The Millennium for Personality Psychology: New Horizons or Good Old Daze

Abstract

On passe en revue les recherches qui s'attaquent a trois questions importantes pour la psychologie appliquke: les taxinomies, la distorsion intentionnelle et la mesure. Les recherches centrees sur les concepts ont dkbouche sur des progres significatifs dans ce domaine. Le modkle en cinq facteurs est nkanmoins critique parce qu'il confond les concepts, est dependant d'une mCthode et incomplet. La comparaison de mCta-analyses generalisant la validite de concepts de personnalite tires de diffCrents modbles taxinomiques montre que le Big Five masque des relations predicteur-critere importantes. L'accomplissement, par exemple, un concept confondu avec d'autres dans le modele en cinq facteurs, presente, avec les critkres, un ensemble de relations hCtCrogenes avec 1'Extraversion et le Sens des ResponsabilitCs, les deux concepts du modkle en cinq facteurs avec lesquels il est souvent confondu. Bref. les resultats d'une recherche dependent de la structure de la taxinomie utilisee. O n s'interesse aussi aux travaux sur la distorsion intentionnelle (biais volontaire aux inventaires d'auto-evaluation). Les candidats a un poste ne distordent pas leurs rkponses autant que dans les travaux de falsification systematique, et la validit6 prkdicteur-critere des autodescriptions modirement biaisees est a peu pres la m&me que celle des reponses d e bonne foi. Les procCdures de mesure qui ne reposent pas sur l'auto-evaluation sont presentees comme etant des solutions de rechange.Research on three issues important to psychologists in applied settings is reviewed: taxonomies, intentional distortion, and measurement mode. Construct-oriented research has enabled the field to make significant advances. Nonetheless, the five-factor model is criticised because it confounds constructs, is method-bound, and is not comprehensive. A comparison of meta-analytic research summarising the criterion-related validity of personality constructs of different taxonomic models reveals that the Five Factor Model obscures important predictor-criterion relationships. Achievement, for example, a construct that is confounded with other constructs in the Five Factor Model, shows a pattern of relationships with criteria that differs from Extroversion or Conscientiousness-the two Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. Leaetta M. Hough. The

Personality scale validities increase throughout medical school.

“…A variety of reasons have been suggested. Among these are poor predictorcriterion matching in validation studies (Hough, 1992(Hough, , 1998, various arguments around bandwidth-fidelity trade-off (Hogan & Holland, 2003;Ones & Viswesvaran, 1996; R. J. Schneider, Hough, & Dunnette, 1996), and predictive inefficiencies of nonBig Five scales (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000).…”

Personality Testing and Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, and Prospects

“…6 Although we harbor some criticisms of the FFM, we certainly do not want to lose the organizing benefits that broad‐level taxonomies such as the FFM afford. We do not want to return to the “good old daze” (Hough, 1997, p. 233) of hundreds of personality scales, each supposedly measuring unique variables.…”

Personality Validity: The Role of Schemas and Motivated Reasoning

“…For example, some scholars (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1992) propose that high conscientiousness may result in excessive meticulousness and orderliness. Several others add that conscientiousness can not predict performance for all occupations, such as, those in which creativity and innovation are important (e.g., Hough, 1997; Robertson, Baron, Gibbons, MacIver, & Nyfield, 2000; Robertson & Callinan, 1998). Others (Tett & Burnett, 2003) note that, in the case of openness, positive trait–performance relations are expected where job demands include tasks requiring creativity for instance.…”