Head‐to‐head comparison of the predictive validity of personality types and dimensions

Abstract

The utility of a configural type approach for predictions from personality is currently controversial. Configural types predict important personality correlates, but continuous dimensions based on the same data often fare much better in cross‐sectional head‐to‐head comparisons. However, many such comparisons can be considered unfair to the type approach, confound diverse differences between type and dimensional approaches, and rely only on cross‐sectional data. A sequence of analyses is reported that include fairer comparisons and deconfound differences due to the number of predictors, categorical versus dimensional predictors, dichotomized dimensions versus configural types, dimensional versus type criterion variables, and cross‐sectional versus longitudinal predictions. The results suggest incremental validity of configural types over dimensions only in a very few cases. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allport

G. W.

(1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt.

Asendorpf

J. B.

Borkenau

Ostendorf

van Aken

M. A. G.

(2001).Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15,169–198.

Asendorpf

J. B.

Caspi

Hofstee

W. B. K.

(Eds.). (2002).The puzzle of personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16(S1),S1–S96.

Asendorpf

J. B.

van Aken

M. A. G.

(1999).Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality prototypes in childhood: Replicability, predictive power, and the trait–type issue. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77,815–832.

Asendorpf

J. B.

van Aken

M. A. G.

(2003).Validity of Big Five personality judgments in childhood: A 9‐year longitudinal study. European Journal of Personality, 17,1–17.

Asendorpf

J. B.

Wilpers

(1998).Personality effects on social relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,1531–1544.

Block

(1961). The Q‐sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research. Springfield, IL: Thomas.

Block

(1971). Lives through time. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft.

Block

(1993). Studying personality the long way. In D. Funder , R. D. Parke , C. Tomlinson‐Keasey , & K. Widaman (Eds.), Studying lives through time: Personality and development(pp.9–41). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

10.

Block

J. H.

Block

(1980). The role of ego‐control and ego‐resiliency in the organization of behavior. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology(Vol. 13, pp.39–101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

11.

Borkenau

Ostendorf

(1993). NEO‐Fünf‐Faktoren Inventar (NEO‐FFI) NEO‐Five‐Factor Inventory. Göttingen: Psychologie.

12.

Bryk

A. S.

Raudenbush

S. W.

(1992). Hierarchical linear models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

13.

Caspi

(1998). Personality development across the life course. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development(5th ed., pp.311–388). New York: Wiley.

14.

Caspi

(2000).The child is the father of the man: Personality continuities from childhood to adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78,158–172.

15.

Caspi

Silva

P. A.

(1995).Temperamental qualities at age three predict personality traits in young adulthood: Longitudinal evidence from a birth cohort. Child Development, 66,486–498.

16.

Costa

P. T.

Herbst

J. H.

McCrae

R. R.

Samuels

Ozer

D. J.

(2002).The replicability and utility of three personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16(Special Issue S1),73–87.

17.

Costa

P. T.

McCrae

R. R.

(1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory NEO‐PI‐R and NEO Five‐Factor Inventory NEO‐FFI professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

18.

Döring

Bortz

(1993).Psychometrische Einsamkeitsforschung: Deutsche Neukonstruktion der UCLA Loneliness Scale [Psychometric loneliness research: A new German version of the UCLA loneliness scale]. Diagnostica, 39,224–239.

19.

Funder

D. C.

(1991).Global traits: A neo‐Allportian approach to personality. Psychological Science, 2,31–39.

20.

Funder

(1999). Personality judgment: A realistic approach to person perception. San Diego, CA: Academic.

21.

Göttert

Asendorpf

(1989).Eine deutsche Version des California‐Child‐Q‐Sort, Kurzform [A German short version of the California Child Q‐Set]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 21,70–82.

22.

Hart

Hofmann

Edelstein

Keller

(1997).The relation of childhood personality types to adolescent behavior and development: A longitudinal study of Icelandic children. Developmental Psychology, 33,195–205.

23.

John

O. P.

Caspi

Robins

R. W.

Moffitt

T. E.

Stouthamer‐Loeber

(1994).The ‘Little Five’: Exploring the nomological network of the five‐factor model of personality in adolescent boys. Child Development, 65,160–178.

24.

John

O. P.

Srivastava

(1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin , & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and Research(2nd ed., pp.102–138). New York: Guilford.

25.

Marsh

H. W.

O'Neill

(1984).Self‐description questionnaire III: The construct validity of multidimensional self‐concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21,153–174.

26.

McCrae

R. R.

Costa

P. T.

Busch

C. M.

(1986).Evaluating comprehensiveness in personality systems: The California Q‐set and the five‐factor model. Journal of Personality, 54,430–446.

27.

Ostendorf

(1990). Sprache und Persönlichkeitsstruktur: Zur Validität des Fünf‐Faktoren‐Modells der Persönlichkeit [Language and personality structure: Validity of the five‐factor model of personality]. Regensburg: Roderer.

28.

Pulkkinen

(1996).Female and male personality styles: A typological and developmental analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70,1288–1306.

29.

Robins

R. W.

John

O. P.

Caspi

Moffitt

T. E.

Stouthamer‐Loeber

(1996).Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70,157–171.

30.

Tewes

(1991). Hamburg–Wechsler Intelligenztest für Erwachsene, Revision 1991 [Hamburg–Wechsler intelligence test for adults, revision 1991]. Bern, Switzerland: Huber.

31.

Van Lieshout

C. F. M.

Haselager

G. J. T.

Riksen‐Walraven

J. M.

van Aken

M. A. G.

(1995).Personality development in middle childhood. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Indianapolis, IN, 1995.

32.

Weinert, F. E. , & Schneider, W. (Eds.). (1999). Individual development from 3 to 12: Findings from the Munich Longitudinal Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

33.

Weiß

(1987). Grundintelligenztest Skala 2 (CFT 20) [Culture Fair Intelligence Test](3rd ed.). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

34.

York

K. L.

John

O. P.

(1992).The four faces of Eve: A typological analysis of women's personality at midlife. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63,494–508.