What laypeople think the Big Five trait labels mean

Increasing the Flexibility of Implicit Personality Assessment: An Examination of a Universal Assessment Procedure of the Self

The current studies systematically examined a new version of the Questionnaire-Based Implicit Association Test (qIAT), which minimizes the differences between direct and indirect modes of assessment. Studies 1a (N = 276) and 1 b (N = 238) tested a method that enables an indirect assessment of questionnaires that include only non-reversed items. Studies 2a (N = 255) and 2 b (N = 284) tested a task that substitutes the problematic construct-related category labels with generic, universal categories. These studies, which focused on extraversion, supported the feasibility, reliability and validity of this procedure. Studies 3a-3c (N = 159, 154 and 151, respectively) supported the internal consistency, test-retest reliability and convergent validity of these methods, assessing three well-researched, semantically complex personality scales: Aggressive Humor Style, Need for Closure and Anxiety Sensitivity. Studies 4a (N = 195) and 4 b (N = 283) supported the implicitness of the qIAT, as most respondents were not aware of this task's purpose. In Study 4c (N = 598), participants who reported using antidepressants had lower self-esteem qIAT scores compared to a control group, thus supporting the criterion validity of this task. Taken together, findings suggest that the new qIAT substantially increases the scope of indirect personality assessment.

How do laypeople define empathy?

The term "empathy" is popular, yet fuzzy. How laypeople define it has not been investigated. In Study 1, we analyzed 99 participants' free narratives describing their personal definition, and in Study 1 (N = 191) and Study 2 (N = 351), we asked participants to rate a list of specific behaviors and tendencies for how well each one matched their personal definition. Out of 10 coded components, perspective taking was mentioned most often and personal distress (anxious reactivity in emotional situations) was never mentioned. Item ratings revealed four Empathy Concept factors: Prosocial Emotional Response, Interpersonal Perceptiveness, Other Perspective, and Anxious Reactivity. Other Perspective and Prosocial Emotional Response were most highly endorsed while Anxious Reactivity showed the lowest endorsement. Individuals varied widely in their endorsements of the factors. These results demonstrate that laypeople hold a multifactorial set of definitions of empathy and differ widely from one another in which ones they endorse.