PMRJ
Back to Articles
Research Article1v1.0CC BY 4.0
PersonaMatrix Research Journal·Volume 1 (2026)·ISSN: Pending·DOI: Pending

Psychological Testing as an Instrument of Differentiated Support in Education, Healthcare Settings, and Crisis Life Transitions: Typological, Trait-Based, and Psychodynamic Approaches

Authors
Anatoliy Drobakha
Independent Researcher, PersonaMatrix Project, United States
Liudmyla Lahuta
President, International Institute of Psychological Maturity Inc, United States
Alona Aponchuk
PersonaMatrix Project, United States
Mykhailo Kalitkin
Independent EdTech Researcher, UNOWA-PersonaMatrix Project, Portugal
Roman Nayda
Independent Researcher (Systems & Data Analysis), PersonaMatrix Project, Ukraine
Received2026-03-15
Revised2026-04-10
Accepted2026-04-10
Published2026-04-10
DOIPending
LicenseCC BY 4.0

Abstract

The article examines psychological testing as an instrument of differentiated support in three applied domains: educational settings, small and mid-size healthcare and wellness environments, and psychological support for individuals undergoing crisis transitions or major life changes. The paper integrates typological, trait-based, and psychodynamic perspectives and argues that the practical value of psychological testing lies not merely in classification, but in identifying relatively stable response patterns relevant to support planning, educational adaptation, and psychologically sensitive communication. Empirical illustration is based on repeated testing data from 159 cases, with an additional trait-profile test available for 49 participants. The findings indicate that repeated stability of the dominant character type is associated with greater clarity and stability of the trait profile. PersonaMatrix is presented as one of the possible instruments for such applications, not as the sole or exclusive framework. The article concludes that structured psychological testing may serve as a useful non-clinical assessment layer for tailoring support to individual psychological needs, provided that interpretive, ethical, and methodological boundaries are clearly maintained.

Keywords

psychological testingcharacter typestrait profilesBig Fivepsychodynamic approachhealthcare communicationeducational supportlife transitionsPersonaMatrix

Citation

Drobakha, A., Lahuta, L., Aponchuk, A., Kalitkin, M., & Nayda, R. (2026). Psychological Testing as an Instrument of Differentiated Support in Education, Healthcare Settings, and Crisis Life Transitions: Typological, Trait-Based, and Psychodynamic Approaches. PersonaMatrix Research Journal.

References

  1. [1]Békés, V., et al. (2024). Defense mechanisms are associated with mental health symptoms across countries.
  2. [2]Bonanno, G. A. (2012). Annual research review: Positive adjustment to adversity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(6), 561–576.
  3. [3]Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W., & Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 453–484.
  4. [4]Di Giuseppe, M., et al. (2021). The hierarchy of defense mechanisms: Assessing defensive functioning with the DMRS-Q. Frontiers in Psychology.
  5. [5]Drobakha, A. (2023, December 23). TestPersona. Test: “Persona. What Is My Personality Type” (TXu 2-408-293) [U.S. copyright registration]. Opulentia SC LLC.
  6. [6]Drobakha, A. (2024, May 1). PersonaMatrix Project. Stage 1: “Persona Methodology” (TXu 2-427-005) [U.S. copyright registration]. Opulentia SC LLC.
  7. [7]Drobakha, A. (2025, March 25). PersonaMatrix Game Framework and AI Architecture (TXu 2-441-123) [U.S. copyright registration]. Opulentia SC LLC.
  8. [8]Drobakha, A., Kalitkin, M., Klymenko, K., Nayda, R., Lahuta, L., & Kostenko, O. (2026). Psychoactive triggers as a stimulus battery for measuring large language models (LLMs): A bridge between psychometrics, clinical psychology, and LLM engineering. Metaverse Science, Society and Law, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.69635/mssl.2026.2.1.31
  9. [9]Hayat, A. A., et al. (2020). The predictive role of personality traits on academic performance of medical students. Medical Education Online, 25(1).
  10. [10]Mammadov, S. (2024). A meta-analytic review of personality and teacher–student relationship quality.
  11. [11]Mancini, A. D., & Bonanno, G. A. (2009). Predictors and parameters of resilience to loss.
  12. [12]McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175–215.
  13. [13]O’Connor, A. M., et al. (2009). Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
  14. [14]Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R. L., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(4), 313–345.
  15. [15]Street, R. L., Jr., Makoul, G., Arora, N. K., & Epstein, R. M. (2009). How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician–patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Education and Counseling, 74(3), 295–301.