Chapter Three

1. Chapter Three Issues in Personality Assessment

2. Sources of Information • Ratings by others • Direct report by observer • Peer ratings • Self-reports • Scales—assess a single aspect of personality • Inventories—measure several distinct aspects of personality

3. Implicit Assessment • Indirect means of determining what a person is like • Example: Implicit Association Test (IAT) • People make categorical decisions rapidly • Response times can reveal how closely linked different concepts are in a person’s mind

4. Types of Information • Objective: measure of concrete reality that involves no interpretation • Example—counts of the time a person touches another in an interpersonal interaction • Subjective: measure that involves interpretation • Example—evaluation of facial expressions for signs of hostility

5. Reliability Consistency or repeatability of measurement • High reliability = greater consistency = lower randomness (error) • Low reliability = less consistency = more error

6. Types of Reliability • Internal reliability: reflects consistency within a set of items intended to measure the same construct • Test-retest reliability: reflects consistency of a measure across time

7. Validity • Types of Validity • Construct • Criterion • Convergent • Discriminant • Face Accuracy of measurement—does it measure what it’s supposed to measure?

8. Construct Validity • Indicates a match between operational and conceptual definitions • Most important type of validity • Other types of validity help establish construct validity

9. Criterion (Predictive) Validity • Most important indicator of construct validity • Examines how well a measure correlates with a standard of comparison (criterion) • Example—does an aggression scale correlate with observer ratings of shoving on a playground? • Examines how well a measure predicts an appropriate outcome • Example—does a self-esteem scale predict who will volunteer answers in class?

10. Convergent Validity • Indicates appropriate correlation with assessment devices presumed to measure the same construct • Highly correlated • Indicates appropriate correlation with assessment devices presumed to measure conceptually similar constructs • Correlated, but not too high, not too low

11. Discriminant Validity • Indicates that scale does NOT correlate with other assessment devices presumed to measure conceptually dissimilar constructs Example: Correlations with Sociability scale

12. Face Validity • Indicates that the item or scale measures what you think it is supposed to measure • Examples: ConstructItem • Depression Do you often feel sad or blue? • Optimism Do you generally expect good things to happen?

13. Culture and Validity • Important questions • Does construct exist in all cultures? (cultural universality) • Are items interpreted the same in each culture?

14. Reliable Valid Reliable Not Valid Not Reliable Not Valid Classic Representation of Reliability and Validity

15. Challenges to Validity • Memory bias • Motivational bias • Response sets—readiness to answer in a particular way • Yea saying (acquiescence) • Nay saying • Social desirability

16. Two Approaches to the Development of Assessment Devices • Rational (Theoretical) Approach • Start with conceptualization • Select items to fit conceptualization • Test validity and reliability • Empirical (Data-Based) Approach • Empirically driven from many items • Use statistical methods to select items based on ability of items to differentiate criterion group

17. Example of Empirical Approach • Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) • Started with many self-descriptive statements • Administered to “normals” and groups with psychiatric diagnoses • Items selected for a scale were ones that differentiated a particular psychiatric group from all others

18. When Are Different Methods Used? • Rational Approach • Usually in connection with theory building • Empirical • Usually used in connection with practical needs • Example: Vocational interests