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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 577-585 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |
| Volume | 56 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| State | Published - Apr 1 1989 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sociology and Political Science
- Social Psychology
Cite this
How Should Multifaceted Personality Constructs Be Tested? Issues Illustrated by Self-Monitoring, Attributional Style, and Hardiness. / Carver, Charles S.
In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 56, No. 4, 01.04.1989, p. 577-585.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
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 -