Linked Life Data

10743882

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/10743882

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
3
pubmed:dateCreated
2000-5-12
pubmed:abstractText
Because of the potential for bias and error in questionnaire responding, many personality inventories include validity scales intended to correct biased scores or identify invalid protocols. The authors evaluated the utility of several types of validity scales in a volunteer sample of 72 men and 106 women who completed the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) and the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ; A. Tellegen, 1978/1982) and were rated by 2 acquaintances on the observer form of the NEO-PI-R. Analyses indicated that the validity indexes lacked utility in this sample. A partial replication (N = 1,728) also failed to find consistent support for the use of validity scales. The authors illustrate the use of informant ratings in assessing protocol validity and argue that psychological assessors should limit their use of validity scales and seek instead to improve the quality of personality assessments.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
0022-3514
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
78
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
582-93
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-11-11
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2000
pubmed:articleTitle
On the invalidity of validity scales: evidence from self-reports and observer ratings in volunteer samples.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Pastoral Counseling, Loyola College, Columbia, Maryland 21045, USA. piedmont@vax.loyola.edu
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article