Using Indirect Measurement Tasks to Assess the Self‐concept of Personality: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analyses

This systematic review presents the current state of research investigating the implicit self‐concept of personality. First, we present results on meta‐analyses estimating internal consistency, reliability coefficients, the implicit–explicit consistency and the single association predictive effect of implicit self‐concept of personality measures. To do this, studies were aggregated over personality domains. Second, for each of the Five Factor personality domains, different aspects of construct validity and predictive validity are reviewed in a narrative way. Results show that implicit self‐concept of personality measures are reliable, and there is evidence for the construct and predictive validity of these implicit measures, especially in the extraversion and agreeableness domains of personality. However, it must be kept in mind that clear evidence for publication bias was found for studies examining the single association predictive pattern. Finally, this systematic review identifies some achievable improvements that are needed in future research. Large cross‐lab efforts are important in this respect. Moreover, the implicit self‐concept of personality field must move from an ‘ad hoc’ to a ‘validation’ approach in developing new indirect measurement tasks. By adopting these research objectives, the information processing account of personality will increase its potential to become integrated into mainstream personality theory and research. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Development of Indirect Measures of Conscientiousness: Combining a Facets Approach and Network Analysis

Because indirect measures of personality self‐concepts such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT) allow tapping into automatic processes, they can offer advantages over self‐report measures. However, prior investigations have led to mixed results regarding the validity of indirect measures of conscientiousness. We suggest that these results might be due to a failure to consider the different facets of conscientiousness. These facets are of crucial importance because they are associated differentially with other psychobiological constructs and they are also characterized by different mechanisms. Therefore, focusing on facets while developing indirect measures of conscientiousness may improve the validity of such measures. In Study 1, we conducted a psycholexical investigation to develop one IAT for each conscientiousness facet. In Study 2, we examined the convergent and discriminant validities of each facet IAT in relation to self‐report measures, peer‐report measures and self‐report behavioural indicators, and we investigated differential associations of the conscientiousness facets with working memory capacity and self‐control. We employed network analysis as a novel approach to elucidate differential relationships involving personality facets. The results corroborated the convergent and discriminant validity of the conscientiousness facet IATs with self‐reports and showed that the conscientiousness facets were differentially associated with working memory capacity and with self‐control. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Affective and cognitive religiosity: Influences on consumer reactance and self‐control

Self‐control is regularly studied in the marketing literature in relation to spending and food consumption; however, little research has assessed trait characteristics that influence consumers' self‐control. Although prior research in other fields has shown a generally positive relationship between religiosity and self‐control, such research has often used poor measures of religiosity and has inadequately examined marketplace outcomes or factors underlying consumers' self‐controlled responses. Thus, the studies herein build on self‐regulation theory to address and extend from these limitations by examining the influence of religiosity, as a multidimensional construct (particularly affective and cognitive religiosity), on self‐control and resulting influences on marketplace behaviors. Findings reveal that priming affectively (cognitively) religious consumers leads to greater (lower) consumer self‐control with a religious message prime (Study 1) and religious writing task (Study 2). Additionally, findings show that psychological reactance is at the root of these responses (Study 3). Implications build on self‐regulation theory and the strength model of self‐control to show the importance of religiosity (particularly affective and cognitive religiosity), interactions with religious primes, and psychological reactance in understanding consumers' self‐control.     

Cognitive and Affective Regulation: Scale Validation and Nomological Network Analysis

This research examined the nomological network of cognitive and affective regulation with two scales developed to operationalise these constructs within complex performance domains. Data demonstrated that cognitive and affective regulation were differentially related to self‐regulatory, affective, and achievement variables at the inter‐ and intra‐individual levels. Psychometric properties of each scale were supported via confirmatory factor analyses and multilevel modeling. Study 1 established support for internal consistency, unidimensionality, and construct validity; Study 2 cross‐validated the scales in a different performance context; and Study 3 demonstrated utility for capturing intra‐individual changes in self‐regulation and predicting performance. This research highlights the importance of examining cognitive and affective regulation at the intra‐individual level of analysis; and the new measures provide a valid tool for advancing progress in this area.     

A Multimethod Multitrait Validity Assessment of Self‐Construal in Japan,Korea, and the United States

A large number of previous studies have used self‐construal to predict communication outcomes. Recent evidence, however, suggests that validity problems may exist in self‐construal measurement. The current study conducted a multimethod multitrait (Campbell & Fiske, 1959) validation study of self‐construal measures with data (total N= 578) collected in Korea (N= 200), Japan (N= 212), and the U.S. (N= 166). The data showed that the Singelis (1994) Self‐Construal Scale, the Cross, Bacon, and Morris (2000) Relational Interdependent Self‐Construal Scale (RISC), and the Kuhn and McPartland (1954) Twenty Statements Test (TST) lacked convergent and discriminant validity, both pan‐culturally and within each of the three countries included in the study. Scores on the TST were not significantly related to scores on the self‐construal scales, and the various self‐construal measures correlated more highly with measures of communication directness than with alternative measures of the same type of self‐construal. Substantial method effects were also observed. The results were tested for both 2‐ and 3‐dimensional models of self‐construal and for refined scales and scales with all items retained. The results of all analyses were inconsistent with the claim that self‐construal measures are construct valid.     

Assessing the Validity of Self Construal Scales

We disagree with Levine et al.'s (2003) conclusion that the 3 self construal scales currently in use have “severe” or “fatal” flaws. We argue that the results of Levine et al.'s meta‐analysis and priming studies do not raise problems with the validity of self construal scales, in part, because their results are compatible with theorizing about self construals. We also contend that Levine et al.'s measurement studies do not necessarily lead to the conclusion that there are problems with the validity of the scales (e.g., there may be multiple dimensions that form independent and interdependent self construals in second‐order factor analyses). We summarize other evidence for the construct validity of self construal scales which indicates that there are theoretically consistent findings across approximately 50 studies using the 3 scales. This would not be possible if there were major problems with the 2‐dimensional model of self construals or the scales used to measure them. We conclude that the 2‐dimensional model of self construals and the current scales are viable for use in future research.     

Development and validation of a work‐specific measure of cognitive failure: Implications for occupational safety

Two studies were conducted to develop and validate a work‐specific measure of cognitive failure, the Workplace cognitive failure scale (WCFS). In initial item development, content validity was gained via sorting. In Study 1, data were obtained from an employee sample that supported the factorial, construct, and criterion‐related validity of the WCFS. In particular, results supported the expected relationships of workplace cognitive failure with facets of personality, role overload, components of self‐regulation, and self‐reported measures of safety outcomes. Study 2 examined the WCFS in two additional employee samples, and provided further criterion‐related validity using objective measures of injury and supervisor ratings of safety behaviour. Overall, results supported the validity and utility of the new measure in assessing organizational safety behaviour and outcomes, more so than the general cognitive failure scale.     

The Initiator Style Questionnaire: A scale to assess initiator tendency in couples

The tendency of partners in a dyad to initiate or avoid relationship problem discussions has proven to have both theoretical and clinical significance. This tendency is conceptualized here as initiator tendency, which is defined as the propensity to initiate relationship‐focused discussions with one’s partner or avoid such discussions. The current paper reports 3 studies summarizing the development of a measure to assess initiator tendency: the Initiator Style Questionnaire (ISQ). The ISQ provides self‐report assessments of self and partner’s perceived initiator tendencies. The studies indicate that the 2 parallel 10‐item measures exhibit strong unidimensionality, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability, as well as appropriate discriminant validity and good convergent and construct validity. Limitations and applications are discussed.     

APPROACH OR AVOIDANCE (OR BOTH?): INTEGRATING CORE SELF‐EVALUATIONS WITHIN AN APPROACH/AVOIDANCE FRAMEWORK

Core self‐evaluations (CSE) represent a new personality construct that, despite an accumulation of evidence regarding its predictive validity, provokes debate regarding the fundamental approach or avoidance nature of the construct. This set of studies sought to clarify the approach/avoidance nature of CSE by examining its relation with approach/avoidance personality traits and motivation constructs (Study 1); we subsequently examined approach/avoidance motivational mechanisms as mediators of the relation between CSE and job performance (Study 2). Overall, the studies demonstrate that CSE is best conceptualized as representing both (high) approach tendencies and (low) avoidance tendencies; implications of these findings for CSE theory are discussed.     

When Validity Testing Lacks Validity: Comment on Levine et al.

The death of self‐construal research has been greatly exaggerated. Levine et al. (2003) highlight the alleged methodological limitations of the current body of the self‐construal model of culture. Their allegations, whether true or not, require a fair investigation. Careful examination of Levine et al. reveals pervasive logical flaws, methodological errors, and interpretation biases, which stem from ethnic stereotyping and other erroneous assumptions at various junctures. These fundamental errors, in turn, render their conclusions untenable. In testing their 1st set of hypotheses, which they proclaim to be “central to the validity” of self‐construal scales, Levine et al. bifurcate the participants into “Westerners” versus “Asians,” and then impose their a priori stereotype of how Westerners ought to be versus how Asians ought to be, which is scientifically unacceptable. This is an unscientific validation criterion (comparable to crude ethnic stereotypes such as “Asians are smarter”) and should not be used to judge the scales' validity. Next, in their discussion of priming, Levine et al. assert that the construct validity of the interdependent self‐construal requires that it must be susceptible to priming. This is an elementary logical fallacy. It simply does not follow from the definition of the interdependent self‐construal and therefore cannot be used as a criterion which reflects on construct validity. Their priming experiments are also deeply flawed by the unrepresentative sample of participants. Further, in their factor analyses, Levine et al. set up the “straw man” of a “universal a priori 2‐factor solution” although no self‐construal scholar or theory insists that there are precisely 2 universally applicable self‐construals or that the current self‐construal scales are perfect. The results of statistical analyses, such as those in Levine et al., crucially depend on the selection of presuppositions. Levine et al.'s presuppositions are untenable, yet they are passed off as self‐evident criteria for validity testing. Their article tries to create an illusion of finality, but is pervasively and fundamentally flawed.     

Construct Validity of Multi‐Source Performance Ratings: An Examination of the Relationship of Self‐, Supervisor‐, and Peer‐Ratings with Cognitive and Personality Measures

Although more and more organizations prefer using multi‐source performance ratings or 360° feedback over traditional performance appraisals, researchers have been rather skeptical regarding the reliability and validity of such ratings. The present study examined the validity of self‐, supervisor‐, and peer‐ratings of 195 employees in a Dutch public organization, using scores on an In‐Basket exercise, an intelligence test, and a personality questionnaire as external criterion measures. Interrater agreement ranged from .28 to .38. Variance in the ratings was explained by both method and content factors. Support for the external construct validity was rather weak. Supervisor‐ratings were not found to be superior to self‐ and peer‐ratings in predicting the scores on the external measures.     

Using the Implicit Association Test to Assess Risk Propensity Self‐concept: Analysis of its Predictive Validity on a Risk‐taking Behaviour in a Natural Setting

The present work analyses the predictive validity of measures provided by several available self‐report and indirect measurement instruments to assess risk propensity (RP) and proposes a measurement instrument using the Implicit Association Test: the IAT of Risk Propensity Self‐Concept (IAT‐RPSC), an adaptation of the prior IAT‐RP of Dislich et al. Study 1 analysed the relationship between IAT‐RPSC scores and several RP self‐report measures. Participants' risk‐taking behaviour in a natural setting was also assessed, analyzing the predictive validity of the IAT‐RPSC scores on risk‐taking behaviour compared with the self‐report measures. Study 2 analysed the predictive validity of the IAT‐RPSC scores in comparison with other indirect measures. Results of these studies showed that the IAT‐RPSC scores exhibited good reliability and were positively correlated to several self‐report and indirect measures, providing evidence for convergent validity. Most importantly, the IAT‐RPSC scores predicted risk‐taking behaviour in a natural setting with real consequences above and beyond all other self‐report and indirect measures analysed. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Exerting Self‐Control ≠ Sacrificing Pleasure

Self‐control is a prominent topic in consumer research, where it is often conceptualized as the abstinence from hedonic consumption. We examine whether this conceptualization accurately captures consumers’ experiences of self‐control conflicts/failures in light of seminal self‐control theories in economics and psychology. Rejecting that notion, we argue that self‐control failures are choices in violation of superordinate long‐term goals accompanied by anticipated regret, rather than choices of hedonic over utilitarian consumption. This conceptualization has important methodological, theoretical, and practical implications. Methodologically, it highlights the need for experimental paradigms with higher construct validity. Theoretically, it helps elucidate how self‐control is distinct from impatience and self‐regulation. Practically, it provides a rich set of implications for deducing interventions on the individual and public policy level to help consumers exert self‐control.     

Further validation of a single‐item measure of social identification

We examine the validity and reliability of a single‐item measure of social identification (SISI). Convergent validity is shown with significant positive correlations with previously published unidimensional and multidimensional measures of in‐group identification and other group‐relevant measures (e.g., entitativity and collective self‐esteem). Divergent validity is shown via nonsignificant correlations with social desirability measures. Predictive validity is shown with positive correlations with group‐relevant behavior (e.g., volunteerism and voting). External validity is shown with correlations with other in‐group identification measures in a community sample. The reliability of the scale is shown by examining scores of the SISI for six different identities at three points in time. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Rainbows in the society: A measure of hope for society

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a measure of social hope. Previous studies have extensively reported on personal hope and its outcomes. Although a few studies have suggested the concept of collective or social hope, there is no instrument to assess the construct. In this study, we created a 5‐item scale, drawing on Snyder's hope theory, and collected two sets of survey data online. Analysis of these data sets revealed that the new scale was structurally unidimensional and internally consistent. In association with Snyder's State Hope Scale, the Social Hope Scale showed convergent and discriminant validity. The social hope construct also exhibited theoretically meaningful relationships with political efficacy and self‐construal (concurrent validity). Finally, social hope was higher for those who had participated in certain types of social activism than it was for those who had not (predictive validity). These results suggest that the Social Hope Scale is a reliable and valid self‐report measure of hopeful thinking for society.     

Addiction and Self‐Deception: A Method for Self‐Control?

Neil Levy argues that while addicts who believe they are not addicts are self‐deceived, addicts who believe they are addicts are just as self‐deceived. Such persons accept a false belief that their addictive behaviour involves a loss of control. This paper examines two implications of Levy's discussion: that accurate self‐knowledge may be particularly difficult for addicts; and that an addict's self‐deceived belief that they cannot control themselves may aid their attempts at self‐control. I argue that the self‐deceived beliefs of addicts in denial and of self‐described addicts differ in kind. Unlike the self‐deception of an addict in denial, that of the self‐described addict allows them to acknowledge their behaviour. As such, it may aid an addict to develop more self‐control. A paradoxical implication is that this self‐deception may allow an addict more self‐knowledge.     

Facets of private and public self‐consciousness: construct and discriminant validity

The construct and discriminant validity of proposed facets of private self‐consciousness (Self‐Reflectiveness and Internal State Awareness) and public self‐consciousness (Style Consciousness and Appearance Consciousness) was examined in two studies. In study 1 an exploratory factor analysis of 367 subjects' responses to a translated version of the Self‐Consciousness Scale (SCS) of Fenigstein, Scheir, and Buss confirmed the existence of two factors of private and public self‐consciousness. Confirmatory factor analysis of 199 university students' responses to the SCS confirmed the results from study 1. A two‐dimensional model of private and public self‐consciousness respectively represented a significant improvement in fit to data over single‐factor models. Further, the two facets of private and public self‐consciousness were related differently to measures representing different aspects of adjustment/maladjustment. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Is the Political Skill Inventory Fit for Personnel Selection? An Experimental Field Study

The political skill inventory (PSI) assesses social effectiveness in organizations by self‐reports and has demonstrated strong evidence of validity. It was the purpose of this experimental field study to investigate construct and criterion‐related validity of the PSI when used under conditions of personnel selection. In the experimental group (n=102), the instructions asked job incumbents to work on the PSI, a social desirability scale, and a Big‐Five personality inventory as if they took part in a personnel selection procedure for a personally very attractive position. Additionally, they were asked to report yearly income. In the control group (n=110), job incumbents were asked to answer the items honestly. As expected, in both conditions, the PSI did not correlate with social desirability, but it correlated positively with extraversion, conscientiousness, and income, and negatively with neuroticism, thus demonstrating construct and incremental criterion‐related validity under both conditions. Implications and limitations are discussed.     

A Matter of Context: A Meta‐Analytic Investigation of the Relative Validity of Contextualized and Noncontextualized Personality Measures

The empirical evidence that has accumulated in support of the notion that personality is a valid predictor of employee performance is vast, yet debate on the matter continues. This study investigates frame‐of‐reference effects as they relate to the validity of self‐report measures of personality. Specifically, we compare the validities of general, noncontextualized personality measures and work‐specific, contextualized measures. The findings suggest that personality measures are a more valid predictor of performance when the scale items or instructions are framed specifically so as to reference work‐specific behaviors. We found that the validities for noncontextualized measures of personality ranged from .02 to .22, with a mean validity of .11. The validities for contextualized measures ranged from .14 to .30, with a mean of .24 . Additional moderator analyses were conducted in an effort to examine several alternate explanations for these validity differences. Specifically, we examined differences between the developmental purpose (general use vs. workplace use) and reliabilities of each type of personality measure. We also compared the validities from published studies to those from unpublished studies. Results suggest that these moderators did not have an impact on the validity differences between noncontextualized and contextualized measures.