Evaluating the predictive validity of personality trait judgments using a naturalistic behavioral criterion: A preliminary test of the self-other knowledge asymmetry model

Intrinsic functional connectivity mediates the effect of personality traits on depressive symptoms

BACKGROUND

Personality traits have been proposed as risk factors for depressive symptoms. However, the neural mechanism behind these relationships is unclear. This study examined the possible mediating effect of resting-state functional connectivity networks on these relationships.

METHODS

Data from 153 healthy Germans were obtained from the MPI-Leipzig Mind-Brain-Body: Neuroanatomy & Connectivity Protocol database. Network-based statistics were used to identify significant functional connectivity networks that were positively and negatively associated with the personality traits of neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion, with and without demographical covariates. Mediation analyses were performed for each personality trait and depressive symptoms with the significant positive and negative network strengths of the respective personality traits as mediators.

RESULTS

Neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion were significantly correlated with depressive symptoms. Network-based statistics identified patterns of functional connectivity that were significantly associated with neuroticism and conscientiousness. After controlling for demographical covariates, significant conscientiousness-associated and extraversion-associated networks emerged. Mediation analysis concluded that only the neuroticism-positive network mediated the effect of neuroticism on depressive symptoms. When age and sex were controlled, the extraversion-positive network completely mediated the effect of extraversion on depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings revealed that patterns of intrinsic functional networks predict personality traits and suggest that the relationship between personality traits and depressive symptoms may in part be due to their common patterns of intrinsic functional networks.

Self as both target and judge: Who has an easier time knowing their own personality?

OBJECTIVE

The past two decades have established that people generally have insight into their personalities, but less is known about how and why self-knowledge might vary between individuals. Using the Realistic Accuracy Model as a framework, we investigate whether some people make better "targets" of self-perception by behaving more consistently in everyday life, and whether these differences have benefits for psychological adjustment.

METHOD

Using data from the Electronically Activated Recorder (n = 286), we indexed self-knowledge as the link between self-reports of personality and actual daily behavior measured over 1 week. We then tested if consistency in daily behavior as well as psychological adjustment predicted stronger self-knowledge.

RESULTS

We found that behaving more consistently in everyday life was associated with more accurate self-reports, but that psychological adjustment was not.

CONCLUSIONS

Analogous to interpersonal perception, self-knowledge of personality might be affected by "target-side" factors, like the quality of information provided through one's behavior. However, unlike being a good target of interpersonal perception, self-knowledge does not seem to be related to psychological adjustment.

Integrating and distinguishing personality and psychopathology

OBJECTIVE

We asked authors of this Special Issue to answer the following four questions: (1) Is there evidence that personality and psychopathology can be integrated? (2) Is integration important? (3) Can they be distinguished? and (4) How can the difference be measured?

METHOD

We review each of the papers and place the special issue in a historical context.

RESULTS

Authors uniformly agreed that personality and psychopathology can be integrated within a common structure and that this is important. The third and fourth questions were more challenging. Though authors generally agreed that there is a distinction between the person and their mental health problems, articulations of that distinction were fuzzy and it is clear that current methods cannot adequately delineate these domains.

CONCLUSIONS

We summarize the issue by offering five directions for future research: (1) develop measurement tools that distinguish between the person, the context, and their transaction, (2) measure behavior and context at multiple timescales, (3) distinguish behavior and dysfunction in measurement, (4) use multimethod data to tap different levels of behavior, and (5) examine person-specific processes. Each of these directions comes with challenges, but the payoff of resolving them will be a more principled, evidence-based, and clinically useful model for the distinction between personality and psychopathology.

Risk assessment tool floundering? Let's ask the client to self-predict

Self-prediction by criminal justice involved clients has not been typically implemented in risk assessment procedures, yet clients have unique self-knowledge that may add to the assessment of risk. The Transition Inventory is an eight scale self-prediction measure that addresses areas that are a precursor to antisocial and criminal activity (e.g., "Drugs or alcohol will be a problem for me"). The Transition Inventory was administered to 131 paroled clients (primary drug-related offenses), 104 of whom were of minority/ethnic status. Predictive validity was demonstrated by the Transition Inventory incrementally predicting supervision failure. Individual scale construct validity was demonstrated by predicting later assessed corresponding measures, with the Leisure scale having the most robust predictive relationship. Self-prediction may promote greater predictability and stronger client engagement in the assessment process.

The self-other knowledge asymmetry in cognitive intelligence, emotional intelligence, and creativity

The self–other knowledge asymmetry model (SOKA) assumes that some personality traits might be open to oneself and other persons (‘open area’), while other traits are more accurately perceived by others (‘blind spot’); a third group of traits might be visible only to oneself and not to others (‘hidden area’), and finally a trait might neither be visible to oneself nor to one's peers (‘unknown area’). So far, this model has been tested only for personality traits and general intelligence, not for more specific abilities; to do so was the novel intention of our study. We tested which of six abilities (verbal, numerical, and spatial intelligence; interpersonal and intrapersonal competence; and creative potential/divergent thinking ability) are in which SOKA area. We administered performance tests for the six abilities in two samples – 233 14-year-olds and 215 18-year-olds – and collected self- and peer-ratings for each domain. Numerical intelligence and creativity were judged validly both from self- and peer-perspectives (‘open area’). In the younger sample verbal intelligence was validly estimated only by peers (‘blind spot’), whereas the older group showed some insight into their own abilities as well (‘blind spot’ to ‘open area’). While in the younger group only the pupils themselves could validly estimate their intra- and interpersonal competence (‘hidden area’), in the older group peers were also successful in estimating other's interpersonal competence, albeit only with low accuracy (‘hidden area’ to ‘open area’). For 18-year-olds, spatial ability was in the hidden area too, but in 14-year-olds this could neither be validly estimated by pupils themselves nor by peers (‘unknown area’). These results implicate the possibility of non-optimal career choices of young people, and could, therefore, be helpful in guiding professional career counselling.

Unique predictive power of other-rated personality: An 18-year longitudinal study

OBJECTIVE

What is gained by having others report on one's personality? Research on adult samples has suggested that informant reports are especially informative regarding traits that are highly visible and evaluative (i.e., socially desirable/undesirable instead of neutral), such as Openness, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness. This 18-year longitudinal study aims to demonstrate the unique predictive power of other-rated personality in adolescence, using life outcomes and personality in adulthood as trait criteria.

METHOD

We examined the unique predictive power of self- and other-rated Big Five personality traits at age 12 and 17 on self-rated life outcomes and personality at age 29 (e.g., educational achievement, work income, depression, moral transgressions, and relationship satisfaction). Participants were 186 German adolescents (53% boys), their parents and friends at age 12, and their mothers and fathers at age 17.

RESULTS

Other-ratings showed unique predictive power beyond self-ratings for all Big Five traits, with the most consistent results for Openness, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness.

CONCLUSIONS

Results demonstrate the added value of including other-reports on adolescent personality when predicting future life outcomes and personality, especially for highly visible and evaluative traits. The present study sheds light on the predictive power of self- versus other-rated personality and personality-outcome associations.

Regional Cultures and the Psychological Geography of Switzerland: Person-Environment-Fit in Personality Predicts Subjective Wellbeing

The present study extended traditional nation-based research on person-culture-fit to the regional level. First, we examined the geographical distribution of Big Five personality traits in Switzerland. Across the 26 Swiss cantons, unique patterns were observed for all traits. For Extraversion and Neuroticism clear language divides emerged between the French- and Italian-speaking South-West vs. the German-speaking North-East. Second, multilevel modeling demonstrated that person-environment-fit in Big Five, composed of elevation (i.e., mean differences between individual profile and cantonal profile), scatter (differences in mean variances) and shape (Pearson correlations between individual and cantonal profiles across all traits; Furr, 2008, 2010), predicted the development of subjective wellbeing (i.e., life satisfaction, satisfaction with personal relationships, positive affect, negative affect) over a period of 4 years. Unexpectedly, while the effects of shape were in line with the person-environment-fit hypothesis (better fit predicted higher subjective wellbeing), the effects of scatter showed the opposite pattern, while null findings were observed for elevation. Across a series of robustness checks, the patterns for shape and elevation were consistently replicated. While that was mostly the case for scatter as well, the effects of scatter appeared to be somewhat less robust and more sensitive to the specific way fit was modeled when predicting certain outcomes (negative affect, positive affect). Distinguishing between supplementary and complementary fit may help to reconcile these findings and future research should explore whether and if so under which conditions these concepts may be applicable to the respective facets of person-culture-fit.

The Goldwater Rule: Perspectives From, and Implications for, Psychological Science

When, if ever, should psychological scientists be permitted to offer professional opinions concerning the mental health of public figures they have never directly examined? This contentious question, which attracted widespread public attention during the 1964 U.S. presidential election involving Barry Goldwater, received renewed scrutiny during and after the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, when many mental health professionals raised pointed questions concerning the psychiatric status of Donald Trump. Although the Goldwater Rule prohibits psychiatrists from offering diagnostic opinions on individuals they have never examined, no comparable rule exists for psychologists. We contend that, owing largely to the Goldwater Rule's origins in psychiatry, a substantial body of psychological research on assessment and clinical judgment, including work on the questionable validity of unstructured interviews, the psychology of cognitive biases, and the validity of informant reports and of L (lifetime) data, has been overlooked in discussions of its merits. We conclude that although the Goldwater Rule may have been defensible several decades ago, it is outdated and premised on dubious scientific assumptions. We further contend that there are select cases in which psychological scientists with suitable expertise may harbor a "duty to inform," allowing them to offer informed opinions concerning public figures' mental health with appropriate caveats.