In pursuing this question further, we turn to a line of inquiry quite different from naturalistic observation and the survey. It takes place not only in clinics and hospitals but also in businesses, schools, and a wide range of other institutions. Called the case study, or the clinical approach due to its origin in hospitals and clinics, it refers to diverse psychological techniques carried out with the aim of examining a specific person, group of people, or event in considerable detail.

The case study may concern almost anyone or anything--a religious group, dangerous expedition, or the mayor's office. While it commonly focuses on a problem of personal adjustment, it provides an opportunity to examine relevant factors in the widest possible context (Bromley, 1990). These procedures for collecting psychological information show two distinct differences from the other research methods. First, the study of the individual plays a more central role. In fact, the case study is sometimes erroneously thought to be concerned exclusively with the individual. Second, this approach usually involves more direct contact with the subjects, as readily reflected in the chief procedures: interviews, psychological tests, and case histories.

Interview Process. Perhaps the most fundamental technique in the case study, the interview is a conversation between two people, variously called the counselor and client, interviewer and interviewee, or therapist and patient. In various ways, the counselor aims to assist the client with some personal problem. In thinking of the interview, we should never overlook the power of words--not only to express our own thoughts and feelings but also to learn about other people and even to influence them. Words, observed Rudyard Kipling, are the most powerful drug used by humanity.

When Milgram interviewed Gretchen Brandt, she showed no signs of tension either by what she said or what she did, such as fidgeting, shifting her position, averting her gaze, or attempting to withdraw from the interview. She spoke of herself only when asked directly and did so in a firm, simple manner, without stammering or making unwarranted claims or irrelevant comments. She said she was not tense or nervous in any way, and her appearance corresponded well to this claim.

Another interviewee, Morris Braverman, proved to be quite different. Under the same circumstances, his brow furrowed constantly, suggesting that he carried with him many burdens. Throughout most of the interview, he behaved in a carefully controlled, serious fashion. In moments of tension, however, he began to snicker, then laugh, and then wheeze with uncontrollable laughter. At one point, he became visibly agitated trying to stifle his nervous laughter. Almost the same age as Gretchen Brandt, he seemed a great deal older because of his lined face and typically serious manner (Milgram, 1974).

As these descriptions indicate, people in interviews communicate not only with words but also by their actions. The skillful, experienced interviewer uses all available evidence in reaching conclusions based on this method.

Psychological Tests. Perhaps the best-known devices in psychology are psychological tests. For many, they should be classified with taxes, traffic lights, and television, unwanted by-products of an advanced society. For others, they are simply an additional means of gathering information about someone, helping that individual to find his or her most appropriate place in our highly complex society. We shall return to this controversy in later discussions of intelligence.

The reader is undoubtedly familiar with group tests, also called pencil-and-paper tests, which are administered to many people simultaneously and scored by machine. Each answer is indicated by selecting one of three or four choices and marking it on the printed form.

Most group tests have two significant limitations. The first concerns the test questions, which examinees must read and answer without individual attention from the test administrator. These questions are largely verbal items, placing heavy emphasis on the ability to use words, which does not always reflect an individual's personal characteristics or mental ability. In fact, it may simply indicate the person's subculture (Table 2­4). Second, the test administrator cannot be sure that each subject understands the instructions, has suitable motivation, and is in a proper condition to take the test. Such problems can lead to spuriously low test scores.

Less familiar are the individual tests, administered to one person at a time. These include inkblots and ambiguous pictures, as well as the more traditional questions. A highly trained examiner observes as the subject responds by speaking or by some other overt actions, rather than by writing. On nonverbal items, which do not require the use of words, the subject manipulates puzzles, blocks, and pictures, an approach that can be used to test people with language deficits (Figure 2­3).

Figure 2-3 Nonverbal Test Item: Seven Cleverness Board. In this test, developed in China 1,000 years ago, the subject is presented with the seven geometric shapes shown on the left and requested to arrange them into an interesting, creative pattern or design. Three such arrangements are shown on the right (Zhang, 1988).

The advantages of individual tests reflect the drawbacks of group tests. A wide variety of items can be employed, and the examiner can note the subject's efficiency, conviction, and mode of answering. The examiner observes behavior, not pencil marks on an answer sheet, perhaps dis- covering that the subject is correct but without confidence, brashly incorrect, or has obtained the correct answers for the wrong reasons. To the extent that the test is used in these additional ways, test administration is a time consuming, expensive, and exacting task.

Studying an Individual. From a research perspective, the intensive study of one individual or event is sometimes known as idiographic research, for it attempts to describe the special "lawfulness'' of just one person or case. It focuses on the predictable behaviors of that individual. Even when several people are studied in this way, individual differences are emphasized; uniformities among people are of less concern (Pelham, 1993).

With Gretchen Brandt, the aim was to understand the ways in which her behavior marked her as different from all other people. Working as a technician in a local medical school, she showed poise and satisfaction with her life. She grew to adolescence in Nazi Germany and World War II, and yet she lived easily within her new culture. This reaction was especially interesting in view of her exposure to Nazi propaganda during her youth. She seemed quite capable of resisting authority that she regarded as evil or wrong.

Studying Several Cases. Sometimes a psychologist conducts a series of studies for some practical purpose and later examines them again, searching for basic principles among them. The aim here is to discern common or universal themes. These studies are called nomothetic research because their purpose is to discover general laws of behavior applicable to all human beings in varying degrees. Several case histories, or complete case studies, considered collectively, may reveal unexpected findings about people in general. Most of this book, and indeed most of psychology, is devoted to discovering and understanding these general principles.

Earlier in the history of psychology, controversy arose over the respective merits of the idiographic and nomothetic approaches. Today they are recognized as complementary rather than antagonistic. The idiographic approach develops clinical insights; the nomothetic approach serves in the broader domains of personality, adjustment, and therapy (Lamiell, 1991; Fraenkel, 1995). Both contribute to our knowledge of human behavior.