How accurate are national stereotypes? A test of different methodological approaches

We compared different methodological approaches in research on the accuracy of national stereotypes that use aggregated mean scores of real people's personality traits as criteria for stereotype accuracy. Our sample comprised 16,713 participants from the Central Europe and 1,090 participants from the Baltic Sea region. Participants rated national stereotypes of their own country using the National Character Survey (NCS) and their personality traits using either the Revised NEO Personality Inventory or the NCS. We examined the effects of different (i) methods for rating of real people (Revised NEO Personality Inventory vs. NCS) and national stereotypes (NCS); (ii) norms for converting raw scores into T‐scores (Russian vs. international norms); and (iii) correlation techniques (intraclass correlations vs. Pearson correlations vs. rank‐order correlations) on the resulting agreement between the ratings of national stereotypes and real people. We showed that the accuracy of national stereotypes depended on the employed methodology. The accuracy was the highest when ratings of real people and national stereotypes were made using the same method and when rank order correlations were used to estimate the agreement between national stereotypes and personality profiles of real people. We propose a new statistical procedure for determining national stereotype accuracy that overcomes limitations of past studies. We provide methodological recommendations applicable to a wider range of cross national stereotype accuracy studies

Age differences in the variance of personality characteristics

In contrast to mean–level comparisons, age group differences in personality trait variance have received only passing research interest. This may seem surprising because individual differences in personality characteristics are exactly what most of personality psychology is about. Because different proposed mechanisms of personality development may entail either increases or decreases in variance over time, the current study is exploratory in nature. Age differences in variance were tested by comparing the standard deviations of the five–factor model domain and facet scales across two age groups (20 to 30 years old versus 50 to 60 years old). Samples from three cultures (Estonia, the Czech Republic and Russia) were employed, and two methods (self–reports and informant–reports) were used. The results showed modest convergence across samples and methods. Age group differences were significant for 11 of 150 facet–level comparisons but never consistently for the same facets. No significant age group differences were observed for the five–factor model domain variance. Therefore, there is little evidence for individual differences in personality characteristics being systematically smaller or larger in older as opposed to younger people. We discuss the implications of these findings for understanding personality development. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology </jats:p

Personality characteristics below facets:A replication and meta-analysis of cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, heritability and utility of personality nuances

Mõttus and colleagues (2017) reported evidence that the unique variance in specific personality characteristics captured by single descriptive items often displayed trait-like properties of cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, and heritability. They suggested that the personality hierarchy should be extended below facets to incorporate these specific characteristics, called personality nuances. The present study attempted to replicate these findings, employing data from 6,287 individuals from 6 countries (Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Japan, and United States). The same personality measure-240-item Revised NEO Personality Inventory-and statistical procedures were used. The present findings closely replicated the original results. When the original and current results were meta-analyzed, the unique variance of nearly all items (i.e., items' scores residualized for all broader personality traits) showed statistically significant cross-rater agreement (median = .12) and rank-order stability over an average of 12 years (median = .24), and the unique variance of the majority of items had a significant heritable component (median = .14). These 3 item properties were intercorrelated, suggesting that items systematically differed in the degree of reflecting valid unique variance. Also, associations of items' unique variance with age, gender, and body mass index (BMI) replicated across samples and tracked with the original findings. Moreover, associations between item residuals and BMI obtained from one group of people allowed for a significant incremental prediction of BMI in an independent sample. Overall, these findings reinforce the hypotheses that nuances constitute the building blocks of the personality trait hierarchy, their properties are robust and they can be useful

Person-fit to the five factor model of personality

The Five Factor Model (FFM), a valid model of interindividual differences in the personality of a group of people, reportedly does not always provide a good fit for the individuals of that group. In addition to intraindividual variation across a considerable period of time, meaningful intraindividual variation can be observed within a single test administration. Two person-fit indices showed that the FFM is an adequate model for 95% of the 1,765 target-judge pairs in four different countries (Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, and Germany): the double-entry intraclass correlation (ICC DE), which indicated that the 30 NEO PI-R scores on scales measuring the same personality trait are more similar and certainly less different than scores measuring different traits, and the individual contribution to the extracted eigenvalues (Z eig). The individual response pattern to the personality questionnaire characterized by the ICC DE and Z eig strongly determined the percentage of explained variance for the group-level factor structure of interindividual differences and the mean self-observer profile agreement. We demonstrate that, if the percentage of variance explained by the first five principal components is high enough, the FFM also provides an adequate fit at the individual level for most people. © 2012 Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern.status: publishe

Age Differences in Personality Traits and Social Desirability: A Multi-Rater Multi-Sample Study

Little research has examined age differences by using more than one source of information. We compared age differences in Five-Factor Model (FFM) facets and nuances in self-reports and ratings by knowledgeable informants using samples from three countries (Estonia, Germany, and the Czech Republic; N=5,624). We hypothesized that age differences would be larger in self- than informant-reports, because of greater social desirability in self-descriptions with advancing age. Indeed, we found that age differences were systematically smaller in informant-reports compared to self-reports; this trend was stronger for traits independently rated as socially desirable. As age differences may be best approximated by average trends of self- and informant-reports, we provide meta-analytic age trends for multi-rater composite scores of the FFM facets and nuances

Change in Anti-COVID-19 Behavior and Prejudice against Minorities during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Longitudinal Evidence from Five European Countries

In the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital to identify factors increasing behaviors that limit the transmission of COVID-19 (i.e., anti-COVID-19 behavior) and factors protecting against the negative consequences of the pandemic on societies (i.e., prejudice). A simultaneous investigation of a change in anti-COVID behavior and prejudice during the pandemic is essential because some factors (e.g., fear of COVID-19) could increase both outcomes, whilst other factors (e.g., norms in anti-COVID behavior or intergroup contact in prejudice) could bring desirable changes in one outcome without negatively affecting the other. In a three-wave longitudinal study (NT1 = 4275) in five European countries from April to October 2020, we employed a latent change score model to distinguish between intra- and inter-individual changes in anti-COVID-19 behavior and prejudice. On the intra-individual level, anti-COVID-19 behavior was increased by anti-COVID-19 norms; and prejudice against migrants from the Middle East was influenced by positive and negative direct and mass-media intergroup contact

Change in anti-COVID-19 behavior and prejudice against minorities during the COVID- 19 pandemic: longitudinal evidence from five European countries

In the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital to identify factors increasing behaviors that limit the transmission of COVID-19 (i.e., anti-COVID-19 behavior) and factors protecting against the negative consequences of the pandemic on societies (i.e., prejudice). A simultaneous investigation of a change in anti-COVID behavior and prejudice during the pandemic is essential because some factors (e.g., fear of COVID-19) could increase both outcomes, whilst other factors (e.g., norms in anti-COVID behavior or intergroup contact in prejudice) could bring desirable changes in one outcome without negatively affecting the other. In a three-wave longitudinal study (NT1 = 4275) in five European countries from April to October 2020, we employed a latent change score model to distinguish between intra- and inter-individual changes in anti-COVID-19 behavior and prejudice. On the intra-individual level, anti-COVID-19 behavior was increased by anti-COVID-19 norms; and prejudice against migrants from the Middle East was influenced by positive and negative direct and mass-media intergroup contact

Anti-COVID Behaviour and Outgroup Attitudes during the COVID-19 Pandemic

This projects investigates the factors that predict anti-COVID behavior and prejudice in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We sampled longitudinal data in 6 countries