Self‐informant agreement for personality and evaluative person descriptors: Comparing methods for creating informant measures

Abstract

Little attention typically is paid to the way self-report measures are translated for use in self-informant agreement studies. We studied two possible methods for creating informant measures: (a) the traditional method in which self-report items were translated from the first- to the third-person and (b) an alternative meta-perceptual method in which informants were directed to rate their perception of the targets’ self-perception. We hypothesized that the latter method would yield stronger self-informant agreement for evaluative personality dimensions measured by indirect item markers. We studied these methods in a sample of 303 undergraduate friendship dyads. Results revealed mean-level differences between methods, similar self-informant agreement across methods, stronger agreement for Big Five dimensions than for evaluative dimensions, and incremental validity for meta-perceptual informant rating methods. Limited power reduced the interpretability of several sparse acquaintanceship effects. We conclude that traditional informant methods are appropriate for most personality traits, but meta-perceptual methods may be more appropriate when personality questionnaire items reflect indirect indicators of the trait being measured, which is particularly likely for evaluative traits.

Self- and Informant Ratings of Personality in Mild Cognitive Impairment, Reviewed

“…However, patients with MCI and their informants had a lower mean agreement on personality ratings than patients with SCI and HC. Mean correlations for the SCI and HC dyads corroborate findings reported in earlier studies of self-other agreement according to the Big Five dimensions [14,21]. The result for the domain anxiety proneness/neuroticism was comparable to earlier findings, while extraversion showed lower correlations across groups.…”

“…Characteristics of the situation, the person being judged and the judge have also been correlated to agreement [18,19,20]. Furthermore, the personality literature has demonstrated a higher degree of self-other agreement for ratings of visible, extraverted, behaviors compared to more affective personality traits [21,22,23]. …”

Investigating the Personality Inventory forDSM-5Using Self and Spouse Reports

“…In addition, wives tended to report higher pathology for themselves on traits within the Negative Affectivity domain, whereas husbands reported more pathology for themselves on traits within the Antagonism and Disinhibition domains. South et al (2011) andSimms et al (2010) found similar results, with spouses typically reporting more negatively for themselves and more positively for their respective spouses. This tendency to report less pathology for spouses may reflect the letter of recommendation effect described by Leising, Erbs, and Fritz (2010), where raters are apt to provide more positive reports if they like the target being rated.…”

Convergence of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in Friendship Dyads

“…Although a thorough review is beyond the scope of this manuscript, researchers have found a wide range of agreement between target and informant ratings ( r s ranging from .25 to .62; Simms et al, 2010). Multiple factors influence the degree of association such as how visible (i.e., overt) the traits are, type/length of relationship with the informant rater, size of the sample, and age of the sample (Coolidge, Burns, & Mooney, 1995; Watson et al, 2000).…”

“…Importantly, though limited information is available regarding agreement on symptoms of depression and anxiety, vast research has been completed in the adult literature on personality and personality disorders (e.g., Klonsky et al, 2002; Simms, Zelazny, Yam, & Gros, 2010; Watson, Hubbard, & Wiese, 2000). Although a thorough review is beyond the scope of this manuscript, researchers have found a wide range of agreement between target and informant ratings ( r s ranging from .25 to .62; Simms et al, 2010).…”