking the child: “Have you already done everything you could?” As soon as the child answers affirmatively to this question and practically stops searching for triangles in the matrix, he is considered to have completed his work. Dividing the average time a child spends searching on a matrix of six triangles by the number of errors made allows us to finally obtain the required indicator.

To diagnose mediated memory, the material needed to carry out the technique is a sheet of paper and a pen. Before the examination begins, the child is told the following words: “Now I will tell you different words and sentences and then pause. During this pause, you will have to draw or write something on a piece of paper that will allow you to remember and then easily recall the words that I said. Try to make drawings or notes as quickly as possible, otherwise we will not have time to complete all the tasks. There are quite a lot of words and expressions that need to be remembered.” The following words and expressions are read to the child one after another: “Home. Stick. Tree. Jump high. The sun is shining. Cheerful man. Children play ball. The clock is standing. The boat is floating on the river. The cat eats fish."

After reading each word or phrase to the child, the experimenter pauses for 20 seconds. At this time, the child must have time to draw something on the sheet of paper given to him that will later allow him to remember the necessary words and expressions. If the child did not manage to make a note or drawing within the allotted time, the experimenter interrupts him and reads out the next word or expression. As soon as the experiment is completed, the psychologist asks the child, using the drawings or notes he made, to remember the words and expressions that were read to him.

Thus, in the modern education system, pressing issues are the child’s readiness for school, his mental development, abilities and relationships. Children have a number of significant characteristics, which puts forward special requirements for methods of psychodiagnostics of children. To ensure the scientific validity of the methods used, subject tests are widely used in psychological diagnostics of children.

Subject testing is based on a unified psychological mechanism of projection. The essence of projection is the transfer of the mental properties of the child being tested onto the task material, which makes it possible to identify his hidden personal characteristics. Unconscious experiences, feelings, thoughts generated by the child’s unconscious drives are accessible to objective diagnosis. With the help of subject tests, it is possible to examine the mental state and personal properties of the level of development of the child’s psychological functions, taking into account age, the dynamics of development, the pace of development, and new age developments. Subject tests significantly reduce research time, which is important when diagnosing children due to the involuntary nature of their attention, they allow one to assess a wide range of issues and ensure the scientific nature of psychodiagnostic methods.