Self-report Personality Tests Research Articles

Personality differences in dental professionals: A cross-sectional survey

Despite its influence on occupational performance and team dynamics, there has been little research into the personality of dental professionals. Existing research does not typically use the prevailing five-factor model of personality. We aimed to measure the personality of dental professionals in the United Kingdom and investigate differences among groups. The sample (n= 906) comprised dental nurses (n= 475), general dental practitioners (GDPs) (n= 182), orthodontists (n= 201), and oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFSs) (n= 48). Recruitment was via email and social media. The questionnaire collected data on demographic variables and contained the Big Five Inventory, a validated self-report personality test. Participants scored on extraversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness neuroticism, and openness. A one-way analysis of variance and post-hoc tests with Bonferroni correction were used to identify significant differences in personality between occupations. Hierarchical multiple regression determined the influence of occupation over and above demographic variables. On a 5-point scale, orthodontists had a mean conscientiousness score 0.23 points higher than GDPs (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.36). Dental nurses had a mean conscientiousness score 0.28 points higher than GDPs (95% CI, 0.17-0.39). Dental nurses had a mean agreeableness score 0.16 points higher than orthodontists (95% CI, 0.05-0.27) and 0.30 points higher than OMFSs (95% CI, 0.10-0.50). For neuroticism, orthodontists had a mean score 0.21 points lower than dental nurses (95% CI, 0.06-0.36), and OMFSs had a mean score 0.43 points lower than dental nurses (95% CI, 0.16-0.70). GDPs had a mean neuroticism score 0.43 points higher than OMFSs (95% CI, 0.14-0.71; P=0.001). Differences were small to moderate in size (d= 0.35-0.45) and occupation was associated with personality after accounting for demographic variables. The personalities of dental nurses, GDPs, orthodontists, and OMFSs differed. Occupation was associated with differences in personality after accounting for demographic characteristics.

Applicant Faking on Personality Tests: Good or Bad and Why Should We Care?

The unitarian understanding of construct validity holds that deliberate response distortion in completing self-report personality tests (i.e., faking) threatens trait-based inferences drawn from test scores. This “faking-is-bad” (FIB) perspective is being challenged by an emerging “faking-is-good” (FIG) position that condones or favors faking and its underlying attributes (e.g., social skill, ATIC) to the degree they contribute to predictor–criterion correlations and are job relevant. Based on the unitarian model of validity and relevant empirical evidence, we argue the FIG perspective is psychometrically flawed and counterproductive to personality-based selection targeting trait-based fit. Carrying forward both positions leads to variously dark futures for self-report personality tests as selection tools. Projections under FIG, we suggest, are particularly serious. FIB offers a more optimistic future but only to the degree faking can be mitigated. Evidence suggesting increasing applicant faking rates and other alarming trends makes the FIB versus FIG debate a timely if not urgent matter.

Formalized Computer-Aided Handwriting Psychology: Validation and Integration into Psychological Assessment.

In contrast to traditional researches that involve a manual, non-quantitative, and subjective way of performing handwriting analysis, in the current research, a special computer-aided method of revised handwriting analysis is used. It includes the detection of personality traits via manual quantitative registration of handwriting signs and their automated quantitative evaluation. This method is based on a mathematical–statistical model that integrates multiple international publications on the evaluation of handwriting signs. The first aim is the validation of the revised method against the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire Revised (16PF-R), which is performed as a self-report personality test by test persons and was developed and researched empirically by Raymond B. Cattell et al. A second aim is the development of an integrated model for assessment including handwriting analysis: when both methods come to the same result on a certain scale, then the construct can be accepted with higher reliability; in contrast, when results are contradictory, they should be regarded as a limitation of each method and raise awareness in the researchers, as these contradictions are a precious source of additional information regarding the complexity, ambiguity, and context specificity of personality traits.

Using Overt and Covert Items in Self-Report Personality Tests: Susceptibility to Faking and Identifiability of Possible Fakers.

Self-report personality tests widely used in clinical, medical, forensic, and organizational areas of psychological assessment are susceptible to faking. Several approaches have been developed to prevent or detect faking, which are based on the use of faking warnings, ipsative items, social desirability scales, and validity scales. The approach proposed in this work deals with the use of overt items (the construct is clear to test-takers) and covert items (the construct is obscure to test-takers). Covert items are expected to be more resistant to faking than overt items. Two hundred sixty-seven individuals were presented with an alexithymia scale. Two experimental conditions were considered. Respondents in the faking condition were asked to reproduce the profile of an alexithymic individual, whereas those in the sincere condition were not asked to exhibit a particular alexithymia profile. The items of the scale were categorized as overt or covert by expert psychotherapists and analyzed through Rasch models. Respondents in the faking condition were able to exhibit measures of alexithymia in the required direction. This occurred for both overt and covert items, but to a greater extent for overt items. Differently from overt items, covert items defined a latent variable whose meaning was shared between respondents in the sincere and faking condition, and resistant to deliberate distortion. Rasch fit statistics indicated unexpected responses more often for respondents in the faking condition than for those in the sincere condition and, in particular, for the responses to overt items by individuals in the faking condition. More than half of the respondents in the faking condition showed a drift rate (difference between the alexithymia levels estimated on the responses to overt and covert items) significantly larger than that observed in the respondents in the sincere condition.

Self-report personality tests and medical school selection

There has been a growing interest on the assessment of personality when selecting medical students. However, how faking may affect its usefulness has been poorly addressed. Therefore, we aimed to assess the faking effect on self-report personality tests in the selection process of graduates to a medical school. Sixty-seven graduates admitted as medical students completed the 60-item NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability short-form scale at the stage of applying (baseline assessment) and after they had already been admitted (follow-up assessment). Reliability was assessed by the intra-class correlation coefficient and means of the personality traits compared by two paired sample t tests. At baseline assessment, the participants showed higher scores on the conscientiousness and lower scores on the neuroticism traits, respectively, 40.3 vs. 38.5 (p = 0.026) and 17.0 vs. 18.5 (p = 0.089). Also, at the follow-up assessment, the participants with low social desirability scored higher on the traits of openness to experience (−1.63 vs. 1.12, p = 0.036), conscientiousness (−3.09 vs. 0.03, p = 0.022), and neuroticism (3.88 vs. −0.69, p = 0.012). Our study does not suggest the use of self-report personality assessment in medical student’s selection as it can be faked particularly among applicants with low social desirability. Research is required to evaluate the faking effect on indirect personality assessment, namely through the tools that aim to select non-academic characteristics.

Psychological Assessment Training in Clinical Psychology Doctoral Programs

ABSTRACTWe surveyed American Psychological Association–accredited clinical psychology doctoral programs' (n = 83) training in psychological assessment—specifically, their coverage of various assessment topics and tests in courses and practica, and whether the training was optional or required. We report results overall and separately per training model (clinical science, scientist-practitioner, and practitioner-focused). Overall, our results suggest that psychological assessment training is as active, or even more active, than in previous years. Areas of increased emphasis include clinical interviewing and psychometrics; multimethod, outcomes, health, and collaborative or therapeutic assessment; and different types of cognitive and self-report personality tests. All or almost all practice-focused programs offered training with the Thematic Apperception Test and Rorschach compared to about half of the scientist-practitioner programs and a third of the clinical science programs. Although almost all programs reported teaching multimethod assessment, what constitutes different methods of assessing psychopathology should be clarified in future studies because many programs appear to rely on one method—self-report (especially clinical science programs). Although doctoral programs covered many assessment topics and tests in didactic courses, there appears to be a shortage of program-run opportunities for students to obtain applied assessment training. Finally, we encourage doctoral programs to be familiar with (a) internships' assessment expectations and opportunities, (b) the professional guidelines for assessment training, and (c) the American Psychological Association's requirements for preinternship assessment competencies.

The Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale outperforms the BIDR Impression Management Scale for identifying fakers

Self-report personality tests are used widely, but it is not uncommon for an individual’s scale score to be invalid due to Socially Desirable Responding (SDR): answering to be viewed favourably. Various indices exist to detect SDR (e.g., faking). The Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSDS) formerly was the most popular. The current gold standard is the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR), considered more sensitive because its development incorporated newer theoretical and empirical understanding of SDR and more sophisticated multivariate techniques. We compare the efficacy of these measures with surprising results: the MCSDS consistently outperforms the BIDR in identifying fakers. This finding indicates that the MCSDS should be retained because it captures elements of faking more effectively than the modern scale.

Correction for faking in self-report personality tests.

Faking is a common problem in testing with self-report personality tests, especially in high-stakes situations. A possible way to correct for it is statistical control on the basis of social desirability scales. Two such scales were developed and applied in the present paper. It was stressed that the statistical models of faking need to be adapted to different properties of the personality scales, since such scales correlate with faking to different extents. In four empirical studies of self-report personality tests, correction for faking was investigated. One of the studies was experimental, and asked participants to fake or to be honest. In the other studies, job or school applicants were investigated. It was found that the approach to correct for effects of faking in self-report personality tests advocated in the paper removed a large share of the effects, about 90%. It was found in one study that faking varied as a function of degree of how important the consequences of test results could be expected to be, more high-stakes situations being associated with more faking. The latter finding is incompatible with the claim that social desirability scales measure a general personality trait. It is concluded that faking can be measured and that correction for faking, based on such measures, can be expected to remove about 90% of its effects.

Faking in Personality Assessment: A “Multisaturation” Perspective on Faking as Performance

Concerns about socially desirable responding on self-report personality tests are heightened in employment settings where motivation to fake is elevated. Building on prior faking models and the classical X = T + e measurement model, we offer a unique performance-based perspective, in which opportunity, ability, and motivation to fake are jointly critical (P = O × A × M). Trait activation theory is used to show how impression management and self-deception can express multiple abilities and traits beyond those targeted and how response biases might be reduced. Three sets of testable hypotheses are offered. That nontargeted traits (e.g., ambition) serving faking might contribute to the prediction of job performance supports the view that faking could benefit selection decisions. Several arguments against this perspective are proposed.

P02-175 - Psychometric correlations between MMPI-2 and aggressivity

IntroductionThe use of standardized and objective instruments constitutes a support to the clinical observation in order to evaluate particular and general aspects of an individual's psychic life, and it can represent a valid aid in the evaluation and prediction of aggressivity. Our aim is the assessment of the MMPI-2 ‘s predictive capacity, a self-report personality test, constituted of 567 items, evaluating possible aggressive acts.Method20 subjects with a history of aggressivity, in the absence of major psychiatric disorders, were examined. The MMPI-2 test was administered to them, so as to assess their profile with reference to the aggressivity's indicators. It was also administered to a control group of subjects without a history of aggressivity.ResultsIn all the examined offenders, unlike the control group, were observed low T values in the K scale (< 40), an increase in the Pd base scale (>65) and supplemental scale O-H (>65); with respect to the derivative indexes, it was noticed a scarce adaptive capacity (Hy< Pa), a low tendency to the tolerance of frustrations and a negative value at T points in the PAI (Hy+100)-(Pd+2Pa).ConclusionIn concordance with the literature data, the MMPI-2 can be a useful support in evaluating the risk of aggressivity. Subjects at risk of acting out show low values in the K scale (< 40), high values in the Pd scale (>65). Other particularly important risk indicators are: code types 4/6, 4/8, 468, a scarce adaptive capacity (Hy< Pa) and a scarce tolerance to frustrations.

Investigating response styles in self-report personality data via a joint structural equation mixture modeling of item responses and response times

Distinct, independent lines of experimental and model-based measurement research have converged on the presence of multiple, aberrant response styles potentially detrimental to the validity of self-report personality test scores. However, these two lines of research have been confounded with the nature in which the theoretical latent personality trait is measured – particularly, the item score and response time (RT)–which reflect structure and process, respectively, of the trait score. The purpose of the current study was to conjointly model item scores and RTs and extend this flexible, exploratory method beyond the domain of cognitive ability constructs to the detection and distinction between distinct latent (i.e., unobserved; unknown a priori) response styles in self-report personality data. Results supported multiple forms of distortion simultaneously present for two constructs, Dutifulness and Extraversion. Unintentional and intentional distortion dominated latent structures in former, whereas response sets dominated in the latter.

Identifying the Aggressive Personality

Acts of workplace aggression by coworkers take a tremendous toll on organizations and their employees. This paper explores the thought processes used by aggressive individuals to rationalize hostile behaviors and discusses various types of workplace aggression. This paper also presents a new personality test, the Conditional Reasoning Test of Aggression, which addresses some of the shortcomings of self-report personality tests that have traditionally been used to identify and screen out aggressive applicants.

Influence of Coaching on Integrity Test Performance and Unlikely Virtues Scale Scores

Self-report personality and integrity tests have been used increasingly in recent years, which may make them a target of test coaching. However, relatively little is known about the effects of coaching on these types of tests. Extending previous research (Alliger, Lilienfeld, & Mitchell, 1996), we investigated the susceptibility of personality-based and overt integrity tests to coaching. Results showed that test takers who were coached on how to present a favorable impression had no real advantage in terms of their integrity test scores over those who were instructed to fake good without being coached on how to respond. However, although coaching had little effect on integrity test scores, coached test takers were able to fake a good impression while largely avoiding endorsement of unlikely virtues items. Thus, test coaching can undermine the use of unlikely virtues scales for identifying test takers who distort their responses.

Correcting for Motivational Distortion on Selected Adolescent Self-Report Personality Tests

The purpose of this study was to correct for motivational distortion (MD) on the High School Personality Questionnaire (HSPQ) and to evaluate the effectiveness of the HSPQ MD scale in identifying test-takers who had “faked good.” Subjects included 193 adolescent males who were given either the standard test instructions or else instructed to fake good. The participants completed the HSPQ and three additional scales that measure response distortions. Data analysis showed that the HSPQ MD scale correctly classified 63% of the respondents, yet showed the least effect size in comparison to the other scales. A multivariate analysis of variance and subsequent univariate analyses indicated that eight personality factors were susceptible to motivational distortion. Correction procedures were effective in reducing the effects of faking good. The relevance of the findings are discussed in terms of theoretical formulations by Cattell (1968, 1973, 1986) and implications for school psychologists.

A model of personality test item response dissimulation.

A general model of faking on self-report personality test items is proposed and empirically evaluated. The model predicts that differential test item response latencies should be faster for schema-congruent test answers than for noncongruent responses. Thus, individuals faking good should take relatively longer to endorse socially undesirable test item content than desirable test item content. Conversely, individuals faking bad should endorse socially desirable test item content relatively slower than undesirable test item content

Types of Power Motivation, Sense of Security, and Style of Power-Seeking in Groups

Two studies examined the hypothesis that, in men, the revised nPower system of Winter measures a specific type of power orientation, which is associated with a moderate sense of security and a moderately defensive style of power-seeking. It was also hypothesized that nPower measures a less secure and a more defensive type of power orientation than the Dominance scale (Dom) of the California Psychological Inventory. High nPower (nPow) scores were associated with a moderate sense of security, whereas high Dominance scores were associated with a high sense of security, as indicated by self-report and sentence-completion personality tests and by peer ratings. In small groups, nPow predicted the development of the moderately defensive attitude of extreme superiority, whereas Dominance predicted the development of the nondefensive orientations of leadership-seeking and unsolicited helping. nPow was negatively related to unsolicited helping. Dominance but not nPow predicted the achievement of leadership and self-confident behavior. On the basis of these results and findings from other studies, it is argued that nPow, unlike Dominance, does not predict leadership-seeking and attainment in long-term small groups.

Measuring nonpathological compulsiveness.

The purpose of this study was to refine the Leyton Obsessional Inventory for use among a normal population. A subset of 25 items from the Leyton inventory was administered to 563 college students along with several self-report personality tests. A factor analysis of the Leyton items yielded three subscales pertaining to the tendency to be overly concerned that decisions and tasks are completed perfectly according to a rigid procedure. The construct validity of the subscales was evaluated in terms of intercorrelations with scores on the other personality tests.

Emotion-trait interrelations and the measurement of personality.

To relate personality concepts to emotion concepts 12 personality trait items were selected on the basis of explicit criteria to represent the trait universe. These terms were paired in all possible combinations and used as a self-report personality test. The scoring categories, however, were based on a theory of emotion which assumes that personality traits can be conceptualized as mixtures of primary emotions. Since the primary emotions are conceived in terms of polar opposites the theory is able to specify the relative degree of conflict implied by each personality trait. The test was given to 3 groups of women equated for IQ, age and income but varying in degree of maladjustment. Two of the groups were hospitalized patients. Results showed that the groups varied significantly in the frequency of choices of high- and low-conflict traits according to theory. Each group had a distinctive emotion profile. An example of the clinical use of the test is given.