Extravert Surgical Resident Applicants Get Higher 360-Degree Evaluations From Coworkers

INTRODUCTION

360-degree evaluations are used as an assessment in order to identify strengths and weaknesses of, or as a continuous evaluation for, residents. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between personality and ratings on 360-degree evaluations among surgical residency applicants. A secondary aim was to describe the personality profile of applicants for a surgical residency position.

METHODS

Doctors interviewed for a residency or locum position in general, urology, or pediatric surgery were included. Participants rated their personality on the Neutralized Big Five Inventory. A 360-degree assessment was conducted. Scores from two laparoscopic simulators were used as a measure of technical ability. Univariate analyses were used to assess the results. Student's t-test was used to compare personality and Pearson correlations between 360-degree assessment and personality.

RESULTS

Fifty doctors participated: data were complete for 38. Personality profiles showed higher emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness ratings than the norm. Correlations revealed a significant relationship between extraversion and higher scores on the 360-degree assessments. Significant univariate correlations were found between extraversion and the 360-degree assessments, and two of the correlations held up after adjustment for multiple tests. No correlations with performance when using laparoscopic simulators were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Applicants for surgical residency rated significantly higher than the norm in four personality domains. Extraversion correlated with overall higher scores in 360-degree assessments by coworkers. Higher scores were not related to objective measures of technical skill, highlighting the importance of using objective measures for assessment.

Why Forced-Choice and Likert Items Provide the Same Information on Personality, Including Social Desirability

The forced-choice response format is often considered superior to the standard Likert-type format for controlling social desirability in personality inventories. We performed simulations and found that the trait information based on the two formats converges when the number of items is high and forced-choice items are mixed with regard to positively and negatively keyed items. Given that forced-choice items extract the same personality information as Likert-type items do, including socially desirable responding, other means are needed to counteract social desirability. We propose using evaluatively neutralized items in personality measurement, as they can counteract social desirability regardless of response format.

The NB5I

Abstract. Personality is usually measured by means of self-ratings. Despite some drawbacks, the method is here to stay, and improving on it, particularly regarding social desirability, is essential. One way to do this is evaluative neutralization, that is, to rephrase items such that it is less obvious to the respondent what would be a desirable response. We present a 120-item evaluatively neutralized five-factor inventory and compare it to the IPIP-NEO ( Goldberg et al., 2006 ). Psychometric analyses revealed that the new inventory has high factor homogeneity, relatively independent facets with acceptable homogeneity and normally distributed ratings, and relatively evaluatively neutral ratings (as indicated by the level of item popularity). In sum, this new inventory captures the same personality variance as other five-factor inventories but with less influence from individual differences in evaluative responding, resulting in less correlation between factors and a factor structure more in line with the simple structure model than many other five-factor inventories. Evaluatively neutralized inventories should be particularly useful when the factor structure is central to the research question and focuses on discriminant validity, such as identifying theoretically valid relationships between personality traits and other concepts.

The effects of survey mode on self-reported psychological functioning: Measurement invariance and latent mean comparison across face-to-face and web modes

Despite the increasing popularity of mixed-mode approaches to data collection, studies examining measurement equivalence across different survey modes in representative samples of the general population, particularly focusing on measures of socially sensitive psychological constructs, are sparse. In this study, we used data from a large representative sample of the Slovenian population (N = 9,900) collected as part of the third wave of the European Health Interview Survey (EHIS) to examine mode-inherent effects (i.e., measurement effects that cannot be neutralized by clever survey design) of the traditional interviewer-mediated face-to-face mode and the increasingly popular self-administered web mode on three measures of psychological functioning, namely the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale (PHQ-8), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), and the Mental Health Continuum - Short Form (MHC-SF). After controlling for self-selection propensities, our results showed strict measurement invariance for all three scales across the two survey modes, but statistically significant and notable differences in latent means, suggesting that individuals who respond face-to-face systematically report better psychological functioning than individuals who respond over the web. These results suggest significant mode inherent effects that cannot be attributed to measurement non-invariance of the scales between face-to-face and web survey modes, but most likely to social desirability bias in responses achieved in the presence of an interviewer. Administration mode effects must be considered when interpreting and comparing results obtained through different survey modes, particularly interviewer-mediated versus self-administered modes, especially when using measures of culturally desirable traits and behaviors, such as mental health and well-being.

Socially Desirable Responding in Experience Sampling

Abstract. Experience sampling often makes use of items that are similar to personality questionnaire items. Arguably, this opens up for item-popularity effects, where some respondents react to the items’ level of evaluative phrasing, causing a separate factor. Gauging the risk of item popularity effects in experience sampling is important since the multifactorial aspect of the responses to the items may cause spurious correlations. We investigate this in one original study and two existing datasets. The results reveal that evaluativeness in experience sampling items creates the same type of problems as in self-rating inventories. We conclude that personality researchers need to be aware that the experience sampling method is not vaccinated against socially desirable responding, and that careful phrasing of items promotes purer personality measures. This allows for more optimal testing of theoretical models of personality, as the fit between data and model will not concern variance in socially desirable responding but in the relevant constructs.

Is the General Factor of Personality Really Related to Frequency of Agreeable, Conscientious, Emotionally Stable, Extraverted, and Open Behavior?

Abstract. Proponents of the general factor of personality have suggested that it is related to more instances of agreeable, conscientious, emotionally stable, extraverted, and open behavior. We tested this frequency hypothesis by relating the GFP from personality self-ratings to the number of instances of typical Big Five behaviors in real life. For a period of 18 consecutive days, 108 students provided responses to experience sampling items on their mobile phones. The items described concrete behaviors that were rated by experts of the Big Five as typical of either of the five traits and were phrased in a way that made them easy to interpret and respond to. The items were then validated in study 1 and it was found that the behavior correlated with Big Five ratings. In a second study, we tested the hypothesis that GFP is related to a higher frequency of GFP related behavior. The results provided little support for the frequency hypothesis and are more compatible with an interpretation of the GFP in terms of style rather than substance.

Five-Factor Personality Inventories Have a Competence-Related Higher-Order Factor Due to Item Phrasing

This research examines whether the items of some of the most well-established five-factor inventories refer to competence. Results reveal that both experts and laymen can distinguish between items that refer to how competently a behavior is performed and items that do not (Study 1). Responses to items that refer to competence create a higher-order factor in the personality inventories (Study 2), and the variability in responses to competence-related items in personality self-ratings is best modeled as a general factor rather than as also tied to the specific Big Five factors (Studies 3 and 4). We suggest that a focused debate on what personality items should refer to is likely to have considerable positive consequences for both theory and measurement of personality.

The Properties and Utility of Less Evaluative Personality Scales: Reduction of Social Desirability; Increase of Construct and Discriminant Validity

Evaluative neutralization implies rephrasing items such that it is less clear to the respondent what would be a desirable response in the given population. The current research compares evaluatively neutralized scales measuring the FFM model with standard counterparts. Study 1 reveals that evaluatively neutralized scales are less influenced by social desirability. Study 2 estimates higher-order factor models for neutralized vs. standard five-factor scales. In contrast to standard inventories, there was little support for higher-order factors for neutralized scales. Study 3 demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity for the neutralized scales, e.g., by less inflated correlations to external measures. It is argued that evaluatively neutralized inventories help researchers come to grips with social desirability in personality measurement, and are particularly useful when the factor structure is central to the research question and there is a focus on discriminant validity.

Use of Social Desirability Scales in Clinical Psychology: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

There is still an open debate about the utility of social desirability indicators. This report systematically reviewed the use of social desirability scales in studies addressing social desirability in clinical psychology.

METHOD

A systematic review (January 2010-March 2015) was conducted, including 35 studies meeting the inclusion criteria of being published in peer-reviewed journals and describing quantitative findings about an association of social desirability with clinical psychology variables using a cross-sectional or longitudinal design.

RESULTS

Social desirability was associated with self-reports of various clinical-psychological dimensions. Most of the included studies treated social desirability as a 1-dimensional variable and only 10 of 35 disentangled the impression management and self-deception components. Although theoretical literature does not consider social desirability a mere response bias, only 4 of the reviewed articles controlled for the possible suppressor effect of personality variables on social desirability, while the majority focused upon the stylistic (response bias) rather than the substantive (personality) nature of this construct.

CONCLUSION

The present review highlighted some limitations in the use of social desirability scales in recent clinical psychology research and tried to offer a few suggestions for handling this issue.