Showing papers by "Robert R. McCrae published in 2019"
TL;DR: It is shown that there are pervasive and unexplained inconsistencies across studies that may be due to insufficient attention to measurement error, subtle but age-sensitive differences in alternative measures of the same trait, or different perspectives reflected in self-reports and observer ratings.
Abstract: Trait stability and maturation are fundamental principles of contemporary personality psychology and have been shown to hold across many cultures. However, it has proven difficult to move beyond th...
193 citations
TL;DR: The authors proposed a much richer and more complex model for personality measure that is more robust and robust than the traditional one that relies on a single trait assessed and random measurement error, and proposed a new view of personality traits.
Abstract: Classical psychometrics held that scores on a personality measure were determined by the trait assessed and random measurement error. A new view proposes a much richer and more complex model that i...
35 citations
TL;DR: Because method biases limit the accuracy of single-source assessments, this work recommends assessments that combine information from two or more informants, and apparently reflect implicit personality theory (IPT)-beliefs about how traits and trait indicators covary.
Abstract: Objective
We tested predictions about the structure and magnitude of method biases in single‐source personality trait assessments. We expected a large number of distinct biases that would parallel the observed structure of traits, at both facet and item levels.
Method
We analyzed multimethod ratings on the Estonian NEO Personality Inventory‐3 in a sample of 3,214 adults. By subtracting informant ratings from self‐reports, we eliminated true score variance and analyzed the size and structure of the residual method biases. We replicated analyses using data (N = 709) from the Czech Revised NEO Personality Inventory.
Results
The magnitude of method biases was consistent with predictions by McCrae (2018, Psychological Assessment). Factor analyses at the facet level showed a clear replication of the normative Five‐Factor Model structure in both samples. Item factor analyses within domains showed that facet‐level method biases mimicked the facet structure of the instrument.
Conclusions
Method biases apparently reflect implicit personality theory (IPT)—beliefs about how traits and trait indicators covary. We discuss the (collective) accuracy and possible origins of IPT. Because method biases limit the accuracy of single‐source assessments, we recommend assessments that combine information from two or more informants.
11 citations