Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Individual Difference Measures (individual + difference_measure)
Selected AbstractsDiscussion on ,Personality psychology as a truly behavioural science' by R. Michael FurrEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, Issue 5 2009Article first published online: 14 JUL 200 Yes We Can! A Plea for Direct Behavioural Observation in Personality Research MITJA D. BACK and BORIS EGLOFF Department of Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany mback@uni-leipzig.de Furr's target paper (this issue) is thought to enhance the standing of personality psychology as a truly behavioural science. We wholeheartedly agree with this goal. In our comment we argue for more specific and ambitious requirements for behavioural personality research. Specifically, we show why behaviour should be observed directly. Moreover, we illustratively describe potentially interesting approaches in behavioural personality research: lens model analyses, the observation of multiple behaviours in diverse experimentally created situations and the observation of behaviour in real life. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. The Categories of Behaviour Should be Clearly Defined PETER BORKENAU Department of Psychology, Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany p.borkenau@psych.uni-halle.de The target paper is helpful by clarifying the terminology as well as the strengths and weaknesses of several approaches to collect behavioural data. Insufficiently considered, however, is the clarity of the categories being used for the coding of behaviour. Evidence is reported showing that interjudge agreement for retrospective and even concurrent codings of behaviour does not execeed interjudge agreement for personality traits if the categories being used for the coding of behaviour are not clearly defined. By contrast, if the behaviour to be registered is unambiguously defined, interjudge agreement may be almost perfect. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Behaviour Functions in Personality Psychology PHILIP J. CORR Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK Philip.Corr@btopenworld.com Furr's target paper highlights the importance, yet under-representation, of behaviour in published articles in personality psychology. Whilst agreeing with most of his points, I remain unclear as to how behaviour (as specifically defined by Furr) relates to other forms of psychological data (e.g. cognitive task performance). In addition, it is not clear how the functions of behaviour are to be decided: different behaviours may serve the same function; and identical behaviours may serve different functions. To clarify these points, methodological and theoretical aspects of Furr's proposal would benefit from delineation. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. On the Difference Between Experience-Sampling Self-Reports and Other Self-Reports WILLIAM FLEESON Department of Psychology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, USA fleesonW@wfu.edu Furr's fair but evaluative consideration of the strengths and weaknesses of behavioural assessment methods is a great service to the field. As part of his consideration, Furr makes a subtle and sophisticated distinction between different self-report methods. It is easy to dismiss all self-reports as poor measures, because some are poor. In contrast, Furr points out that the immediacy of the self-reports of behaviour in experience-sampling make experience-sampling one of the three strongest methods for assessing behaviour. This comment supports his conclusion, by arguing that ESM greatly diminishes one the three major problems afflicting self-reports,lack of knowledge,and because direct observations also suffer from the other two major problems afflicting self-reports. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. What and Where is ,Behaviour' in Personality Psychology? LAURA A. KING and JASON TRENT Department of Psychology, University of Missouri, Columbia, USA kingla@missouri.edu Furr is to be lauded for presenting a coherent and persuasive case for the lack of behavioural data in personality psychology. While agreeing wholeheartedly that personality psychology could benefit from greater inclusion of behavioural variables, here we question two aspects of Furr's analysis, first his definition of behaviour and second, his evidence that behaviour is under-appreciated in personality psychology. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Naturalistic Observation of Daily Behaviour in Personality Psychology MATTHIAS R. MEHL Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA mehl@email.arizona.edu This comment highlights naturalistic observation as a specific method within Furr's (this issue) cluster direct behavioural observation and discusses the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR) as a naturalistic observation sampling method that can be used in relatively large, nomothetic studies. Naturalistic observation with a method such as the EAR can inform researchers' understanding of personality in its relationship to daily behaviour in two important ways. It can help calibrate personality effects against act-frequencies of real-world behaviour and provide ecological, behavioural personality criteria that are independent of self-report. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Measuring Behaviour D. S. MOSKOWITZ and JENNIFER J. RUSSELL Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada dsm@psych.mcgill.ca Furr (this issue) provides an illuminating comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of various methods for assessing behaviour. In the selection of a method for assessing behaviour, there should be a careful analysis of the definition of the behaviour and the purpose of assessment. This commentary clarifies and expands upon some points concerning the suitability of experience sampling measures, referred to as Intensive Repeated Measurements in Naturalistic Settings (IRM-NS). IRM-NS measures are particularly useful for constructing measures of differing levels of specificity or generality, for providing individual difference measures which can be associated with multiple layers of contextual variables, and for providing measures capable of reflecting variability and distributional features of behaviour. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Behaviours, Non-Behaviours and Self-Reports SAMPO V. PAUNONEN Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada paunonen@uwo.ca Furr's (this issue) thoughtful analysis of the contemporary body of research in personality psychology has led him to two conclusions: our science does not do enough to study real, observable behaviours; and, when it does, too often it relies on ,weak' methods based on retrospective self-reports of behaviour. In reply, I note that many researchers are interested in going beyond the study of individual behaviours to the behaviour trends embodied in personality traits; and the self-report of behaviour, using well-validated personality questionnaires, is often the best measurement option. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. An Ethological Perspective on How to Define and Study Behaviour LARS PENKE Department of Psychology, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK lars.penke@ed.ac.uk While Furr (this issue) makes many important contributions to the study of behaviour, his definition of behaviour is somewhat questionable and also lacks a broader theoretical frame. I provide some historical and theoretical background on the study of behaviour in psychology and biology, from which I conclude that a general definition of behaviour might be out of reach. However, psychological research can gain from adding a functional perspective on behaviour in the tradition of Tinbergens's four questions, which takes long-term outcomes and fitness consequences of behaviours into account. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. What is a Behaviour? MARCO PERUGINI Faculty of Psychology, University of Milan,Bicocca, Milan, Italy marco.perugini@unimib.it The target paper proposes an interesting framework to classify behaviour as well as a convincing plea to use it more often in personality research. However, besides some potential issues in the definition of what is a behaviour, the application of the proposed definition to specific cases is at times inconsistent. I argue that this is because Furr attempts to provide a theory-free definition yet he implicitly uses theoretical considerations when applying the definition to specific cases. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Is Personality Really the Study of Behaviour? MICHAEL D. ROBINSON Department of Psychology, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, USA Michael.D.Robinson@ndsu.edu Furr (this issue) contends that behavioural studies of personality are particularly important, have been under-appreciated, and should be privileged in the future. The present commentary instead suggests that personality psychology has more value as an integrative science rather than one that narrowly pursues a behavioural agenda. Cognition, emotion, motivation, the self-concept and the structure of personality are important topics regardless of their possible links to behaviour. Indeed, the ultimate goal of personality psychology is to understanding individual difference functioning broadly considered rather than behaviour narrowly considered. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Linking Personality and Behaviour Based on Theory MANFRED SCHMITT Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany schmittm@uni-landau.de My comments on Furr's (this issue) target paper ,Personality as a Truly Behavioural Science' are meant to complement his behavioural taxonomy and sharpen some of the presumptions and conclusions of his analysis. First, I argue that the relevance of behaviour for our field depends on how we define personality. Second, I propose that every taxonomy of behaviour should be grounded in theory. The quality of behavioural data does not only depend on the validity of the measures we use. It also depends on how well behavioural data reflect theoretical assumptions on the causal factors and mechanisms that shape behaviour. Third, I suggest that the quality of personality theories, personality research and behavioural data will profit from ideas about the psychological processes and mechanisms that link personality and behaviour. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. The Apparent Objectivity of Behaviour is Illusory RYNE A. SHERMAN, CHRISTOPHER S. NAVE and DAVID C. FUNDER Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside, CA, USA funder@ucr.edu It is often presumed that objective measures of behaviour (e.g. counts of the number of smiles) are more scientific than more subjective measures of behaviour (e.g. ratings of the degree to which a person behaved in a cheerful manner). We contend that the apparent objectivity of any behavioural measure is illusory. First, the reliability of more subjective measures of behaviour is often strikingly similar to the reliabilities of so-called objective measures. Further, a growing body of literature suggests that subjective measures of behaviour provide more valid measures of psychological constructs of interest. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Personality and Behaviour: A Neglected Opportunity? LIAD UZIEL and ROY F. BAUMEISTER Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA Baumeister@psy.fsu.edu Personality psychology has neglected the study of behaviour. Furr's efforts to provide a stricter definition of behaviour will not solve the problem, although they may be helpful in other ways. His articulation of various research strategies for studying behaviour will be more helpful for enabling personality psychology to contribute important insights and principles about behaviour. The neglect of behaviour may have roots in how personality psychologists define the mission of their field, but expanding that mission to encompass behaviour would be a positive step. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Proclivity for Improvisation as a Predictor of Entrepreneurial IntentionsJOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, Issue 1 2006Keith M. Hmieleski This study examines the relationship between improvisation and entrepreneurial intentions. Of specific interest is whether or not a proclivity for improvisation explains any variance in entrepreneurial intentions beyond what is accounted for by other relevant individual difference measures. Using a sample of 430 college students, entrepreneurial intentions are found to be significantly associated with measures of personality, motivation, cognitive style, social models, and improvisation. The strongest relationship is found between entrepreneurial intentions and improvisation. The results of hierarchical regression show that improvisation accounts for a significant amount of variance in entrepreneurial intention above and beyond what is accounted for by the other variables. [source] Revisiting search task difficulty: Behavioral and individual difference measuresPROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY (ELECTRONIC), Issue 1 2008Jacek Gwizdka Search task characteristics are recognized as important factors that affect search process and its outcomes. We examine the relationships among operational measures of searcher's behavior, individual cognitive differences, subjective task difficulty and mental effort assessed by dual-task performance. A web-based information study was conduced in a controlled experimental setting. Forty eight study participants performed six search tasks of varying type and structure. Subjective task difficulty was found to be influenced by the searcher's effort measured as the number of result pages and individual documents visited, the number of documents marked as relevant, as well as by individual cognitive differences, and mental effort assessed by performance on the secondary task. In contrast to previous studies, no strong effects of user navigation graph structure were found. [source] Children's memory for emergency medical treatment after one year: the impact of individual difference variables on recall and suggestibilityAPPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 7 2001Elaine Burgwyn-Bailes This study explores the impact of individual difference variables on children's recall and suggestibility when they discuss a stressful personal experience. It was hypothesized that some differences in social factors, including child self concept and parenting style, would be associated with variations in the way children related their experiences. Participants were 24 3- to 7-year-old children who sustained facial lacerations requiring minor medical emergency treatment by a plastic surgeon. The children were interviewed about their surgeries on three occasions: a few days, 6 weeks and 1 year after the experience. A number of individual difference measures were administered to the children and their parents at the time of the first two interviews. The results support the hypothesis that there are individual difference variables that may help to explain some of the variability in children's recall and suggestibility. Younger children with poorer receptive language skills and children of more traditional parents recalled less total information about their surgeries after one year. Child traditionalism, achievement-motivation and social avoidance, as assessed by use of the Eder Self-View Questionnaire, made a difference in suggestibility at the initial interview, but not at subsequent memory assessments. The results are interpreted as suggesting that both the demand characteristics of the interview and the strength of the memory trace are important in understanding the effects of individual difference variables in memory performance. Implications for child testimony are discussed. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Associations Among GABRG1, Level of Response to Alcohol, and Drinking BehaviorsALCOHOLISM, Issue 8 2009Lara A. Ray Background:, Recent studies of the genetics of alcoholism have focused on a cluster of genes encoding for ,-aminobutyric acid (GABAA) receptor subunits, which is thought to play a role in the expression of addiction phenotypes. This study examined allelic associations between 2 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the GABRG1 gene (rs1391166 and rs1497571) and alcohol phenotypes, namely level of response to alcohol, alcohol use patterns, and alcohol-related problems. Method:, Participants were non-treatment-seeking seeking hazardous drinkers (n = 124) who provided DNA samples, participated in a face-to-face interview for level of response to alcohol, and completed a series of drinking and individual differences measures. Results:, Analyses revealed that a SNP of the GABRG1 gene (rs1497571) was associated with level of response to alcohol and drinking patterns in this subclinical sample. Follow-up mediational analyses were also conducted to examine putative mechanisms underlying these associations. Discussion:, These findings replicate and extend recent research suggesting that genetic variation at the GABRG1 locus may underlie the expression of alcohol phenotypes, including level of response to alcohol. [source] | ||||||||||