On the Stability of Variability: Retest Reliability of Metatraits

Abstract

The variance in a subject's responses to the different -items on a trait scale has been interpreted as an indication of behavioral consistency, truthfulness, and/or traitedness. The present study examined the retest stability of intritem variances on three trait scales. Interitem variance scores showed fairly high retest reliability (in the. 7 range). Shorter, more homogeneous subscales had lower retest reliability scores. Interitem variances did not moderate the stability of trait scores. These results suggest that (a) people are consistent in their degree of variability on a given dimension, (b) highly variable responding to different items on a scale may be a consistent, meaningful pattern rather than an indication of incompetent or random responding, and (c) the simple deletion of high-variance (or "untraited") subjects from a sample will not automatically improve results. Additional findings suggested a positive but weak tendency for people who responded consistently (vs. variably) to the items on one scale to respond the same way to the items on other scales.

Revisiting the Stability of Variability: Traitedness and Supertraitedness on the Acl and Neo-Ffi

“…In the only study found exam ining the test-retest reliability of traitedness, Baumeister (1991) demonstrated substantial retest stability for traitedness on the dimensions of locus of co ntrol, self-esteem, and self-attention across a t wo-week interval. However, moderate correlations between the variance measures among the three traits failed to resolve whether the sa me people a re consistent on all traits (i.e ., person-specific consistency) or whether d ifferent people are consistent on differen t traits (i.e., trait-specific consistency).…”

“…To assess the te mporal stability of traitedness, and thus its status as a stable c omponent of individual differences, we investigated the correlation between the stan dard deviations of the individuals' responses across time using a standard test-retest paradigm. We attempted to repl icate Baumeister's (1991) efforts by using two different instruments that measured the Big Five factors of neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness.…”

“…The second goal was to assess whether the same people are consistent on all t raits (i.e., person-specific consistency) or whether different people are consistent on different traits (i.e., t rait-specific consistency; Baumeister, 1991). The ques tion of personspecific versus trait-specific consistency is measured via the intercorrelation among the interitem variances for each session's traits, with relativel y higher correlations suggesting the for mer, and relativ ely lower correlations suggesting the latter.…”

“…In addition, correlations were computed between the standard d eviations for each factor at time 1 and t ime 2 to e xamine individual differences in the degree of traitedness across time. High cross-temporal correlations between subjects' standard deviations would indicate no t only that the consistency of item responses was stable (Baumeister, 1991), but also that traitedness itself was a stable construct.…”

Trait Relevance and Trait Assessment

“…However, numerous researchers in personality and social psychology have argued that not all personality traits, attitudes, and values are equally relevant to all individuals (Allport, 1937;Baumeister, 1991;Baumeister & Tice, 1988;Bem & Allen, 1974;Britt, 1993;Converse, 1970;Fazio, 1989;Hershberger, Plomin, & Pedersen, 1995;Higgins, 1997;Kelly, 1955;Kenrick & Stringfield, 1980;Lamiell, 1987;Lanning, 1988;Pelham, 1993;Pelham & Swann, 1994;Petty & Krosnick, 1995;Tice, 1989). Often termed idiographic (Allport, 1937;Pelham, 1993),1 these approaches argue that because of unique social experience and genetic endowment, people will vary in the extent to which a given construct influences their experience and determines their behavior.…”