2b - measuring p - did Flashcards
Self-Report Scales and Inventories
Typically:
Introspective
Subjective
Structured
Contain more than one item per construct
scale: Measures one dimension of personality.
inventory: Several scales that, together, measure multiple dimensions of personality.
Measurement Error: random and systematic error
Random Error
Non-systematic variation in the test score.
Equally likely to score slightly higher vs. lower than true score.
→Increase the number of items.
Systematic Error (bias)
Test score always slightly higher or lower than true score
→Increasing the number of items does not help.
Common sources of systematic error in self-report scales include: ‘response set bias’, socially-desirable responding, and faking
Response Set Biases (4 types) + solution
Straightlining’ - A type of ‘Insufficient Effort Responding’
Acquiescence bias: tendency to agree (‘Strongly Agree’, ‘YES’)
‘Nay saying’: tendency to disagree
Midpoint responding (e.g. ‘neither agree nor disagree’)
Solve:
Remove mid-point option
Include Reverse-Scored Items
Socially-Desirable Response Bias + solution
Deceptive intent.
Particular concern in occupational/forensic settings
solution:
Include ‘Lie Detector’ items
Make all options socially undesirable….
Machiavellianism: The Mach V Scale
Measures for this trait are highly prone to socially desirable response bias as people who are high in this trait are likely to be deceptive and manipulative (so hard trait to measure)
Behavioural Measures of Personality
Steffans and Schulze König (2006): used behavioural measures as part of a broader validation study.
Argued that self-reported personality and controlled, deliberate behaviour does not always represent who we truly are.
Developed measures of trait-relevant ‘spontaneous behaviours’.
4 traits measured:
agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, extraversion
Implicit Personality Assessment
Steffans and Schulze König (2006)
Modification of the Implicit Association Test (‘IAT’): used to measure people’s automatic associations to stimuli.
Steffans and Schulze König (2006) test for IAT results (behaviour)
Some correlation between IAT scores and self-report scores.
For some traits, IAT score correlated more strongly with behaviour than self-report scores did.
But, still fairly low convergent validity – seem to measure different things.
Other Report/ what it’s dependent on
Someone else rating your personality (or vice versa)
Dependent on:
External manifestations of feelings, thoughts etc.
The proportion of situations that observer has access to.
Self-Other Knowledge Asymmetry (SOKA) Model(Vazire, 2010)
Both Self and Other ratings can be valid predictors of behaviour, but:
Asymmetries in validity of self vs other knowledge
Others more accurate than self when rating traits high in evaluativeness e.g. intellect.
Strongest effects for ‘others’ who are less close.
Self more accurate than others when rating low observability traits e.g. neuroticism
Projective Tests of Personality
+ pros and cons
Describe/tell a story about e.g. ambiguous/ meaningless stimuli.
‘Projection’ of personality.
Scored according to e.g. Content Focus
pros:
Less dependent on introspection.
Less prone to bias and faking.
cons:
Subjective, complex, unreliable scoring.
Not based on mainstream personality theory.
The Apperceptive Personality Test(Holmstrom, Silber & Karp, 1990)
Make up a story about each picture
Complete a structured questionnaire
Personality has some influence on interpretation of pictures.
