15 OCT 7 Wide range of psychology questionnaires traits social attitudes life goals 1 hour of credit Find it here SONA Annual online survey for 1 hour of credit ID: 483967
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "SEPT" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Chapter 2
Personality Assessment,
Measurement, & Research DesignSlide2
Psychometrics & Personality
Individual differences psychology is
closely linked to
psychometrics
Correlation Coefficient (1900)
Factor analysis (1930)
Construct Validity (1950)
Test construction (1960s)Slide3
Primary Measurement Issues
Where
we
get
our information about personality, i.e., our
data sources
.
How we evaluate our
data
quality
.
How we use personality measurements in
data analysis
procedures
to…
Address different research questions with different
research designs
.Slide4
Data Sources:
LOTS of data
L
Life outcome data
O
Observer reports
T
Test data
S
Self-reportsSlide5
The information a person reveals about her/himself in….
Questionnaires
Interviews
Sources of Personality Data
Self-ReportSlide6
Unstructured
“I am ____________”
EXAMPLE:
“20
StatementsTest
”
I am___________
I am___________I am___________
Sources of Personality Data
Self-ReportSlide7
Sentence Completion Blanks
Washington University Sentence Completion test of Ego-Maturity
(
WUSCTED
)
Jane Loevinger
1) At times she worried about ____________
2) The thing I like about myself is___________
3) I am_________________
Content coding procedure (requires training)Slide8
Structured tests
I am devious.
T F
To be famous. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9
Types of Response
formats:
Check list
True-False
LikertSlide9
“Likert Scale”
(Likert, 1932)
I am kindhearted. 1 2 3 4 5
To be famous. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Slide10
Experience Sampling:
Beepers, cellphones, daily diary
McClelland (1980)
Affiliation study
Compare
TAT
vs Questionnaire
Outcome variable = Freq of affiliating
Result: Both TAT & Ques. predicted
Sources of Personality Data
Self-ReportSlide11
Strength
: Individuals have access to a wealth of information about themselves
Weakness
: Respondents must be honest
Impression management
Self-deception
Sources of Personality Data
Self-ReportSlide12
Del
Paulhus
(UBC)
Socially
Desirable
Responding
SDR
Slide13
Paulhus (1984; 2008
)
SDR is not one thing, but two:
They correspond to 2 kinds of social value:
agentic, communal
Agentic bias
Look competent, powerful, superior
Communal biasLook kind, trustworthy, loyalSlide14
Agency and CommunionSlide15Slide16
Acquiescence
Yea-saying and Naysaying
Agreeing regardless of content
Disagreeing regardless of content
Solution: Balance wording direction
Controversial because reverse-keyed items sometimes have weaker validity than affirmative worded items. Slide17
Sources of Personality Data
Observer Report Data
Unique access to some data
Data aggregation across observers
Cancel idiosyncratic biases
Improve reliability & validitySlide18
Effect of Aggregation Across Observers
on Heritability Estimates
Reiman et al. (1997) Slide19
Effect of Aggregation Across Observers
on Heritability Estimates
Reiman et al. (1997) Slide20
Sources of Personality Data
Observer Report Data
Types of observers:
Professional (eg IPSR)
+trained to assess reliably and validly
Intimate observers (eg roommate)
+access to natural behavior
+multiple vantage points (spouse, parents)Slide21
Naturalistic vs. Artificial Observation
Immediate vs. Retrospective Observation
Molar vs. Molecular Units of Observation.
Sources of Personality Data
Observer Report DataSlide22
Participants are placed in a standardized testing situation
Procedures are designed to elicit behaviour difficult to observe in everyday life .
Sources of Personality Data
Test DataSlide23
Example: Megargee (1969)
Dominance, gender & leadership
Pre-tested M and F on dominance
Groups=MM, FF, MF, FM (H/L
dom
)
Contrived leadership task
"fix the box " task"assign your own leader"...result:MM: Leader was Dom (75% of time)MF: Leader was M (80% of time) MF: Dom F
chose leader! ( chose M) Slide24
Mechanical Recording Devices
Buss et al. (1980) “Actometer” study
1) Do measures converge? (ratings, actometer data)
2) Is activity-level stable over time?
3) Does actometer predict psychological functioning?
Sources of Personality Data
Test DataSlide25
Physiological Data…
Sources of Personality Data
Test DataSlide26
Functional MRI Slide27
Positron Emission TomographySlide28
Neuroscience of extraversion
Johnson et al. (1999)
PET
9 low (I), 9 high (E)
resting state only
RESULTS
Thalamus I: ↑ Anterior, E: ↑ posterior Insula I:
↑ Anterior, E: ↑ posterior Broca’s Area I >
E
( talking to yourself !!) Slide29
Neuroscience of spiritual feelings
Borg et al. (1999)Slide30
Neuroscience of spiritual feelings
Borg et al. (1999)
Measured “self-transcendence”
Measured serotonin
receptor density
Conclusions
Weak
serotonin binding Weak gating
of sensory stimuli [?]Slide31
Mechanical Recording Devices
Physiological Data
Projective Tests
Sources of Personality Data
Test DataSlide32
RorshchachSlide33
RorschachSlide34
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)
ap
-perception (
away from +
perception)
"assimilation of perception by prior knowledge"
Created 1930s by Christiana Morgan and Henry Murray
"Tell a story"Analyzed for motivational themes(n=need): nAchieve, nPower, nAffiliation, n-IntimacySlide35Slide36Slide37
2000Slide38Slide39
Rorschach? -No.
TAT? -Yes.Slide40
Information that can be gleaned from the events, activities, and outcomes in a person’s life .
Life-Outcome Data
Sources of Personality DataSlide41
Motor Vehicle Accident Death rate per 10,000
Slide42
Bad-tempered Boys Outcomes
Caspi, Elder, Bem (1989)Slide43
Shy Boys' Outcomes
Caspi, Elder, Bem (1989)Slide44
Evaluating Measure Quality
Reliability
How
trustworthy
is the score?
Test-Retest Reliability
Split Half Reliability
Alternate Forms
Internal Consistency
Coefficient Alpha Slide45
Why so many similar statements?
EPQ Extraversion Scale
30 statements!
Answer: improve reliability
Aggregation
Reduce error variance
Increase Signal/Noise ratio Slide46
Effect of aggregation on Reliability Slide47
Evaluating Data Quality
Reliability
= trustworthiness
Say I use Shoe Size to measure IQ…
Is it a reliable test?
Yes. Measurements of Shoe Size are very stable across time and situations.
Is it a VALID test? … Nope. Validity = meaning of scores. Do the scores truly measure the thing they are supposed to be measuring? Slide48
Types of ValiditySlide49
Face Validity
Face validity = Whether the item content in the measure appears to be logically relevant to the underlying concept being measured. This is not a critical form of validity for a measure, but in some circumstances can be important. Slide50
Content Validity
Content validit
y
= whether the content is
fully representative
of all aspects of the construct being measure. The paranormal beliefs scale above has items to cover all of the primary content distinctions that had been proposed for the concept of “paranormal belief”. Slide51
Convergent Validity
Proof that the scores ARE associated with things they SHOULD be associated with.
Discriminant
Validity
Proof that the scores are NOT associated with things they should NOT be associated with
.
Above are correlations between paranormal beliefs and various other traits. Slide52
Criterion Validity
Does the measure predict something that can be considered a theoretical criterion for the concept--something it
should
predict if the scores were measuring what they are supposed to be measuring?
This example here used
“
known groups” as criteria:If the paranormal beliefsmeasure is valid, the groupshere should differ in an expected pattern: Relg.fundamentalists should belowest and “spiritualists”should be highest in para-normal beliefs. Slide53
Factorial
Validity
Do the items all
hang together
--do they intercorrelate with each other in the expected manner? In other words, do the items show good “
structure
”? Example: The example on the next page shows results from a factor analysis. The numbers are correlations with two “underlying factors”. All the paranormal items correlate with the same factor, (except P07). All the fundamentalism items correlate with the other factor. These are good results. They suggest the paranormal scale items all hang together as they should, and the fundamentalism items all hang together as they should. Slide54
Factorial Validity
of
a
Paranormal Beliefs Scale
Fac1
Fac2Slide55
Summary of Types of ValiditySlide56
Research Designs
3 Primary Types
1) Case Study
2) Correlational
3) ExperimentalSlide57
Research Designs
Case Studies
SINGLE PERSON
+
More detail, more depth
+
Excellent for developing theory
- Bad for testing theorySlide58
Influential Case Studies
Phineus Gage
(1860)
Anna O
(Freud & Breuer, 1895)
HM
(Henry Molaison, 1953) Mask of Sanity (
Cleckley, 1941)Slide59
Dodge MorganSlide60Slide61
Morgan sailed alone around the world.
Team of trait researchers did case study of Morgan.
Numerous personality assessments done.
Different measurement approaches were pitted against each other.
Whole issue of Journal of Personality (1997) devoted to Morgan. Slide62
Dodge Morgan Study by Nasby & Reid (1997)
Interpersonal
circumplex
(
Wiggins)
Five
factor Model (Costa & McCrae)Life Story narratives (D. McAdams)
MMPI, Clinical Assessment (J.Butcher)Each perspective provided something unique in understanding Dodge Morgan.Slide63
Research Designs
Correlational: Quantify
covariation
between
things.
Correlation
coefficient: rMagnitude & direction of assoc. (Usually) cannot infer causation from correlation. Slide64
The Correlation Coefficient:
Numerical
index
of covariation
Ranges from:
-
1.0 ..to.. +
1.0“.00” = no association.Q: Which correlation below is the strongest association in the list?A) -.59 B) +.
50 C) -.09 D) +.34 Slide65
Guess the correlation !
Height, weight,
r
= +.
60
Exam 1
, Exam2,
r
= +.
45
Divorce, Neur,
r
= +.
20
Smoking, Lifespan,
r = +.08
Height and Weight
r
.70
+
Neuroticism and Happiness
.30
+
Extrav & Happiness
.50
+
Consc and GPA
.50
-
Aspirin and Heart attack risk
.08
-
Consc and Creativity
.20
-Slide66
3 Common Correlational Relationships:
Additive
, Mediator
,
Moderator Slide67
Additive
Self-Control
Mindfulness
Well-being
r
=.30
r
=.45Slide68
Mediation
Self-Control
Mindfulness
Well-being
( MEDIATOR )
r
=.60
r
=.45
r
= .00Slide69
MAO
Moderation (interaction)
Maltreatment
in childhood
Antisocial
r
=.05
r
=.09
r
=.42Slide70
Fundamentalist
Background
Paranormal Belief
?
Spiritual
BeliefSlide71
Low
High
Spirituality
Paranormal Belief
Religious Fundamentalism
r = .50
r = .00
ModeratorSlide72
Multiple Correlation & RegressionSlide73
Personality of Video GamersSlide74
Causal ModelingSlide75
Factor Analysis
“Seeing the forests instead of the trees”
Finding broad patterns
of covariation among many variables
Partitioning
covariation among many measures into independent sets
Shrinking
a large number of smaller variables into a small number of larger variables.Slide76
Factor a number:
15 = 3 x 5
Factor a matrix of numbers:Slide77
Intercorrelation matrixSlide78
Intercorrelation matrix
2 product matricesSlide79
Intercorrelation matrixSlide80
e.g., We factor analyze a correlation matrix.
Yields
2 product matrices
Eigenvalues, and eigenvectors.
Eigenvectors = “
factor loadings”Slide81
Intercorrelation matrixSlide82
Intercorrelation matrix
2 product matricesSlide83
Factor I
Loadings
Factor II
Body
Mass
Mental
AbilitySlide84
Factor Analysis
Many uses
Discovering trait dimensions
Perceptual sensitivity? Curiosity?
Fantasy-proneness? Liberal Values?
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCEConstructing taxonomies (e.g., Big Five) Slide85
Data reduction
e.g., Aggregating predictors for regression analyses
Test construction
e.g., Selecting questionnaire items
Factor loadingSlide86
Factor Analysis
Evaluating the
factor structure
of a test
“
Factorial
validity
”Slide87
Experimental Methods
Typical experiment
Measure a trait
Select Hi vs. Lo on the trait
Put subjects in controlled situation
Manipulate some variable(s)
Measure some outcome(s)
Example…Slide88
Experimental
Methods: Example
Howarth & Eysenck (1988)
How does arousal influence memory?
Depends if STerm or LTerm memory:
“Action Decrement theory”
Example: strong emotion Short-term memory: worsens
Long-term memory: improvesSlide89
Howarth & Eysenck (1988)
High extraversion =
LOW
brain arousal
Low extraversion =
HIGH
brain arousal
If true…E > I short-term recallI > E long-term recall
Slide90
Howarth & Eysenck (1988)
Extraverts
Introverts
Delay Interval
# Words recalledSlide91
“Significance”
Need
to distinguish:
Statistical significance
What is the statistical probability that the result was due to random error?
Practical significance
Does
a result of that magnitude (r = .09) have any real world importance? Slide92
Personality of Video GamersSlide93
Effect Size
Measures of effect size
1. Magnitude
of
experimental effect
Cohen’s
d = (Group1 – Group2) / SD2. CorrelationsCorrelations
are effect sizes.Can convert d to correlation.
Slide94Slide95
Effect Size
Useful benchmarks:
Large 40+
Medium 25 - 40
Small 15 - 25
Example:
Milgram
(1962) Obedience Study…Slide96
r
=
.40Slide97
Effect Size
Milgram (1962)
effect size was equivalent to r = .40
This is one of the most well-known studies in social psychology.
Trait measures often predict important life outcomes > .40
Traits are indeed real and important. Slide98
Some Effect Sizes in Medicine:
Effect sizes in personality psychology are
not
abysmal.
A growing concern is how
replicable
important research findings are.
Now great interest in systematic
replication research
in psychology.Slide99
SUMMARY
Data sources:
LOTS
Data quality:
Reliability and Validity
Research designs:
Case study
Correlational Experiment