Two, five, six, eight (thousand): Time to end the dimension reduction debate!

Wiernik, Brenton M.; Yarkoni, Tal; Giordano, Casey; Raghavan, Mukhunth

doi:10.31234/osf.io/d7jye

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the goal of psychometrics is, as Loevinger (1957) stated, "to isolate, to identify and... to measure separately the important components of 1 Factor structures probably are not truly falsifiable. As an example, the debate between the Big Five and the HEXACO can never be laid to rest by a preponderance of evidence because both are reasonable solutions and useful in different circumstances, but neither arrives at a higher truth (Srivastava, 2020;Wiernik et al, 2020). There are too many vested interests, too many opinions about which rotation is most appropriate, and too many fit statistics for a nail ever to be driven into the coffin of a halfway-tolerable factor solution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Traditional Measures of Personality with BISCUIT and BARE: A New Statistical Learning Technique and Behavioral Item Pool to Push Personality Psychology Forward

Elleman¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This dissertation investigates two ways in which personality psychology should move beyond the traditional approach of measuring personality with broad domains composed of trait descriptors, as exemplified by the Big Five taxonomy. The first study (Chapter 2) suggests an alternative to the traditional approach of aggregating personality items into domains. Mounting evidence indicates that, compared to domains, narrower measures of personality account for more variance in criteria and describe personality-criterion relationships more accurately. Analysis of individual personality items is the most granular approach to studying personality and is typically performed with statistical learning techniques (SLTs). The first study: (a) champions a new statistical learning technique, BISCUIT; (b) finds that BISCUIT provides a balance between prediction and parsimony; and (c) replicates previous findings that the broadness of the Big Five traits hinder their predictive power.The second study (Chapter 3) suggests an alternative to the traditional approach of measuring personality with trait descriptors, or "traditional personality items." Of the three patterns commonly associated with personality (cognitions, emotions, and behaviors), behaviors are the least studied; traditional personality items tend to measure cognitions and emotions. Historically, yearlong patterns of specific behaviors have been thought of as criteria of personality measures, but the second study posits they should be classified as personality items because they measure patterns of behavior, a component of personality. The second study reviews and extends two pilot studies that indicated behavioral frequencies predict life outcomes, sometimes better than traditional personality items. The second study: (a) estimates the extent to which behavioral frequencies strengthen personality-criterion relationships above traditional personality items; (b) determines that some criteria are differentially predicted by personality item type; and (c) publishes an updated, public-domain item pool of behavioral frequencies: the BARE (Behavioral Acts, Revised and Expanded) Inventory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Traditional Measures of Personality with BISCUIT and BARE: A New Statistical Learning Technique and Behavioral Item Pool to Push Personality Psychology Forward

Elleman¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• • Traditionally, personality psychology has almost exclusively focused on profiling personality by using questionnaires and self-reports. Yet personality assessments based on traditional approaches have low predictive validity when tested on real-world outcomes, especially when aggregated traits are used as features rather than individual items (see Mõttus et al, 2017;Revelle et al, 2021;Saucier et al, 2020;Wiernik et al, 2020). Furthermore, self-reports are affected by biases (Kreitchmann et al, 2019;Müller & Moshagen, 2019), and standard questionnaires are extremely time-consuming, often consisting of hundreds of items, which intrinsically limits scalability.…”

Section: Other Potential Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting Psychology to the Test: Rethinking Model Evaluation Through Benchmarking and Prediction

Rocca

Yarkoni

2021

Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consensus on standards for evaluating models and theories is an integral part of every science. Nonetheless, in psychology, relatively little focus has been placed on defining reliable communal metrics to assess model performance. Evaluation practices are often idiosyncratic and are affected by a number of shortcomings (e.g., failure to assess models’ ability to generalize to unseen data) that make it difficult to discriminate between good and bad models. Drawing inspiration from fields such as machine learning and statistical genetics, we argue in favor of introducing common benchmarks as a means of overcoming the lack of reliable model evaluation criteria currently observed in psychology. We discuss a number of principles benchmarks should satisfy to achieve maximal utility, identify concrete steps the community could take to promote the development of such benchmarks, and address a number of potential pitfalls and concerns that may arise in the course of implementation. We argue that reaching consensus on common evaluation benchmarks will foster cumulative progress in psychology and encourage researchers to place heavier emphasis on the practical utility of scientific models.

show abstract

“…Because status is not a major barrier to criticism in our field, this may have also led us to adopt a general culture of strong disagreements within the field, aired quite openly but without a lot of hostility or personal animosity (at least in the last few decades). For example, personality scientists subscribe to different views regarding personality structure and measures (e.g., Big Five, HEXACO, individual trait approaches such as the Q-sort; Anglim & O’Connor, 2019 ; Wiernik et al, 2020 ) and have differing opinions about what the most useful levels and units of analysis are (e.g., nomothetic vs. idiographic). Despite these disagreements, personality psychologists cooperate in their scientific pursuits, and critical discourse is carried out through empirical research.…”

Section: Strengths Of Personality Psychology: What We Do Wellmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why has personality psychology played an outsized role in the credibility revolution?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personality is not the most popular subfield of psychology. But, in one way or another, personality psychologists have played an outsized role in the ongoing “credibility revolution” in psychology. Not only have individual personality psychologists taken on visible roles in the movement, but our field’s practices and norms have now become models for other fields to emulate (or, for those who share Baumeister’s (2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.003) skeptical view of the consequences of increasing rigor, a model for what to avoid). In this article we discuss some unique features of our field that may have placed us in an ideal position to be leaders in this movement. We do so from a subjective perspective, describing our impressions and opinions about possible explanations for personality psychology’s disproportionate role in the credibility revolution. We also discuss some ways in which personality psychology remains less-than-optimal, and how we can address these flaws.

show abstract

Two, five, six, eight (thousand): Time to end the dimension reduction debate!

Cited by 11 publications

References 11 publications

Beyond Traditional Measures of Personality with BISCUIT and BARE: A New Statistical Learning Technique and Behavioral Item Pool to Push Personality Psychology Forward

Beyond Traditional Measures of Personality with BISCUIT and BARE: A New Statistical Learning Technique and Behavioral Item Pool to Push Personality Psychology Forward

Putting Psychology to the Test: Rethinking Model Evaluation Through Benchmarking and Prediction

Why has personality psychology played an outsized role in the credibility revolution?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About