Contextualized Personality: Traditional and New Assessment Procedures

Abstract

We describe our ongoing program of research related to the assessment of contextualized personality, focusing on social roles and cultural cues as contextual factors. First, we present our research employing the traditional assessment approach, wherein participants are asked to rate explicitly their personality across several different roles. We argue that this hypothetical approach is potentially susceptible to the influence of stereotypes, social desirability, and demand characteristics. We therefore describe the development of three novel and subtle assessment procedures that are based on obtaining online self-representations that are activated while occupying a specific context. Finally, the strengths and limitations of all four approaches, as well as directions for future research in the study of contextualized personality, are discussed.

Variability in Personality Expression Across Contexts: A Social Network Approach

“…Current models of personality suggest that personality is both a stable underlying trait and a dynamic process that emerges situationally. Previous attempts to assess personality using these models have focused on features of the physical environment (e.g., Ten Berge & De Raad, ) or on broad interpersonal roles (e.g., Heller et al., ; Wood, ). The current findings suggest that interpersonal relationships at a dyadic level can also be useful in conceptualizing personality.…”

The vigilant parent: Parental role salience affects parents' risk perceptions, risk-aversion, and trust in strangers

“…Prior research shows that when roles are situationally salient people exhibit traits (Heller, Watson, Komar, Min, & Perunovic, 2007) and pursue goals (Fitzsimons & Bargh, 2003) consistent with those roles. A recent study found that parents' moral judgments became more paternalistic when their parental role was salient than when it was non-salient (Eibach, Libby, & Ehrlinger, 2009).…”

Open Assessment of Learning: A Meta-Synthesis

“…Any alternative to the established norm automatically enters unknown territories and is therefore "risky and dangerous", which is one of the main ideas that difficult change in the traditional evaluation. (Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 1999;Heller, Watson, Komar, Min, & Perunovic, 2007;Maslovaty & Kuzi, 2002;Stoiber & Vanderwood, 2008).…”