Individual Differences Psychology Week 5
Individual Differences Psychology Week 5 PSY 345
Popular in Individual Differences
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Psychology (PSYC)
This 9 page Class Notes was uploaded by Cimmi Alvarez on Thursday September 22, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 345 at University of Texas at Austin taught by Elliot Tucker-Drob in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 5 views. For similar materials see Individual Differences in Psychology (PSYC) at University of Texas at Austin.
Reviews for Individual Differences Psychology Week 5
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 09/22/16
Week 5 Ancient Conceptualizations of Personality Greek and Roman Philosophers and physicians conceived personality and health as a product of fur humors (bodily fluids) Black bile- melancholic, moody glum Blood- Sanguine, happy healthy Phlem- phlegmatic, slow, droopy Yellow bile- Choleric, irritable, hot tempered Toward Empirical Science of Personality: Galton 1884 Character which shapes our conduct is a definite and durable something, and therefore it is reasonable to attempt to measure it In emotional temperament 1915 Webb applies spearman’s factor analytic methods to personality Takes rating of student’s personality Include 40 character traits Character Traits that webb found to correlate with General Intelligence Power of getting through mental work rapidly Cheerfulness Desire to excel Controlling for Intelligence, Webb Finds second factor- “w” Character traits load on this factor defines them as “persistence of motive” Towards a Multifactor Taxonomy: The Lexical Approach To find major dimensions underlying all human personality (content validity) must start with pool of personality items representative of all possible aspects Brainstorm to create diverse pool of personality test items More comprehensive and systematic way to go through a dictionary to find all of the different words that can be used to describe personality- lexical approach Lexical Hypothesis People have tendency to talk about peoples characteristics To talk about recurrent features of characters, modern languages have developed adjectives Major features of personality are contained in modern languages, and sample from dictionaries to find a sufficient set of adjectives to include in personality test Origins of Lexical Approach: Galton 1884 1936: Allport and Odbert Identify 17,953 Personality-Descriptive Words Based on Webster’s New International Dictionary 1925 Reduce list to 4,504 words judged to be descriptive of relatively permanent traits ‘40s Cattel Makes use of Allport-Odbert List eliminates synonyms and adds terms from existing psychological theories Arrives at a list of 171 words Collects data and factor analyzes them Identifies 23 factors, 16 most robust which he measures with his Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire 15 personality factors and 1 intelligence factor 2 strange because he came up with fluid and crystalized intelligence Each dimension has an opposite side and is continuous though we label it as one dimension General Factors? Dimensions Correlate with each other Hans Eysenck Originally 1947 theorized 2 major dimensions to personality each of which were biologically determined Extraverted and Stale Those we know can fall on different areas on those two dimensions. Later ‘70s added Psychoticism Lacking empathy Cold killer who doesn’t care about people, takes advantage of others for self-gain. Facets of Eysenck’s Major Personality Traits Recognize not all of personality can fit into these 3 things but these are the broad trends Prototypical Personality Types Neurotic Worrier, trouble sleeping, psychosomatic symptoms (anxiety attacks, Twitching). Overreacts to situations Extravert Likes parties, many friends, enjoys company and conversation, likes practical jokes Psychotic 3 Lack empathy, cruel, inhumane, Schadenfreude, Violent films, sexually manipulative Five Factor Model Allaying 22 of Cattell’s factors, Fiske ’49 identify higher order 5 factor structure Tubes and Chistanal ’61 replicated findings and named the factors: Surgency (extraversion), Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotion Stability, Culture 1992 became known because of Costa and McCrae- Marketed their personality test widely. It is most widely used. Characteristics big 5 Openness ( Intellect, Imagination) Conscientious: Organized, Neat, orderly, practical, prompt, meticulous Extraversion: Talkative, extraverted, Assertive, Forward, Outspoken Agreeableness: Sympathetic, Kind, Warm, Understanding, Sincere Neuroticism (emotional Stability): Moody Anxious, Insecure The facets are not totally agreed upon. Strange that all five factors have 7 facets but it is easier to market that way Towards an Evolutionary Approach? Nettle If evolution is supposed to select for the best level why doesn’t everyone have the same personality traits Finds that each could be great in different environments weather high or low Different ends has both good and bad aspects. Evolution hasn’t chosen the perfect level of each trait because some circumstances it is good and in others not so much Big five and Gigantic Three 5 4 Openness Conscientiousness Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism 3 Psychoticism Extraversion Neuroticism Real World Outcomes Real world Correlates of Intelligence Real World Correlates of Personality What do these traits predict? Selection Methods and Job Performance Schmidt and Hunter 1998 Use personnel selection methods Give applicants individual differences test and predict how well the applicant would do at the job Choose the applicants that enable the company to make profits What is required to make a selection method useful? How much variability is there in job performance? If there is no variability, then it doesn’t matter who you take Look at things that are easily measurable. – card punches- how much productivity in an hour. Easy to quantify their efficiency How selective can you be? Only have as many people as openings apply, cant be selective. If take 5% of applicants, you can be very selective in who you take. 5 What is the cost of using them? Can we select criterion be administered easily and cheaply? Can use it on anyone applying or only those with some level of experience? Cant apply it easily to general applicant pool, it does little good in helping to select between people. How well does selection method predict job performance? The main focus. Back of the Envelope Calculations Job that pays $40,000, the SD of output is about $16,000 That means the difference between a work at the 84 % produces th $32,000 more in revenue than the one in the 16 % th Pros and Cons of Possible Tests General Mental Ability (Intelligence) Tests Cheap to administer Can be used for all jobs and all levels of seniority Requires no job specific background knowledge Work Sample Tests Hands on simulation of the job being applied for Can only be used on applicants who already know the job Otherwise, applicants must first be trained Expensive, time intensive Predictive Integrity Test Personality tests reflective of conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability. Whether they do dugs or drink on job, steal, fight with other workers, sabotage equipment, and antisocial behaviors 6 Tend not to correlate with General Mental Ability Pro Structures vs. Unstructured interviews Structured- ask everyone same questions Unstructured- come in and chat. Different people in different ideas. Personal but not everyone is evaluated the same way. People really like this because get to know the person. People talk about different things and you cant really compare them. Personal ideas unrelated to the job impact your decision. Job Knowledge Tests Cheap, easy to administer Expected to know the job already. Specific things you have to know on the job- not good for entry level applicants Graphology Hand writing analysis The way you write determines the type of person you are Calling References Schmidt and Hunter Meta-Analysis Advocating old results from previously published studies Sometimes unpublished because of file-drawer problem Making sure that you get the same results again. Just because you got the answer once it could be a result by chance rather than valid results. Idea stuff in literature isn’t representative because if experiments are not a low enough p value just put in file drawer rather than publishing the research 7 Combine all results previous studies and hopefully it is representing what it is supposed to represent. Sample size also maters Gist of Multiple Regression Looking for things that give an extra prediction Predictor 2 that measures more than General mental abilities. How much job performance is depicted based on the overlap of GMA and predictor 2 Results: Job Performance Performance measured using supervisory ratings of job performance, but production records, sales records, and other measured were also used. Results: Job Related Learning Requires you know some part of the job but you learn how to do it. Job related learning is typically measured Why GMA good predictor of Job Performance Watch people acquire knowledge. More intelligence learn to do the job better. SES, SAT, GPA Does seriocomic Status explain relationship between admission tests and post-secondary academic performance On average SAT does okay job at predicting performance Intelligence may matter for average people, but what about at the very high ends? Does having extremely high intelligence vs of above average intelligence really make a difference? Outliers, Malcom Gladwell Success and IQ works only up until a point of around 120 anything above really doesn’t do much 8 THE social animal, David Brooks 150 IQ is smarter than !20 but 30 points produce little measure of success Park, Luinski, and Benbow Study of mathematically Precocious Youth Score in top 1% of Quantitative SAT by age 13 Followed up 25 years later. Ceiling effect- can’t do better than 800 though some could. But you aren’t tested on it. Using age 13 you are able to see these individual differences because they will be below 800 but by the time they would typically take it they would be higher than the ceiling -Graphs of these kids show that being a smart kid matters when it comes to publication and patents. The higher a person is in the one percentile the more successful they were Bringing it back to Personnel selection Want to make groundbreaking discoveries in company you want to pick the smartest of the smart. GRIT People more gritty are less likely to drop out of west point 9