A prototype strategy for construction of personality scales.

Abstract

This study examined the predictive validity of different strategies for constructing personality scales. The Adjective Check List (ACL) was used as a common item pool to construct sets of eight scales by each of six strategies. A prototype strategy was introduced in this study as a proposed improvement on rational scale construction methodology. Its validity was compared with four traditional strategies and one random strategy in predicting eight criterion measures. The four traditional strategies compared were empirical, factor analytic, rational, and internal consistency. The subjects were 234 paid fraternity males ranging in age from 18-26, who supplied ACL responses and eight criterion measures in the form of peer ratings. Included in the eight criteria were peer ratings on the traits of achievement, dominance, nurturance, affiliation, exhibition, autonomy, aggression, and deference. Zero-order correlational analyses were followed by multipleregression procedures used in a double cross-validation design. Results indicated that the prototype strategy was statistically superior to all of the other strategies, and further research on this methodology and its application to other pools and samples is urged.

Use of Exemplar Surveys to Reveal Implicit Types of Intelligence

“…Our exemplar approach is not inconsistent with the more established prototype-feature approaches to conceptions of traits (e.g., Broughton, 1984;Chaplin et al, 1988;Fehr, 1988;Sternberg, 1985). In fact, with available techniques, it has been difficult to establish whether cognitive representations of traits are primarily feature based (prototype-like), exemplar based, or some combination of the two (Barsalou, 1990;Smith & Zarate, 1992).…”

“…Moreover, a resemblance to any of the five types predicted high nomination ratings. Note that such analyses are possible only within an exemplar approach to target assessment (Broughton, 1984).…”

“…Among other things, this research demonstrated that prototypes of intelligence are distinct from those of related mental abilities such as creativity and wisdom. 1 This early prototype work has since been followed up by others studying implicit theories of intelligence (e.g., Kosmitzki & John, 1993;Raty & Snellman, 1997;Ruisel, 1996) and personality traits (Broughton, 1984;Chaplin, John, & Goldberg, 1988;John, 1986;Rush & Russell, 1988). …”

Everyday Conceptions of Modesty: A Prototype Analysis

“…To characterize the everyday concept of modesty, we attempted to distil its prototype from a set of empirically generated exemplars (for a similar methodologies, see Broughton, 1984;Buss & Craik, 1985;Hassebrauck, 1997). In particular, we instructed participants from two different populations to list the characteristics (exemplars) that they regarded as typifying a modest person.…”

A text-stimuli presentation manager for the IBM PC with ipsatization correction for response sets and reaction times

“…Cronbach, 1970;Nunnally, 1978). For instance, subjects differ reliably in the number of responses they give to open-ended questions (response productivity bias; Cronbach, 1949), the extent to which extreme responses are given on rating scales (extreme response tendency; Nunnally, 1978), the number of self-descriptors they endorse or check off as true (checking bias; Broughton, 1984;Strack, 1987;Wiggins & Pincus, 1989), and the tendency to work for speed over accuracy in reaction time experiments (Cronbach, 1970). To neutralize these and other response set variables, a quantitative index of a subject's style of responding is required that can be used to weight responses.…”