mod 1 - assessment + measurement Flashcards
How do researchers measure personality?
S data, O data, T data, L data
describe S data
○ Researchers can ask individuals what they think their personality traits are (Self-report data;
Interviews, periodic reports, surveys, questionnaires (most widely used)
individuals have access to a wealth of information about themselves that is inaccessible
to anyone else, such as their habitual level of anxiety
§ Most common
§ Pro: u know urself best + see urself in every situation - more info about urself and access to ur thoughts and feelings
§ Con: you might not be self-aware or honest
describe O data
capitalize on sources for gathering information about a person’s personality (friends,
family, teachers, etc.)
observers may have access to information not attainable through other sources
omultiple observers can be used to assess each individual
oallows investigators to evaluate the degree of agreement among observers—
inter-rater reliability
more valid and reliable assessment
§ Pros: might know you better if its ur family, seem more objective, can ask multiple informants from different contexts and aggregate.
§ Cons: less in your head, might only know what you are like in a specific situation
disadvantage is close relationships may cause observers to overlook negative
features – bias
describe T data
can design laboratory studies to detect what someone’s personality traits are (Test-data; T-data).
§ Pros: more direct and most objective, not influenced by emotional investment or biases
§ Cons: still judgement calls on behavior coding that might have little context (not clearcut), no clear direct line between behavior and traits (has to be inferred)
§ In or out of the lab
§ Can be hard to implement bc directly measuring
§ Common
§ Out of the lab can be trickier to measure
describe L data
can look at real life indicators to detect people’s personality traits (Life-outcome data; L-data).
§ Pros:
§ Cons: not 1-1 mapping (like test data), always some guess work
§ Look at records
§ Might need consent, might be accessible publically
what results are most powerful?
- there are multiple approaches to studying personality.
- Researchers will adopt a variety of approaches to measure personality.
Results that replicate through “triangulation” are the most powerful
- Researchers will adopt a variety of approaches to measure personality.
Define self-report data, and give examples of unstructured and structured questions
- (S-data)—the information a person reveals about themselves.
open-ended “fill in the blank” questions (unstructured)
oTwenty Statements Test - participant receives a sheet of paper that is essentially
blank, except for the words “I am” repeated 20 times. There is a space after each
of these partial statements, and participants are asked to complete them
forced choice true-or-false questions (structured)
likert-type scale: express with numbers the degree to which a trait described
them
Explain what a Likert-type scale and a personality scale are, and give examples of adjective/checklist questionnaires vs statement questionnaires.
- A more complex method involves
requesting participants to indicate in numerical form the degree to which each trait term characterizes them,
say on a 7-point rating scale of 1 (least characteristic) to 7 (most characteristic). This is called a Likert-type scale - A personality scale typically involves summing the scores on a series of individual rating scales like the one
above. A personality scale for activity level, for example, might consist of adding up scores from rating scales on energetic, active, and vigorous (adjective).
- A personality scale typically involves summing the scores on a series of individual rating scales like the one
- statement questionaire: Sample items from the CPI
are: I enjoy social gatherings just to be with people; I looked up to my father as an ideal man; A person needs to
“show off” a little now and then; I have a very strong desire to be a success in the world; I am very slow in making
up my mind. Participants read each statement and then indicate on an answer sheet whether they agree with
the statement and feel that it is true of them or disagree with the statement
define experience sampling.
In this method,
people answer some questions, perhaps about their moods or physical symptoms, every day for
several weeks or longer. People are usually contacted electronically (paged) one or more times a
day at random intervals to complete the measures.
What are the pros and cons of using naturalistic observation and artificial observation.?
naturalistic observation: observers witness and record events that occur in the normal
course of the lives of their participants
ooffers researchers the ability to secure information in the realistic context of a
person’s everyday life, but at the cost of not being able to control the events and
behavioral samples witnessed
artificial observers: Experimenters can instruct participants to perform a task, such as
participation in a group discussion, and then observe how individuals behave in these
constructed settings
ocontrolling conditions and eliciting the relevant behavior
osacrificing the realism of everyday life
briefly describe the design and findings of Megargee’s research into dominance.
Megargee study where pairs were: (1) high dominant male + low dominant male, (2)
high dominant female + low dominant female, (3) high dominant male + low dominant
female, (4) high dominant female + low dominant male
o75% of high-dominant men, 70% of high-dominant women took leadership role
in the same-sex pairs
ohigh-dominant men paired with low-dominant women, 90% of the men became
leaders
ohigh-dominant women and low-dominant men, 20% of high-dominant women
assumed the leadership role
ohigh-dominant women were appointing their low-dominant partners to the
leadership position - women were expressing dominance in a different manner
participants might try to guess what trait is being measured and then alter their
responses to create a specific impression of themselves
difficulty in verifying that the research participants define the testing situation in the
same way as the experimenter
researcher may inadvertently influence how the participants behave
O data types of observers?
Types of Observers
observers who are personality assessors who do not know participants in advance
observers who know the participant
in better position to observe target’s natural behavior
multiple social personalities can be assessed – different personalities for
different groups of people
explain how T-data can be collected a) in a lab, b) using a mechanical recording device,
in a lab - standardized test
Mechanical Recording Devices
actometer: modified self-winding watch, strapped to the arms/legs of participants
(typically, children)
not hampered by biases of human observer and can be used in naturalistic settings
few personality dispositions lend themselves to mechanical assessment
define life-outcome data, and briefly describe the design and findings of Caspi and colleagues research into temper tantrums
ife-Outcome Data (L-Data)
information that can be gleaned from the events, activities, and outcomes in a person’s
life that are available to public scrutiny i.e. marriage, speeding ticket
Personality psychologists often use S-data and O-data to predict L-data
driving records, including speeding tickets and traffic accidents, are used by insurance
companies to determine how much we pay for car insuranc
-caspi interviewed children ages 8,9,10 and mothers
-used two personality scales to measure illed temperness - severity and frequency (O data bc based on mothers observations)
- in adulthood (30-40 yrs) researchers gathered Life outcome info and expmained if the O data predicted the L data findings
was found that they did - ill temper was more connected to erratic work lives, divorce, marrying partners with a lower occupational status
Do the sources of data generally agree with each other? What traits tend to have more agreement? Why is triangulation important?
Depending on the personality variable under consideration, agreement across data sources tends to range from
low to moderate.
trait. Traits such as extraversion showed moderate agreement across data
sources. The trait of “calculating,” on the other hand, showed low self–spouse agreement. Traits that are easily
observable (such as extraversion) show a higher degree of self–observer agreement than do traits (such as cal-
culating) that are difficult to observe and require inferences about internal mental states
, is to examine results that transcend data sources—
a procedure sometimes referred to as triangulation.-findings that transcend the limitations of single-data-source
assessment.
how to collect t data in ) from physiology,
Physiological Data
eyeblink startle reflex - When people are startled, as when a loud noise occurs, they
show the startle reflex, which consists of blinking their eyes, lowering the chin toward the chest, and inhaling suddenly – it was found that psychopaths did not exhibit this
reflex
oPerhaps psychopaths commit their crimes because they don’t have the normal
level of anxiety or guilt that prevents most of us from doing anything wrong
functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI): used to identify the areas of the brain
that “light up” when performing certain tasks such as verbal problems or spatial
navigation problems
key benefits of physiological data are that it is difficult for participants to fake responses
how to collect t data or d) from a projective test.
projective Techniques
person is given a standard stimulus and asked what he or she sees
the person “projects” his or her concerns, conflicts, traits, and ways of seeing or dealing
with the world onto the ambiguous stimulus
gathers info about wishes, desires, etc. a person is not aware about
difficult to score, uncertain validity and reliability
Researchers evaluate personality measures by examining what three things?
reliability (consistency of measurement), validity (does the test measure what it claims to measure), and generalizability of assessments
describe test retest reliability
: Consistency of a measure over time.
The greater the time frame, the lower the expected reliability.For example, if you complete a questionnaire in September, will you get the same score in December? This can depend on what you are measuring (e.g., is the construct stable like intelligence, or does it change frequently like current feelings of anger?) and the time frame between measurements (e.g., having someone complete a questionnaire 2 months apart versus 20 years apart).
describe Inter-item reliability/internal consistency:
Consistency of items that go into the overall score. In other words, do all of the items on the questionnaire measure the same thing? This can depend on how broad your measure is (e.g., a questionnaire that measures both anxiety and depression would have a lower internal consistency than one that measures only depression), and how well written it is (e.g., poorly worded or confusing items lead to lower internal consistencies).
describe Inter-rater reliability:
Consistency of scores across observers. If two psychologists give you the same test, will they arrive at the same score? This is influenced by the quality of the test (e.g., is it easy to use? Is the scoring highly subjective?) and the training of the observers.
describe face validity
The test looks like it measures what it claims to measure. Be aware that sometimes we want a test to have low face validity. For example, if we are screening potential police officers, we might want to measure aggressive tendencies. However, if the test looks like a measure of aggression, the candidates might try to lie about how aggressive they are. Therefore, we would want our aggression questionnaire to have lower face validity.
describe Predictive/criterion validity:
The measure predicts criteria external to the test. In other words, does it predict some real-world outcome, such as whether or not you will do well in a given career or how healthy you will likely be later in life. You have to use a good theory to decide what behaviours/outcomes should be predicted by your test.
