How Should Multifaceted Personality Constructs Be Tested? Issues Illustrated by Self-Monitoring, Attributional Style, and Hardiness

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

228 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two or more dimensions unintentionally varied simultaneously are said to be confounded, but several theories in personality intentionally combine 3 or more distinct qualities. Researchers using these theories sum the qualities before testing predictions. How wise is this practice? The practice appears to derive from 2 distinct lines of reasoning. One of them assumes that the component dimensions converge on a single underlying quality (latent variable) that each reflects imperfectly. The other assumes a synergy among dimensions. Issues arising from each line of reasoning are illustrated by examining self-monitoring, attributional style, and hardiness. Conclusions are that (a) information is lost whenever a latent variable theory is tested solely by a composite and (b) a synergistic theory can be tested only through a statistical interaction.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)577-585
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Personality and Social Psychology
Volume56
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 1 1989

Fingerprint

Personality
personality
Research Personnel
monitoring
synergy
interaction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Social Psychology

Cite this

@article{dc45b3cd6aa14d6d8afc211aa6eefff5,
title = "How Should Multifaceted Personality Constructs Be Tested? Issues Illustrated by Self-Monitoring, Attributional Style, and Hardiness",
abstract = "Two or more dimensions unintentionally varied simultaneously are said to be confounded, but several theories in personality intentionally combine 3 or more distinct qualities. Researchers using these theories sum the qualities before testing predictions. How wise is this practice? The practice appears to derive from 2 distinct lines of reasoning. One of them assumes that the component dimensions converge on a single underlying quality (latent variable) that each reflects imperfectly. The other assumes a synergy among dimensions. Issues arising from each line of reasoning are illustrated by examining self-monitoring, attributional style, and hardiness. Conclusions are that (a) information is lost whenever a latent variable theory is tested solely by a composite and (b) a synergistic theory can be tested only through a statistical interaction.",
author = "Carver, {Charles S}",
year = "1989",
month = "4",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "56",
pages = "577--585",
journal = "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology",
issn = "0022-3514",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How Should Multifaceted Personality Constructs Be Tested? Issues Illustrated by Self-Monitoring, Attributional Style, and Hardiness

AU - Carver, Charles S

PY - 1989/4/1

Y1 - 1989/4/1

N2 - Two or more dimensions unintentionally varied simultaneously are said to be confounded, but several theories in personality intentionally combine 3 or more distinct qualities. Researchers using these theories sum the qualities before testing predictions. How wise is this practice? The practice appears to derive from 2 distinct lines of reasoning. One of them assumes that the component dimensions converge on a single underlying quality (latent variable) that each reflects imperfectly. The other assumes a synergy among dimensions. Issues arising from each line of reasoning are illustrated by examining self-monitoring, attributional style, and hardiness. Conclusions are that (a) information is lost whenever a latent variable theory is tested solely by a composite and (b) a synergistic theory can be tested only through a statistical interaction.

AB - Two or more dimensions unintentionally varied simultaneously are said to be confounded, but several theories in personality intentionally combine 3 or more distinct qualities. Researchers using these theories sum the qualities before testing predictions. How wise is this practice? The practice appears to derive from 2 distinct lines of reasoning. One of them assumes that the component dimensions converge on a single underlying quality (latent variable) that each reflects imperfectly. The other assumes a synergy among dimensions. Issues arising from each line of reasoning are illustrated by examining self-monitoring, attributional style, and hardiness. Conclusions are that (a) information is lost whenever a latent variable theory is tested solely by a composite and (b) a synergistic theory can be tested only through a statistical interaction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024652974&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024652974&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2651646

AN - SCOPUS:0024652974

VL - 56

SP - 577

EP - 585

JO - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

SN - 0022-3514

IS - 4

ER -