Assessment of DSM-IV personality disorders in obsessive-compulsive disorder: comparison of clinical diagnosis, self-report questionnaire, and semi-structured interview

In patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder, personality disorders are not many times assessed according to DSM-IV criteria. The purpose of the present study is to examine the prevalence of personality disorders diagnosed according to the DSM-IV in a severely disordered OCD population (n=65) with three different methods of assessing personality disorders (structured interview, questionnaire, and clinical diagnoses). Furthermore, correspondence between these different methods was investigated and their construct validity was examined by relating the three methods to external variables. Each method resulted in a predominance of Cluster C personality disorders, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder had the highest prevalence. However, there was generally low correspondence regarding which patient had which personality disorder. Results concerning the relation of external variables were the most promising for the structured clinical interview.     

Residential mobility moderates preferences for egalitarian versus loyal helpers

The present research examines whether the experience and the expectation of residential mobility related to the type of helpers whom people wanted to befriend and work with. We predicted and found that people who moved more frequently before college (Studies 1 and 2) preferred those who were likely to extend a helpful hand to those outside their immediate social circles. By contrast, people who had not moved preferred those who prioritized helping in-group members over strangers. Study 3 tested the hypothesis by priming the expectation of residential mobility versus stability and replicated the findings with residential mobility but did not find difference in the stability condition. These results suggest that residential mobility does not merely change people's living environments but also affects interpersonal preferences and with whom people would like to associate.     

Predicting Conversational Reports of a Personal Event

This study concerns topic selection in conversational reports of a personal event, the birth of a baby. Ninety phone calls from 12 fathers and 7 mothers were analyzed in terms of the subject's prior concerns (prenatal questionnaire) and the outcome of events (postpartum questionnaire). Four analyses were conducted. The first showed that subjects were likely to mention topics of high, rather than low, prior concern, and unusual, rather than ordinary, outcome. The second showed that chronologically early topics were discussed before late topics. These findings were compatible with either a memory (i.e., “knowledge telling”) or a communication (i.e., “knowledge processing”) model of topic selection. Two additional analyses were conducted to evaluate predictions derived from each of these models. The first analysis showed that the conversations also contained a small set of pro forma topics that appeared earlier and more frequently than other topics. The second showed that these topics were more likely to be recipient-initiated. These results suggest that reporters deviated from an optimal retrieval plan to take the recipient into account. The results as a whole support a communication-based, “knowledge processing” (Bereiter & Scardomalia, 1980) model of topic selection.     

Calibration trumps confidence as a basis for witness credibility

Confident witnesses are deemed more credible than unconfident ones, and accurate witnesses are deemed more credible than inaccurate ones. But are those effects independent? Two experiments show that errors in testimony damage the overall credibility of witnesses who were confident about the erroneous testimony more than that of witnesses who were not confident about it. Furthermore, after making an error, less confident witnesses may appear more credible than more confident ones. Our interpretation of these results is that people make inferences about source calibration when evaluating testimony and other social communication.     

Accuracy, confidence, and calibration: how young children and adults assess credibility

Do children and adults use the same cues to judge whether someone is a reliable source of information? In 4 experiments, we investigated whether children (ages 5 and 6) and adults used information regarding accuracy, confidence, and calibration (i.e., how well an informant's confidence predicts the likelihood of being correct) to judge informants' credibility. We found that both children and adults used information about confidence and accuracy to judge credibility; however, only adults used information about informants' calibration. Adults discredited informants who exhibited poor calibration, but children did not. Requiring adult participants to complete a secondary task while evaluating informants' credibility impaired their ability to make use of calibration information. Thus, children and adults may differ in how they infer credibility because of the cognitive demands of using calibration.     

Being liked is more than having a good personality: The role of matching

Is possession of desirable personality characteristics the only predictor that someone will be well-liked in a group of acquaintances, or does similarity to others in the group also matter? We tested participants (n = 844) who had been assigned to peer groups and had spent 6 weeks together. Participants assessed self and peer personalities. We found that after controlling for attributions of desirable and undesirable personality characteristics, individuals with similar personality patterns liked each other more than individuals with dissimilar patterns. Further analysis revealed similarity of basic demographic attributes (i.e., sex and race) predicted liking independent of personality similarity. Results provide a comprehensive analysis of relations between personality similarity and liking among acquaintances in a randomized, naturalistic design.     

Credible testimony in and out of court

Assessing informants’ credibility is critical to several aspects of the legal process (e.g., when police interrogate suspects or jurors evaluate witnesses). There is a large body of research—from various areas of psychology and allied fields—about how people evaluate each others’ credibility. We review the literature on lie detection and interpersonal perception to demonstrate that inferences regarding credibility may be multiply determined. Specifically, characteristics of the informant, of the listener, and of the situation affect people’s perceptions of informants’ credibility. We conclude with a discussion of research on calibration (i.e., an informant’s confidence-accuracy relation) because it offers fruitful avenues for future credibility research in the legal domain.     

The benefits of knowing what you know (and what you don’t): How calibration affects credibility

People tend to believe, and take advice from, informants who are highly confident. However, people use more than a mere “confidence heuristic.” We believe that confidence is influential because—in the absence of other information—people assume it is a valid cue to an informant’s likelihood of being correct. However, when people get evidence about an informant’s calibration (i.e., her confidence-accuracy relationship) they override reliance on confidence or accuracy alone. Two experiments in which participants choose between two opposing witnesses to a car accident show that neither confidence nor accuracy alone explains judgments of credibility; rather, whether a person is seen as credible ultimately depends on whether the person demonstrates good calibration. Credibility depends on whether sources were justified in believing what they believed.     

Age and airline accidents

The issuance of a commercial pilot's license is contingent upon the fulfillment of stated minimum flight time. These requirements imply that total flight time and aircraft flight time can be equated with safety. For this reason, aircraft accidents involving licensed, professional pilots become difficult to explain. This study examined the relationship of pilot experience to accidents by comparing pilots' age and experience in 188 accidents involving corporate/executive pilots. The more severe accidents were expected to involve younger, less experienced pilots. The data in this study, however, refute this expectation. The age, aircraft time, or total time difference between groups was not significant. More research, both in the field and under controlled conditions, may bring in the psychological concept of cognitive dissonance.