RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

436 PERSONAL CONSTRUCTS
Box 20.1
Eliciting constructs and constructing a repertory
grid
Apersonisaskedtonameanumberofpeoplewhoare
significant to him. These might be,forexample,mother,
father, wife, friend, employer, religious representative.
These constitute the elements in the repertory grid.
The subject is then asked to arrange the elements
into groups of threes in such a manner that two are
similar in some way but at the same time different from
the third. The ways in which the elements may be alike
or different are the constructs, generally expressed
in bipolar form (quiet–talkative; mean–generous;
warm–cold). The way in which two of the elements
are similar is called the similarity pole of the construct;
and the way in which two of the elements are different
from the third, the contrast pole of the construct.
Agridcannowbeconstructedbyaskingthesubject
to place each element at either the similarity or the
contrast pole of each construct. Let x = one pole of the
construct, and blank = the other. The result can be set
out as follows:
Constructs Elements
A B C D E F
1quiet–talkative x x x x
2mean–generous x x x
3warm–cold x x
It is now possible to derive different kinds of information
from the grid. By studying each row,forexample,wecan
get some idea of how a person defines each construct
in terms of significant people in his life. From each
column, wehaveapersonalityprofileofeachofthe
significant people in terms of theconstructsselectedby
the subjects. More sophisticated treatments of grid data
are discussed in examples presented in the text.
Source:adaptedfromKelly1969
Kelly for eliciting constructs and identifying their
relationship with elements in the form of a
repertory grid.
Since Kelly’s (1955) original account of what
he called ‘The Role Construct Repertory Grid
Test’, several variations of repertory grid have been
developed and used in different areas of research. It
is the flexibility and adaptability of repertory grid
technique that have made it such an attractive
tool to researchers in psychiatric, counselling
and, more recently, educational settings. We now
review a number of developments in the form and
the use of the technique. Alban-Metcalf (1997:
318) suggests that the use of repertory grids is
largely twofold: in their ‘static’ form they elicit
perceptions that people hold of others at a single
point in time; in their ‘dynamic’ form, repeated
application of the method indicates changes in
perception over time; the latter is useful for
charting development and change.
For an example of a repertory grid and
triadic elicitation exercise see the accompanying
web site (http://www.routledge.com/textbooks/
9780415368780 – Chapter 20, file 20.1.doc).
‘Elicited’ versus ‘provided’ constructs
Acentralassumptionofthis‘standard’formof
repertory grid is that it enables the researcher to
elicit constructs that subjects customarily use in
interpreting and predicting the behaviour of those
people who are important in their lives. Kelly’s
method of eliciting personal constructs required
the subject to complete a number of cards, ‘each
showing the name of a person in [his/her] life’.
Similarly, in identifying elements, the subject was
asked, ‘Is there an important way in which two of
[the elements] – any two – differ from the third’,
i.e. ‘triadic elicitation’ (see, for example, Nash
1976). This insistence upon important persons
and important ways that they are alike or differ,
where both constructs and elements are nominated
by the subjects themselves, is central to personal
construct theory. Kelly gives it precise expression
in his individuality corollary – ‘Persons differ from
each other in their construction of events.’
Several forms of repertory grid technique now
in common use represent a significant departure
from Kelly’s individuality corollary in that they
provide constructs to subjects rather than elicit
constructs from them.
One justification for the use of provided
constructs is implicit in Ryle’s commentary on
the individuality corollary: ‘Kelly paid rather
little attention to developmental and social
processes’, Ryle (1975) observes, ‘his own concern
was with the personal and not the social’. Ryle
(1975) believes that the individuality corollary