Is Implicit Personality Theory illusory? Armchair criticism versus replicated empirical research

The Tzeng and Tzeng (1982) criticisms of the assumptions underlying the Jackson, Chan, and Stricker (1979) study of Implicit Personality Theory fail to take account of the relevant empirical data. For example, the key contention of Tzeng and Tzeng–that the measures of judged and empirical trait-co-occurrence used by Jackson et al. were not comparable–is contradicted by replicated findings which establish that the two are substantially and consistently related, results for which Tzeng and Tzeng offer no alternative explanation. In short, Tzeng and Tzeng have not demonstrated that their criticisms have any real substance. Hence, none of the Jackson et al. results and conclusions, including those questioning the conditional probability index as a measure of empirical co-occurrence and those supporting the validity of Implicit Personality Theory, are affected or changed.     

The artificial dispute over Implicit Personality Theory: An answer to Jackson, Strieker, and Mirels

In their evaluation of Tzeng and Tzeng's (1982) concerns over the level of sophistication currently evident in the study of Implicit Personality Theory (IPT), Jackson and Strieker (1982) and Mirels (1982a) reaffirm their disputed positions at the opposing extremes of the myth-vs.-fact continuum of IPT. The present paper re-examines major measurement and statistical issues in the empirical study of IPT that are still unacknowledged by either Jackson and Strieker, or Mirels, or both. It is demonstrated that their dispute is artificial and can be accounted for by their lack of measuremental sophistication and their statistical partialities. Researchers are cautioned to consider more than “mechanical computability” and “statistical adoptability” in conducting and/or judging similar empirical studies.     

Implicit Personality Theory: Myth or fact? An illustration of how empirical research can miss

The present paper examines some problems in the current literature on Implicit Personality Theory (IPT) with specific reference to the controversial publications by Mirels (1976) and Jackson, Chan, and Stricker (1979). Their disputes address the question of whether individuals' estimates of trait co-occurrence accurately reflect actual (empirical) trait co-occurrence in personality ratings. The cogency of the disputes is undermined, however, by both studies' deficiences at the levels of theory, measurement, and statistical analysis. For instance, the indices used for representing estimated and empirical trait co-occurrence are neither adequately justified nor commensurate. For future personality attribution research, we discuss both the theoretical distinction between two (comparative and absolute) judgment formats frequently involved in data gathering and the empirical distinction between sophisticated and unsophisticated research strategies involved in data analysis. Finally, it was concluded that due to the residual effect of the empiricism of the 1950s and 1960s, and a lack of logical coherence between cognitive psychology, psychometric theories, and statistical data manipulations, IPT is still at an early stage of development. Future investigators should therefore develop a rigorous program with the sophistication of so-called “nomological operationalization” for a systematic investigation of IPT.     

The illusory nature of Implicit Personality Theory: Logical and empirical considerations

Mirels (1976) demonstrated that derivations from Implicit Personality Theory were compromised by marked absolute discrepancies between subjects’ estimates of the coendorsement of personality items and the empirical relations between the items. Arguments presented by Jackson, Chan, and Strieker (1979) in a recent critique of this demonstration were shown to be based on an arbitrary and severely restrictive view of implicit theory. Logical and empirical considerations were brought to bear in the present paper to indicate that (a) empirical conditional probabilities of test item coendorsement are an appropriate comparison standard for estimates of those probabilities, (b) large absolute discrepancies between estimated and empirical coendorsement must be regarded as seriously impugning the accuracy of IPT, and (c) exclusive reliance on the correlational correspondence between estimated and empirical coendorsement results in an overly sanguine view of the accuracy of IPT. Moreover, it was shown that subjects fail to discriminate between highly asymmetrical conditional probabilities, a finding directly at variance with the assertion that the presumably veridical postulates of implicit theory are inductively extracted from experience. Also discussed were the relation between IPT and everyday social judgments, and the influence of IPT on behavioral ratings.     

Implicit personality theory: Is it illusory?1

Several studies have found a substantial association between subjects' judgments about the co-occurrence of personality items and the items' actual co-occurrence, lending support to the validity of implicit personality theory. This work has recently been called into question by an investigation of Mirels (1976) that reported a nonsignificant relationship between judged probabilities of item pairs and the pairs' empirical coendorsement probabilities (actually calculated conditional probabilities) derived from self-report responses. Using Mirels' data as well as new data, an appreciable and highly significant association between judgments of behavioral co-occurrence and empirical coendorsement was found, when the latter was measured by correlational-type indexes instead of conditional probability. This outcome indicates that the divergent results in the Mirels investigation were due to its use of the conditional probability index as a measure of empirical coendorsement. These findings add to the accumulating body of evidence pointing to the validity of implicit personality theory.     

Is There Any Empirical Support for Bowen's Concepts of Differentiation of Self,

Murray Bowen's Family Systems Theory is considered by many to be the most thorough and thoughtful set of ideas that family therapy has created (Nichols & Schwartz, 1995). But does the literature support his concepts and ideas? This article reviewed eight empirical research articles published in the last decade or so in which Bowenian concepts were tested. The purpose was to determine whether there is any empirical support for Bowen's concepts of differentiation of self, triangulation, and fusion. Some of Bowen's notions were supported by empirical data and two valid and reliable instruments designed to test Bowenian concepts were created.     

The Interplay of Temperament and Regulatory Focus on Consumer Problem‐Solving Modes

Regulatory Focus Theory's two fundamental processing orientations, Prevention Focus and Promotion Focus, have been shown to capture important differences in problem‐solving motivation, goal pursuit, and individual‐task ‘fit’, although some ambiguity remains regarding the nature of these differences; they have been construed as chronic but have also been related to specific situational factors. Separately, understandings of temperament (hereditable, physiological‐based individual differences) have advanced significantly, although efforts to validate measures of temperament have been frustrating. Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory posits two fundamental temperaments, the Behavioral Inhibition System (an avoidance system sensitive to punishments and threats) and the Behavioral Activation System (an appetitive/approach system sensitive to rewards). We relate Regulatory Focus Theory to Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory, initiating the integration of Promotion Focus and Prevention Focus with the extensive extant theory and nomological networks of temperament and highlighting conspicuous empirical divergence between the two systems.     

1991—2008年内隐记忆研究的文献计量学分析

对收录在中国期刊网上的154条内隐记忆研究的论文题录(1991—2008年)进行计量学分析,发现:(1)自1991年来,我国内隐研究呈稳步增长趋势,前后三个六年里,论文数量之比近似为1∶2∶3;2005-2007年是发表论文数量最多的时间,2008年又有所下降。(2)我国内隐记忆的实证研究与理论研究势均力敌。实证研究中,研究对象主要是正常人,特殊群体的关注较少。(3)我国内隐记忆研究具有较高的水平,但仍有待进一步提高。(4)我国的内隐记忆研究力量严重分布不均,在经济较发达的华东、华北、中南地区占了绝对优势。高校是我国内隐记忆的主力军。(5)合作研究与独著研究平分秋色。合作研究不仅要加强内部合作,更要注重外部合作乃至国际合作研究。     

Traits and Adaptations: A Theoretical Examination and New Empirical Evidence

We investigated the distinction between traits (also labelled basic tendencies or dispositions) and (characteristic) adaptations, two related features of the personality system postulated to influence how personality manifests throughout the lifespan. Traits are alleged to be universal, causal, and enduring entities that exist across cultures and through evolutionary time, whereas learned adaptations are acquired through sustained interaction with cultural, physical, and social environments. Although this distinction is central to several personality theories, they provide few measurable criteria to distinguish between traits and adaptations. Moreover, little research has endeavoured to operationalize it, let alone test it empirically. Drawing on insights from four frameworks—the Five-Factor Theory, Cybernetic Big Five Theory, Disposition–Adaptation–Environment Model, and New Big Five—we attempted to investigate the distinction both theoretically and empirically. Using various experimental rating conditions, we first scored 240 questionnaire items in their degrees of definitionally reflecting traits and/or adaptations. Next, we correlated these definitional ratings with the items' estimates of rank-order stability, consensual validity, and heritability—criteria often associated with personality traits. We found some evidence that items rated as more trait-like and less adaptation-like correspond to higher cross-rater agreement and stability but not heritability. These associations survived controlling for items' retest reliability, social desirability, and variance. The theoretical and empirical implications of these findings are discussed. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Is temporal order encoded automatically?

The reported experiment tested the suggestion that encoding of temporal order is automatic. Specifically, two of Hasher and Zacks’s (1979) automaticity criteria were examined: (1) that the amount and appropriateness of practice received would not affect acquisition of temporal information, and (2) that reliable individual differences would not be found on a test of memory for temporal order. Contrary to expectations, neither of these criteria was confirmed: Retention of temporal order increased with practice at three (or four) successive lists. And, reliable individual differences were indicated by the findings that subjects’ relative performance levels remained stable across lists, and that groups with higher average academic ability outperformed those with lower ability. Similar results were obtained for a flee-recall task (in which case they were expected). Problems of assessing degrees of nonautomaticity are discussed. Our data are seen to be in general conformity with Tzeng’s (e.g., Tzeng & Cotton, 1980) “study-phase” retrieval theory of temporal coding.     

Depressive implicit associations and adults' reports of childhood abuse

Theory and research suggest that negative events in childhood (e.g., childhood abuse) may contribute to the development of a cognitive vulnerability to depression. A limitation of past research, however, is that the majority has focused on explicit cognitions (e.g., attributional style) and it remains unclear whether similar relations would be observed for more implicit measures of depressive cognitions. This study investigated the relation between young adults' reports of childhood abuse and their implicit depressive cognitions, as measured by the Implicit Association Test. As hypothesised, young adults reporting a history of childhood abuse exhibited stronger implicit associations for depression-relevant stimuli than did individuals with no abuse history. These results were maintained even after statistically controlling for the influence of current depressive symptom levels.     

Implicit Religion

Implicit Religion: the Journal of the Centre for the Study of Implicit Religion and Contemporary Spirituality began publication in 1998, but the formal study of Implicit Religion began just thirty years before, in 1968. Its study concentrates upon those aspects of everyday life, the understanding of which may be enhanced if we ask whether they might have, within them, some sort of inherent religiosity of their own. While many other terms, and many other journals, have some degree of overlap with this area of interest, now, it is thought that this Journal is unique in its consistent study of the non-reductionist theory and empirical manifestations of (what might be termed) “secular faith.”     

Do Subordinates Formulate an Impression of their Manager's Implicit Person Theory?

Implicit person theory (IPT) is characterised by the belief that specific attributes of people are generally either more static (i.e. entity beliefs) or more malleable (i.e. incremental beliefs). Within the organisational sciences literature, past IPT research has focused on the impact of managers' IPT beliefs on their own behaviours. The current research advances the extant literature by presenting two empirical studies that assess whether subordinates formulate an impression of their manager's IPT. The results are consistent with subordinates forming such an impression, as subordinates working under the same manager generally agreed on their manager's IPT. Moreover, our results support the convergent validity (e.g. with job satisfaction, turnover intention) and the discriminant validity (e.g. with transformational leadership, subordinates' own IPT perception) of the subordinates' impressions of their manager's IPT. The theoretical and practical implications of the current research, and future directions regarding cross‐cultural differences related to IPT impression, are discussed.     

A sequential theory of psychological discrimination

A theory of discrimination which assumes that subjects compare psychological values evoked by a stimulus to a subjective referent is proposed. Momentary differences between psychological values for the stimulus and the referent are accumulated over time until one or the other of two response thresholds is first exceeded. The theory is analyzed as a random walk bounded between two absorbing barriers. A general solution to response conditioned expected response times is computed and the important role played by the moment generating function (mgf) for increments to the random walk is examined. From considerations of the mgf it is shown that unlike other random walk models [Stone, 1960; Laming, 1968] the present theory does not imply that response conditioned mean correct and error times must be equal. For two fixed stimuli and a fixed referent it is shown that by controlling values of response thresholds, subjects can produce Receiver Operating Characteristics similar or identical to those predicted by Signal Detection Theory, High Threshold Theory, or Low Threshold Theory.     

Reconceptualizing personality pathology in DSM-5: limitations in evidence for eliminating dependent personality disorder and other DSM-IV syndromes

The DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Workgroup proposed that five DSM-IV personality disorders be eliminated as formal diagnostic categories (paranoid, schizoid, histrionic, narcissistic, and dependent), because these syndromes purportedly have low clinical utility and minimal evidence for validity. Scrutiny of studies cited in support of this proposal reveals difficulties in three areas: (1) Inadequate information regarding parameters of the literature search; (2) Mixed empirical support for proposed changes; and (3) Selective attention to certain disorders and not others. Review of validity and clinical utility data related to dependent personality disorder indicates that evidence regarding this syndrome does not differ from that of syndromes proposed for retention in DSM-5. Limitations in the research base cited by the workgroup illuminates gaps in the personality disorder literature, and may serve as a starting point for systematic research on personality pathology so that adequate empirical data are available to decide which syndromes to retain, revise, or remove in future versions of the diagnostic manual.     

Social Judgement Theory

This paper first explores a number of themes in the psychological system developed by the Austrian-American psychologist, Egon Brunswik, focusing on those that had a formative influence on Social Judgement Theory. We show that while perception was a recurring ground for Brunswik's empirical and theoretical work, his psychology was a psychology of cognition in the broadest sense. Next, two major themes in Social Judgement Theory— functionalism and probabilism— are described, and the elegant formulation known as Brunswik's Lens Model is introduced. Some methodological and theoretical implications of these themes are presented. The paper concludes with Hammond's Cognitive Continuum Theory (CCT), which is a theory describing modes of cognition and how those modes are influenced by task characteristics.     

Gradable adjectives: A defence of pluralism

This paper attacks the Implicit Reference Class Theory of gradable adjectives and proposes instead a ‘pluralist’ approach to the semantics of those terms, according to which they can be governed by a variety of different types of standards, one, but only one, of which is the group-indexed standards utilized by the Implicit Reference Class Theory.     

Faking of the Implicit Association Test Is Statistically Detectable and Partly Correctable

Male and female participants were instructed to produce an altered response pattern on an Implicit Association Test measure of gender identity by slowing performance in trials requiring the same response to stimuli designating own gender and self. Participants' faking success was found to be predictable by a measure of slowing relative to unfaked performances. This combined task slowing (CTS) indicator was then applied in reanalyses of three experiments from other laboratories, two involving instructed faking and one involving possibly motivated faking. Across all studies involving instructed faking, CTS correctly classified 75% of intentionally faking participants. Using the CTS index to adjust faked Implicit Association Test scores increased the correlation of CTS-adjusted measures with known group membership, relative to unadjusted (i.e., faked) measures.     

Getting Along and/or Getting Ahead: Differential HEXACO Personality Correlates of Likeability and Popularity among Adolescents

Getting along (i.e. to be liked) and getting ahead (i.e. to be popular) are two fundamental psychological motives that have important consequences for adolescents' well-being. Especially antisocial behavioural tendencies, which are less well covered by the Big Five than by the HEXACO model, have been shown to differentially predict likeability and popularity. In this study, possible differential relations between personality and likeability and popularity were investigated using the HEXACO Simplified Personality Inventory and sociometric measures of likeability and popularity among 552 (12 to 14 years old) adolescents. Results showed that agreeableness was the most important likeability predictor, whereas extraversion (positive), openness to experience, honesty-humility, and agreeableness (all three negative) were the most important popularity predictors. Facet-level analyses revealed that selected HEXACO facets (greed avoidance, fearfulness, social boldness, gentleness, prudence, perfectionism, aesthetic appreciation, and altruism) most strongly—and in opposite directions—differentiated in the prediction of likeability and popularity. Furthermore, none of the expected interactions but several masking and cancellation effects were observed. The results, which are also discussed in light of interpersonal circumplex, resource control strategies, hierarchical differentiation, and socioanalytic frameworks, suggest that—among early adolescents—differential personality predictors may make it difficult to both get along and get ahead. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology