-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Source method biases as implicit personality theory at the domain and facet levels
RR. McCrae, R. Mõttus, M. Hřebíčková, A. Realo, J. Allik,
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
30244473
DOI
10.1111/jopy.12435
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- osobnost * MeSH
- osobnostní dotazník normy MeSH
- psychologická teorie MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- srovnání kultur MeSH
- testování osobnosti normy MeSH
- zpráva o sobě normy MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Česká republika MeSH
- Estonsko MeSH
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.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc20023778
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20201214131139.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 201125s2019 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1111/jopy.12435 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)30244473
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a McCrae, Robert R $u Gloucester, Massachusetts.
- 245 10
- $a Source method biases as implicit personality theory at the domain and facet levels / $c RR. McCrae, R. Mõttus, M. Hřebíčková, A. Realo, J. Allik,
- 520 9_
- $a 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.
- 650 _2
- $a mladiství $7 D000293
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a senioři nad 80 let $7 D000369
- 650 _2
- $a srovnání kultur $7 D003431
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 12
- $a osobnost $7 D010551
- 650 _2
- $a testování osobnosti $x normy $7 D010552
- 650 _2
- $a osobnostní dotazník $x normy $7 D010555
- 650 _2
- $a psychologická teorie $7 D011582
- 650 _2
- $a zpráva o sobě $x normy $7 D057566
- 650 _2
- $a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
- 651 _2
- $a Česká republika $7 D018153
- 651 _2
- $a Estonsko $7 D004957
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Mõttus, René $u Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland. Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
- 700 1_
- $a Hřebíčková, Martina $u Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Realo, Anu $u Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. Department of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, England.
- 700 1_
- $a Allik, Jüri $u Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. Estonian Academy of Sciences, Tallinn, Estonia.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00002890 $t Journal of personality $x 1467-6494 $g Roč. 87, č. 4 (2019), s. 813-826
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30244473 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20201125 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20201214131138 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1596097 $s 1114454
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $b 87 $c 4 $d 813-826 $e 20181011 $i 1467-6494 $m Journal of personality $n J Pers $x MED00002890
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20201125