Two multi method studies probed the structure and correlates of self-reports of personality when participants were permitted to admit that they did not know assessment words. The first study (1,187 college students) examined the structure of self-evaluation using Goldberg's markers for his five-factor approach. Students reported greatest familiarity with Agreeableness markers and least familiarity with Emotional Stability. The second study (317 young adolescents) used two data sources: (a) individualized, self-paced, computer-based self-evaluations and (b) teacher ratings and evaluations of adjustment. The assessment (in either English or Spanish) allowed participants to obtain definitions. Adolescents requested the least help with agreeableness markers and the most help with emotional stability. Even with unknown words, and despite differences in methodology, similar five-factor structures emerged in both studies. Computer assessment methods, in combination with a five-factor approach, may be useful for probing processes that underlie the structure and development of personality and their links to adjustment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ahadi, S. A. , & Rothbart, M. K. (1994). Temperament, development, and the Big Five. In C. F. Halverson, G. A. Kohnstamm, & R. P. Martin (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 189-208). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Akiyamna, M. M. (1985). Denials in young children from a cross-linguistic perspective. Child Development; 56, 95-102.
3.
Albright, L. , Kenny, D. A., & Malloy, T. E. (1988). Consensus in personality judgments at zero-acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 387-395.
4.
Allport, G. W. , & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47 (1, Whole No. 211).
5.
Angleitner, A. , & Wiggins,J. S. (Eds.). (1986). Personality assessment via questionnaires: Current issues in theory and measurement. New York: Springer-Verlag.
6.
Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187-215.
7.
Briggs, S. R. (1992). Assessing the five-factor model of personality description. Journal of Personality, 60, 253-294.
8.
Campbell, D. T. (1988) A phenomenology of the other one: Corrigible, hypothetical, and critical. In E. S. Overman (Ed.), Methodology and epistemology for social science: Selected papers Donald T. Campbell (pp. 337-359). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Campbell, S. D. , Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (1994, August). Computers as tools for personality research: Probing the five-factor model of personality. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
10.
Caramazza, A. , & Grober, E. (1976). Polysemy and the structure of the subjective lexicon. In C. Rameh (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on languages and linguistics. Semantics: Theory and applications. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
11.
Caspi, A. , & Moffitt, T. E. (1993). When do individual differences matter? Aparadoxical theory of personality coherence. Psychological Inquiry, 4, 247-271.
12.
Cook, T. D. , & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentationChicago: Rand McNally.
13.
Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press.
14.
Digman, J. M. (1989). Five robust personality dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality, 57, 195-214.
15.
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.
16.
Digman, J. M. , & Inouye, J. (1986). Further specification of the five robust factors of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 116-123.
17.
Digman,J. M. , & Takcmoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of personality: Re-analysis and comparison of six major studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 16, 149-170.
18.
Eccles,J. , Wigfield, A., Flanagan, C., Miller, C., Reuman, D., & Yee, D. (1989). Self-concepts, domain values, and self-esteem: Relations and changes in early adolescence. Journal of Personality, 57, 283-310.
19.
Ericsson, K. A. , & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-251.
20.
Funder, D. C. , & West, S. G. (1993). Consensus, self-other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 61, 457-476.
21.
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universal in personality lexicons. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 141-165). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.
22.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
23.
Goldberg, L. R, & Rosolack, T. K.(1994). The Big Five factor structure as an integrative framework: An empirical comparison with Eysenck's P-E-N model. In C. Halverson, G. Kohnstamm, & R. R. Martin (Eds.), Development of the structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 7-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Graziano, W. , & Eisenberg, N. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of personality. In R. Hogan,J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 795-824). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
25.
Graziano, W. G. , Hair, E. C., & Finch, J. F. (1997). Competitiveness mediates the link between personality and group performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1394-1408.
26.
Graziano, W. G. ,Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Finch,J. F. (1997). The self as a mediator between personality and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 392-404.
27.
Graziano, W. G. ,Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Hair, E. C. (1996). Perceiving conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 820-835.
28.
Graziano, W. G. , Moore,J. S., & Collins,J. E. (1988). Social cognition as segmentation of the stream of behavior. Developmental Psychology, 24, 568-573.
29.
Graziano, W. G. , & Ward, D. (1992). Probing the Big Five in adolescence: Personality and adjustment during a developmental transition. Journal of Personality, 60, 425-440.
30.
Greenberg, J. , & Folger, R. (1988). Controversial issues in social research methods. New York: Springer-Verlag.
31.
Halverson, C. F. (1988). Remembering your parents: Reflections on the retrospective method. Journal of Personality, 56, 435-444.
32.
Halverson, C. F. , Kohnstamm, G. D., & Martin, R. P. (Eds.). (1994). Development of the structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthoodHillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33.
Harkness, A. , Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. (1995). Differential convergence of self-report and informant data for MPQtraits: Implications for the construct of negative emotionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 185-204.
34.
Higgins, E. T. , & Parsons,J. (1983). Social cognition and the social life of the child: Stages as subcultures. In E. T. Higgins, D. N. Ruble, & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), Social cognition and social development:A sociocultural perspective (pp. 15-62). New York: Cambridge University Press.
35.
Hogan, R. (1983). A socioanalytic theory of personality. In M. Page (Ed.), 1982 Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 55-89). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
36.
Houts, A. C. , Cook, T. D., & Shadish, W. R. (1986). The person-situation debate: A critical multiplist perspective. Methodological developments in personality research [Special issue]. Journal of Personality, 54, 52-105.
37.
Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.
38.
Jensen-Campbell, L. A. , Graziano, W. G., & Hair, E. C. (1996). Personality and relationships as moderators of interpersonal conflict in adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 42, 148-163.
39.
John, O. P. (1990). The five-factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality theory and research. New York: Guilford.
40.
John, O. P. , Caspi, A., Robins, R. W., Moffitt, T. E. & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1994). The "Little Five": Exploring the nomological network of the five-factor model of personality in adolescent boys. Child Development65, 160-178.
41.
John, O. , & Robins, R. W. (1993) Determinants of interjudge agreement in personality traits: The Big Five domains, observability, evaluativeness, and the unique perspective of the self. Journal of Personality, 61, 521-552.
42.
Jones, L. V. , & Appelbaum, M. I. (1989). Psychometric methods. In M. R Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (pp. 23-44). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
43.
Kenrick, D. T. , & Stringfield, D. O. (1980). Personality traits and the eye of the beholder: Crossing some traditional philosophical boundaries in the search for consistencies in all of the people. Psychological Review, 87, 88-104.
44.
Knowles, E. (1988). Item context effects on personality scales: Measuring changes in measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 312-322.
45.
Lautenschlager, G. , & Flaherty, V. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more socially desirable?Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 310-314.
46.
Lerner, R. M. , & Tubman,J. G. (1989). Conceptual issues in studying continuity and discontinuity in personality development across life. Journal of Personality, 57, 343-374.
47.
McCrae, R. R. , & Costa, P. T. (1985). Updating Norman's "Adequate taxonomy": Intelligence and personality dimensions in the natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 710-721.
48.
McCrae, R, R. , & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
49.
McCrae, R. R. , & Costa, P. T.,Jr. (1989). The structure of interpersonal traits: Wiggins circumplex and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 586-595.
50.
McCrae, R. R. , & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its application. Journal of Personality, 60, 175-215.
51.
McFarland, S. G. , & Sparks, C. M. (1985). Age, education, and internal consistency of personality scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1692-1702.
52.
Morris, L. W. (1979). Extraversion and introversion: An interactional perspective. New York: Wiley.
53.
Murphy, G. L. (1997). Polysemy and the creation of novel word meanings. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, &J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 235-265). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
54.
Murphy, G. L. , & Andrew, J. M. (1993). The conceptual basis of antonymy and synonymy in adjectives. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 301-319.
55.
Nelson, T. O. , & Narens, L. (1980). Norms of 300 general-information questions: Accuracy of recall, latency of recall, and feeling-of-knowing ratings. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 338-368.
56.
Norman, W. T. (1967). 2,800 personality trait descriptors: Normative operating characteristics for a university population. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Department of Psychology.
57.
Nunnally,J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
58.
Olsen, C. V. (1976). On choosing a test statistic in multivariate analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 579-586.
59.
Ozer, D.J. , & Reise, S. P. (1994). Personality assessment. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 357-388.
60.
Panter, A. T. , Tanaka,J., & Hoyle, R. H. (1994). Structural models for multimode designs in personality and temperament research. In C. F. Halverson, G. Kohnstamm, & R. R. Martin (Eds.), The development of the structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 111-138). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
61.
Paulhus, D. (1986). Self-deception and impression managementin test responses. In A. Angleitner &J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaires: Current issues and theory in measurement (pp. 143-165). New York: Springer-Verlag.
62.
Peevers, B. , & Secord, P. (1973). Developmental changes in the attribution of descriptive concepts to persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 120-128.
63.
Roid, G. H. (1986). Computer technology and testing. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Witt (Eds.), The future of testing (pp. 29-72). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
64.
Schuman, H. , Kalton, G., & Ludwig,J. (1983). Context and contiguity in survey questionnaires. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 112-115.
65.
Schwarz, N. (1994).Judgment in social context: Biases, shortcomings, and the logic of conversation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 123-162). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
66.
Simmons, R. G. , & Blythe, D. (1987). Moving into adolescence: The impact of pubertal change and school context. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
67.
Widner, R. L. , Smith, S. M., & Graziano, W. G. (1996). The effects of demand characteristics on the reporting of tip-of-the-tongue and feeling-of-knowing states. American Journal of Psychology, 109(4), 525-538.
68.
Wiggins,J. S. , & Trapnell, P. (1997). Personality structures: The return of the Big Five. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. R Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
69.
Wilkinson, L. (1975). Response variable hypotheses in the multivariate analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 408-412.
70.
Winer, B.J. , Brown, D. R, & Michels, K. M. (1991). Statistical principles in experimental design (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
