Another perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and predictive validity

Name	Another perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and predictive validity
Publication date	2010
Author 1
Author 2
Author 3
Author 4
Author 5
Author 6
Published In
Abstract	The bulk of personality research has been built from self-report measures of personality. However, collecting personality ratings from other-raters, such as family, friends, and even strangers, is a dramatically underutilized method that allows better explanation and prediction of personality’s role in many domains of psychology. Drawing hypotheses from D. C. Funder’s (1995) realistic accuracy model about trait and information moderators of accuracy, we offer 3 meta-analyses to help researchers and applied psychologists understand and interpret both consistencies and unique insights afforded by other-ratings of personality. These meta-analyses integrate findings based on 44,178 target individuals rated across 263 independent samples. Each meta-analysis assessed the accuracy of observer ratings, as indexed by interrater consensus/reliability (Study 1), self– other correlations (Study 2), and predictions of behavior (Study 3). The results show that although increased frequency of interacting with targets does improve accuracy in rating personality, informants’ interpersonal intimacy with the target is necessary for substantial increases in other-rating accuracy. Interpersonal intimacy improved accuracy especially for traits low in visibility (e.g., Emotional Stability) but only minimally for traits high in evaluativeness (e.g., Agreeableness). In addition, observer ratings were strong predictors of behaviors. When the criterion was academic achievement or job performance, other-ratings yielded predictive validities substantially greater than and incremental to self-ratings. These findings indicate that extraordinary value can gained by using other-reports to measure personality, and these findings provide guidelines toward enriching personality theory. Various subfields of psychology in which personality variables are systematically assessed and utilized in research and practice can benefit tremendously from use of others’ ratings to measure personality variables.
TagCloud	personality, meta-analysis, observers, informants, consensus
Méthodoogy & Field of research (targeted population & number)	(a) using a search string in PsycINFO ; (b) hand searching through a collection of over 200 psychological test manuals; (c) reviewing research bibliographies of three personality inventories that have other-report forms ; (d) reviewing the reference sections of existing meta-analyses and summary articles on other-ratings of personality ; (e) manually searching relevant existing meta-analytic databases; (f) contacting researchers who have frequently used other-ratings to request unpublished data; and (g) reviewing the reference sections of articles located through Strategies 1–6 for potential contributing data sources.
Discussion	other-ratings are clearly linked to targets’ personality traits and targets behave consistently enough for other-raters to rate their personality accurately ; personality ratings from multiple raters must be assessed to improve research reliability and validity ; Highly visible traits and nonevaluative traits should be rated more accurately by others ; interpersonal intimacy with the target produced further gains in interrater and self– other accuracy ; work colleagues’ ratings were strongly predictive of targets’ job performance (considerably more strongly predictive than were self-ratings)
Limites
Ouverture / Perspective	using a broader set of traits ; further qualitative studies on the sources of discrepancies between self- and other-ratings
Conclusion	traits appear to be readily expressed (high RA) to those intimately acquainted with targets, but considerably less trait expression is afforded to those less intimately acquainted with targets (even when interactions with a target are frequent) ; other-raters are considerably idiosyncratic in how they view the target (modest DU), especially in rating traits low in visibility and high in evaluativeness ; other-ratings assess traits more validly than do self-ratings for predicting at least some important criteria (e.g., academic and job performance)
Figure