The problem of validity results when using personality inventories

Abstract

The article analyzes the main reasons for reducing the reliability and predictive value of diagnostic information when using personality inventory, such as falsification of responses, response sets and variability of responses. Data on the manifestation of different types of response sets of the subjects (to simulation and dissimulation, to agreement and disagreement, to average and extreme responses, to socially desirable and unusual, unapproved responses) are generalized and systematized.

Author Biography

Elena A. Truhan, Belarusian State University, Niezaliežnasci Avenue, 4, 220030, Minsk, Belarus

PhD (psychology), docent; associate professor at the department of psychology, faculty of philosophy and social sciences

References

  1. Anastasi A, Urbina S. Psikhologicheskoye testirovaniye [Psychological testing]. Saint Petersburg: Peter; 2003. Russian.
  2. Burlachuk LF. Psikhodiagnostika [Psychodiagnostics]. Saint Petersburg: Peter; 2003. Russian.
  3. Shmelev AG. Prakticheskaya testologiya. Testirovaniye v obrazovanii, prikladnoy psikhologii i upravlenii personalom [Practical testing. testing in education, applied psychology and personnel management]. Moscow: Maska; 2013. Russian.
  4. Crowne DP, Marlowe D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology. 1960;24(4):349–354.
  5. Rukavishnikov AA, Rukavishnikova NG, Sokolova MB. Posobiye po primeneniyu MMPI [MMPI Application Guide]. Yaroslavl: Research and Practical center «Psychodiagnostics»; 2001. Russian.
  6. Morozova-Larina OI. Reliability scales in modern psychodiagnostics. Filosofiya i sotsial’nyye nauki. 2015; 4:84–88.
  7. Russian.
  8. Osin EN, Rasskazova EI, Neyaskina YuYu, Dorfman LYa, Aleksandrova LA. Operacionalization of fivefactor model of personality lines on the Russian selection. Psikhologicheskaya diagnostika. 2015;3:80–104. Russian.
  9. Cronbach LJ. Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1946;6: 475–494. DOI: 10.1177/001316444600600405.
  10. Guilford JP. Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1959.
  11. Edwards AL. The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research. New York: Dryden Press; 1957.
  12. Kline P. Spravochnoye rukovodstvo po konstruirovaniyu testov. Vvedeniye v psikhometricheskoye proyektirovaniye [A handbook of test construction. Introduction to psychometric design]. Kiev: PAN; 1994. Russian. 12. Berg IA. The deviation hypothesis: a broad statement of its assumptions and postulates. Response Set in Personality Assessment. Chicago: Aldine; 1967. р. 167–190.
  13. Kortneva YuV. Diagnostika aktual’noy problemy [Diagnostics of the actual problem]. Moscow: Institute of Humanitarian Studies; 2004. Russian.
  14. Goldberg LR. Model of item ambiguity in personality assessment. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1963; 23:467–500.
  15. Nowakowska M. Psychologia ilościowa z elementami naukometrii. Warsaw: PWN; 1975. Polish.
Published
2019-02-18
Keywords: psychodiagnostics, personality inventory, validity, reliability, falsification of responses, response sets, variability of responses, social desirability
How to Cite
Truhan, E. A. (2019). The problem of validity results when using personality inventories. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology, 1, 134-140. Retrieved from https://journals.bsu.by/index.php/philosophy/article/view/2025
Issue
No 1 (2019): Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology
Section
Methods of Psychological Research

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The authors who are published in this journal agree to the following:

  1. The authors retain copyright on the work and provide the journal with the right of first publication of the work on condition of license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial. 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
  2. The authors retain the right to enter into certain contractual agreements relating to the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g. post it on the institutional repository, publication in the book), with the reference to its original publication in this journal.
  3. The authors have the right to post their work on the Internet (e.g. on the institutional store or personal website) prior to and during the review process, conducted by the journal, as this may lead to a productive discussion and a large number of references to this work. (See The Effect of Open Access.)