Abstract
This paper considers the concept of trait as a natural category from everyday usage and the reasons why self-report questionnaires have been used to measure traits. It argues that such questionnaires cannot be used in scientific work as operational definitions of traits. Discussing possible new directions for research in this domain, it makes two main points: (a) Questionnaires can be useful instruments for applied purposes when they have been designed and validated for the particular application, and when there is empirical evidence to support their use they can be of some value; (b) the use of questionnaires for scientific work, however, requires us to have a better theory of these instruments and of the processes involved in their administration and in the subjects’ selection of their answers. Just as measurement helps us develop substantive theory, so we must have the relevant substantive theory to enable us to understand our measuring operations and to develop the rationale for their use.
This paper has profited from comments on the earlier version presented at the Bielefeld Symposium, especially those of Jerry Wiggins.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ashton, S.G., & Goldberg, L.R. (1973). In response to Jackson’s challenge: The comparative validity of personality scales constructed by the external (empirical) strategy and scales developed intuitively by experts, novices, and laymen. Journal of Research in Personality, 7, 1–20.
Belson, W.A. (1968). Respondent understanding of survey questions. Polls, 3, 1–13.
Bem, D.J., & Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross-situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506–520.
Buss, D.M.,&Craik, K.H. (1980). The frequency concept of disposition: Dominance and prototypically dominant acts. Journal of Personality, 48, 379–392.
Buss, D.M.,&Craik, K.H. (1981). The act frequency analysis of interpersonal dispositions: Aloofness, gregariousness, dominance, and submission. Journal of Personality, 49, 175–192.
Butt, D.S., & Fiske, D.W. (1968). Comparison of strategies in developing scales for dominance. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 505–519.
Campbell, D.T., & Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant valldation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.
Campbell, N.R. (1952). What is science? New York: Dover. (Originally published 1921).
Coleman, J.S. (1969). The methods of sociology. In Bierstadt, R. (Ed.), A design for sociology: Scope, objectives, and methods (Monograph 9). Philadelphia: American Academy of Political and Social Science.
Ericsson, K.A., & Simon, H.A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215–251.
Fiske, D.W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from difference sources. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 329–344.
Fiske, D.W. (1966). Some hypotheses concerning test adequacy. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 26, 69–88.
Fiske, D.W. (1971). Measuring the concepts of personality. Chicago: Aldine.
Fiske, D.W. (1973). Can a personahty construct be validated empirically? Psychological Bulletin, 80, 89–92.
Fiske, D.W. (1976). Can a personality construct have a singular validational pattern? Rejoinder to Huba and Hamilton. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 877–879.
Fiske, D.W. (1978). Strategies for personality research: The observation versus interpretation of behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fiske, D.W. (1980). When are verbal reports veridical? In Shweder, R. (Ed.), New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science: Fallible judgments in behavioral research (No. 4). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fiske, D.W. (in press). Measuring to understand and understanding measuring.
Fiske, S.T., & Cox, M.G. (1979). Describing others: There’s more to person perception than trait lists. Journal of Personality, 47, 136–161.
Goldberg, L.R. (1981). Language and personahty: Developing a taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms. In Fiske, D. (Ed.), New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science. Problems with language imprecision. (No. 9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jackson, D.N. (1975). The relative validity of scales prepared by naive item writers and those based on empirical methods of personality scale construction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 35, 361–370.
Jackson, D.N., & Paunonen, S.V. (1980). Personality structure and assessment. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 503–551.
Kenrick, D.T., & Stringfield, D.O. (1980). Personality traits and the eye of the beholder: Crossing some traditional philosophical boundaries in the search for consistency in all of the people. Psychological Review, 87, 88–104.
Kuhn, T.S. (1961). The function of measurement in modern physical science. In Woolf, H. (Ed.), Quantification: A history of the meaning of measurement in the natural and social sciences (pp. 31–63). New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
Kuncel, R.B. (1973). Response processes and relative location of subject and item. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 33, 545–563.
Svis, C.B., & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 89–115.
Nisbett, R.E. (1980). The trait construct in lay and professional psychology. In Festinger, L. (Ed.), Retrospections on social psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nisbett, R.E., & Wilson, T.D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.
Norman, W. (1969). “To see ourselves as others see us!”: Relations among-self-perceptions, peer-perceptions, and expected peer-perceptions of personality attributes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 4, 417–443.
Pepper, S. (1981). Problems in the quantification of frequency expressions. In Fiske, D.W. (Ed.), New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science: Problems with language imprecision (No. 9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Smith, E.R., & Miller, F.D. (1978). Limits on perceptions of cognitive processes: A reply to Nisbett and Wilson. Psychological Review, 85, 355–362.
Sternberg, R.J. (1979). The nature of mental abilities. American Psychologist, 34, 214–230.
Sternberg, R.J. (1981). Testing and cognitive psychology. American Psychologist, 36, 1181– 1189.
Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N.M. (1982). Asking questions: A practical guide to questionnaire design. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Turner, C., & Krauss, E. (1978). Fallible indicators of the subjective state of the nation. American Psychologist, 33, 456–470.
Turner, R.G. (1981). Using subject generated descriptors. In Fiske, D. (Ed.), New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science. Problems with language imprecision (No. 9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wiggins, J.S. (1980). Circumplex models of interpersonal behavior. In Wheeler, L. (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 1). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1986 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fiske, D.W. (1986). The Trait Concept and the Personality Questionnaire. In: Angleitner, A., Wiggins, J.S. (eds) Personality Assessment via Questionnaires. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70751-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70751-3_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-70753-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-70751-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive