1. What are the 4 types of data sources?

List each of them, give a brief definition, and at least one example.
Why might you want to give 2 examples of each? To practice your understanding of these topics!
L-Data: information that can be obtained from a person’s life. Example: court records and arrests
O-Data: information provided by close observers such as parents, friends, or teachers. Example: a teacher being
asked to evaluate a student’s extraversion.
T-Data: Data obtained from experiments or tests. Example: SAT, gratification test
S-Data: Data provided by the subject. Example: responses to questionnaires.

2. Some research in personality psychology uses the experimental approach, other research uses the
correlational approach. Define each approach briefly and give an example. Why are both needed? Let's say
you want to study the link between negative emotion and suicidal ideation--could you justify ethically
doing an experimental study on that topic?
Experimental research involves the manipulation of one or more variables, to determine their causal impact on
outcomes. An example would be Steele (1997) which investigated the “stereotype threat”. In correlational
research the investigator mea­sures two or more variables and determines the degree to which they are associated
with each other. For example, a researcher might be interested in how anxiety and self-consciousness correlate to
one another. An experimental study that explores the the relationship between negative emotion and suicide
ideation would have to introduce one “negative emotion” or “suicicidal ideation” to an individual to determine
a causal relationship. Either way, researchers would be causing someone to consider taking their own life. That
would be unethical.
3. What are the nomothetic and idiographic approaches to personality assessment? What can you say about
their (relative) strengths and weaknesses?
An Idiographic strategy attempts to create a detailed account of an individual. Nomothetic approaches attempt
to create identify patterns and principles that apply to a population. Their relative strengths and weaknesses are
comparable to the concept of bandwidth and fidelity and their tradeoff. Idiographic has a high personal
resolution but poor population resolution, while the inverse is true for nomothetic.

4. What do you know about correlations? Make sure you cover: (a) what is the highest and lowest number a
correlation can be? (b) what do these correlations mean: +.30? .08? -.45? (c) What is the correlation between
taking a daily aspirin and living without a heart attack for the next 10 years? (d) What is a typical
correlation in research, such as in a study of the link between self-reported extraversion and attaining a
leadership function in your sorority/fraternity? You read a study on this topic and the authors claim a
correlation of .89--what do you think about that result? (e) Does correlation imply a causal influence of
variable A on variable B? Illustrate your answer by discussing the finding that physical height is correlated
with performance on intelligence tests.
a) Correlations range from +1.00 to -1.00. +1.00 means an absolute positive correlation while -1.00 means
an absolute negative correlation.
b) .30 usually means a difference of 30% between outcome frequencies. This is called a 30% improvement
from the random outcome. It is a typical correlation. .08 works the same way but it falls just under the
 “small but still significant” criteria. .45 means a strong negative correlation between outcome
frequencies meaning the “good” outcomes decreased while the “bad” outcomes increased and their
difference was 45%.
c) It is positively correlated with an 8% possibility of improvement.
d) A typical correlation is .30. I would think that this measurement is likely an error and it can likely stem
from an error in reliability.
e) Correlation does not imply causation. An explanation for the correlation must exist and it might be the
case that getting taller will not cause more intelligence or vice versa, it probably just means that kids
grow and get smarter as they get older.

5. Define reliability as presented in lecture and make a table with the 4 major kinds of reliability indexes,
showing what aspect of generalizability each of them covers. For example, interjudge agreement examines
generalizability across ... Is a retest correlation of .80 OK? How about a retest correlation of .35?
Reliability is the extent to which we can generalize an observation and be replicated.

Generalize across time If the same observation can be made from retesting

Generalize across tests If the same observation can be made from a parallel
test.

Generalize across items Internal consistency

Generalize across observers The same observation can be made by different

observers

6. Define validity and the 3 major aspects we need to consider when we think about validity, as defined in the
lecture. Explain each of the 3 aspects using an example. Ideally, find your own example. If you cannot, use
the example from lecture (i.e., if you used Prof. John's cool new Conscientiousness test to pick your new
roommates--what validity questions should you consider?).
Validity is the extent to which an observation actually reflects the phenomena of interest in a study. Three
considerations when evaluating validity: Content validity means a test must accurately capture everything it is
supposed to, Criterion validity means a measure must predict relevant outcomes in the future, convergent and
discriminant aspects of validity means a test should only measure what it seeks to measure. An example would be
a test to see if the McDonald's partnership with BTS drove up sales in North America. Content validity will
implore that all participating chains in North America will be measured (not just in the U.S.), Criterion validity
that what is measured will happen at non-participating McDonald’s locations once they do, and convergent and
discriminant aspects of validity should show that it’s specifically due to the partnership with BTS and not
because the Cajun sauce is that good.