Good and Bad Indicators of Personality Flashcards
Informant (I) data
- ask someone who knows the person well
- based on real world (or the person’s projection into the world)
- limitations: people might act differently in different contexts
Life outcome (L) data
- verifiable, objective
- interpretation of data is subjective
- many variables can affect outcome besides personality
Behavioral (B) data
- watch what the person does for yourself
- multi-determined: lots of reasons why they might act a certain way
- don’t know what is going on in their mind when the act
Self-judgement (S) data
- ask the person directly
- individual’s subjective experience/judgement
- can be biased, self-presentation
Why are we drawn to personality tests?
- self-discovery
- become the person we want to be
- identify settings in which we will thrive
- tell others about ourselves (way of shaping our environment)
Correlation coefficient
-size of an effect or association between two variables, x and y
p-level
probability that the result would occur (by chance) if the null hypothesis were true
Binomial Effect Size Display
- converts magnitude of a correlation that are more clinically significant
- divide correlation by two, add or subtract to 50
What three factors make good measures of personality?
- Validity
- Reliability
- Generalizability
Validity
- does it measure what it says its measuring
- degree to which an instrument reflects what it is supposed to measure
- convergent
- discriminant
- predictive
- depends on reliability
Convergent validity
- does it relate to what it is supposed to be related to?
- is it associated with other measures that measure the same thing
Discriminant validity
-it doesn’t relate to things it shouldn’t be related to
Predictive validity
-relates to meaningful behaviors and outcomes
Reliability
-is it consistent?
-reduced by error
-increased by :
standardizing procedures
making relevant to participant
aggregating items
- may not increase the validity of the measurement
-for self-report measures: internal consistency and test-retest important
Internal consistency
Items on the measure that are supposed to measure the same thing are highly correlated
Test-retest
The same person will receive the same score at different times
Generalizability
Validity and reliability hold across cultural contexts
Who created the Myers-Briggs Personality measure
Katerine Briggs and her daugther Isabel Briggs Myers
Is Myers-Briggs a good measure of personality?
- convergent validity: yes (for extraversion and conscientiousness)
- discriminant: mixed
- predictive: mixed
- internal consistency: yes
- test-retest: yes for continuous, not for type
- don’t know if they are generalizable
Problems with the Myers-Briggs
- poor reliability and validity
- oversimplification of Jungian types
- no norms
- you don’t know what your score means compared to other people
- ambiguity in interpreting the scores
- correlates to better measures (which we can use instead)
- breaks up personality into types instead of a continuum
Gordon Allport
- had assistant find all of the terms in the dictionary that relate to personality
- about 18,000 words
Fundamental Lexical Hypothesis
if a word is important, it will be in a language
Raymond Cattell
- 16 traits
- self-report inventory
- used factor analysis
Factor analysis
- summarizes interrelations among a set of variables
- reduces many variables into basic/important elements
- identifies groups, clusters, factors, or related items
Limitations of factor analysis
- factors depend on what you include in the analysis
- factors are defined by the researcher
- factors are often difficult to interpret
The Big Five
- Openness
- Conscientiousness
- Extraversion
- Agreeableness
- Neuroticism
Neuroticism
- anxiety
- hostility
- depression
- self-consciousness
- impulsiveness
- vulnerability to stress
- anger
Neuroticism questionnaire items
- I am not a worrier (reverse)
- I often feel inferior to others
Ozer and Benet-Martinez (2006)
meta analysis about the big five traits and outcome measures