Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1991-12
Are psychophysiological/psychophysical scores good candidates for diagnosing temperament/personality traits and for a demonstration of the construct validity of psychometrically measured traits?
The aim of this paper is to examine the use of psychophysiological and/or psychophysical measures employed as (a) tools aimed at diagnosing personality/temperament traits and (b) criteria for estimating the construct validity of personality/temperament inventories. The exploration is based on three diferent sources: (1) data collected mainly within the neo‐Pavlovian approach on CNS properties; (2) selected examples of studies in the domain of sensation‐seeking, neuroticism, and extraversion; and (3) theoretical considerations regarding the specificity of phenomena being measured by means of psychometric and psychophysiological/psychophysical scores. It is concluded that psychophysiological and psychophysical measures may be used for the assessment of personality/temperament traits or for estimating the construct validity of psychometric tools applied in personality (temperament) research under very strict requirements and limited circumstances only. In most of the studies conducted up to now, these circumstances and requirements have not been fulfilled.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmelangM.UllwerU. (1991). Correlations between psychometric measures and psychophysiological as well as experimental variables in studies of extraversion and neuroticism’. In: Strelau, J. and Angleitner, A. (Eds), Explorations in Temperament: International Perspectives on Theory and Measurement, pp.287–315, Plenum Press, New York.
2.
AndresenB. (1987). Differentielle Psychophysiologie valenzkontrarer Aktivierungsdimensionen [Differential Psychophysiology of Activation Dimensions Characterized by Contrary Valency], Peter Land, Frankfurt/M.
3.
AngleitnerA.RiemannR. (1991) ‘ What can we learn from the discussion of personality questionnaires for the construction of temperament inventories?’. In: Strelau, J. and Angleitner, A. (Eds), Explorations in Temperament: International Perspectives on Theory and Measurement, pp.191–204, Plenum Press, New York.
4.
BarnesG. E. (1985). ‘ The Vando R‐A Scale as a measure of stimulus reducing‐augmenting’. In: Strelau, J. , Farley F. H. and Gale, A. (Eds), The Biological Bases of Personality and Behaviour: Theories, Measurement Techniques, and Development, Vol. 1, pp.171–180, Hemisphere, Washington, DC.
5.
BorisovaM. N.GurevichK. M.Yermolayeva‐TominaL. B.KolodnayaA. Ya.Ravich‐ShcherboI. V.ShvartsL. A. (1963). ‘ Materials for comparative studies of various indices of the mobility of the nervous system in man’. In: Teplov, B. M. (Ed.), Typological Features of Higher Nervous Activity in Man, Vol. 3, pp.180–201, RSFSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, Moscow (in Russian).
6.
BuchsbaumM. S. (1978). ‘ Neurophysiological studies of reduction and augmentation’. In: Petrie, A. (Ed.), Individuality in Pain and suffering,2nd edn, pp.141–157, Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.
7.
BuchsbaumM. S.HaierR. J.JohnsonJ. (1983). ‘ Augmenting and reducing: individual differences in evoked potentials’. In: Gale, A. and Edwards, J. A. (Eds), Physiological Correlates of Human Behaviour: Individual Differences and Psychopathology, Vol. 3, pp.120–138, Academic Press, London.
CattellR. B. (1965). The Scientific Analysis of Personality, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.
10.
CattellR. B. (1978). The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis in Behavioral and Life Sciences, Plenum Press, New York.
11.
CattellR. B.WarburtonF. W. (1967). Objective Personality & Motivation Tests: a Theoretical Introduction and Practical Compendium, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.
12.
EpsteinS. (1979). ‘The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people much of the time’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37:1097–1126.
13.
EpsteinS. (1980). ‘The stability of behavior: II. Implications for psychological research’, American Psychologist, 35:790–806.
14.
EysenckH. J. (1967). The Biological Basis of Personality, Thomas, Springfield, IL.
15.
EysenckH. J. (1970). The Structure of Human Personality, Methuen, London.
16.
EysenckH. J.EysenckM. W. (1985). Personality and Individual Differences, Plenum Press, New York.
17.
EysenckH. J.LeveyA. (1972). ‘ Conditioning, introversion‐extraversion and the strength of the nervous system’. In: Nebylitsyn V. D. and Gray, J. A. (Eds), Biological Bases of Individual Behavior, pp.206–220, Academic Press, New York.
18.
FahrenbergJ. (1977). ‘ Physiological concepts in personality research’. In: Cattell R. B. and Dreger, R. M. (Eds), Handbook of Modern Personality Theory, pp.585–611, Hemisphere/Wiley, Washington, DC/New York.
19.
FahrenbergJ. (1987). ‘ Concepts of activation and arousal in the theory of emotionality (neuroticism): a multivariate conceptualization’. In: Strelau, J. and Eysenck, H. J. (Eds), Personality Dimensions and Arousal, pp.99–120, Plenum Press, New York.
20.
FahrenbergJ.FoersterF.SchneiderH. J.MüllerW.MyrtekM. (1984). Aktivierungsforschung im Labor‐Feld‐Vergleich[ Research on Arousal in Laboratory‐field Comparisons], Minerva‐Publikation, Munich.
21.
FahrenbergJ.SelgH.HampelR. (1978). Das Freiburger Persönlichkeitsinventar (FPI). Handanweisung[ The Freiburg Personality Inventory (FPI). Manual ],3rd end, Hogrefe, Göttingen.
22.
FahrenbergJ.WalschburgerP.FoersterF.MyrtekM.MüllerW. (1983). ‘An evaluation of trait, state and reaction aspects of activation processes’, Psychophysiology, 20:188–195.
23.
FranksC. M. (1957). ‘Personality factors and rate of conditioning’, British Journal of Psychology, 48:119–126.
24.
GaleA. (1983). ‘Electroencephalographic studies of extraversion‐introversion: a case study in the psychophysiology of individual differences’, Personality and Individual Differences, 4:371–380.
25.
GaleA.EdwardsJ. A. (1983a). ‘Psychophysiology and individual differences: theory, research procedures, and the interpretation of data’, Australian Journal of Psychology, 35:361–379.
26.
GaleA.EdwardsJ. A. (1983b). ‘A short critique of the psychophysiology of individual differences’, Personality and Individual Differences, 4:429–435.
27.
GoldmanD.KohnP. M.HungR. W. (1983). ‘Sensation seeking, augmenting‐reducing, and absolute auditory threshold: a strength‐of‐the‐nervous‐system perspective’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45:405–411.
28.
Gray, J. A. (Ed) (1964). Pavlov's Typology, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
29.
GrayJ. A. (1991). ‘ The neuropsychology of temperament’. In: Strelau, J. and Angleitner, A. (Eds), Explorations in Temperament: International Perspectives on Theory and Measurement, pp.105–128, Plenum Press, New York.
30.
HerzogT. R.WilliamsD. M.WeintraubD. J. (1985). ‘Meanwhile, back at personality ranch: the augmenters and reducers ride again’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48:1342–1352.
31.
IppolitovF. V. (1972). ‘ Interanalyser differences in the sensitivity‐strength parameter for vision, hearing and cutaneous activity. In: Nebylitsyn V. D. and Gray, G. A. (Eds), Biological Bases of Individual Behavior, pp.43–62, Academic Press, New York.
32.
Ivanov‐SmolenskyA. G. (1935). ‘The experimental investigation of higher nervous activity in children’, Fiziologicheskii Zhurnal SSSR, 19:133–140(in Russian).
33.
JacksonD. N.PaunonenS. V. (1985). ‘Construct validity and the predictability of behavior’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49:554–570.
34.
KaganJ.ReznickJ. S. (1986). ‘ Shyness and temperament’. In: Jones, W. H. , Cheek J. M. and Briggs, S. R. (Eds), Shyness, pp.81–90, Plenum Press, New York.
35.
KaskeyG. B.SalzmanL. F.KlormanR.PassH. L. (1980). ‘Relationships between stimulus intensity and amplitude of visual and auditory event related potentials’, Biological Psychology, 10:115–125.
36.
KohnP. M. (1987). ‘ Issues in the measurement of arousability’. In: Strelau, J. and Eysenck, H. J. (Eds), Personality Dimensions and Arousal, pp.233–250, Plenum Press, New York.
37.
KohnP. M.CowlesM. P.LafreniereK. (1987). ‘Relationships between psychometric and experimental measures of arousability’, Personality and Individual Differences, 8:225–231.
38.
LaceyJ. I. (1967). ‘ Somatic response patterning and stress: some revisions of activation theory’. In: Appley M. H. and Trumbull, R. (Eds), Psychological Stress: Issues in Research, pp.14–37, Appleton‐Century‐Crofts, New York.
39.
LolasF.CollinC.CamposanoS.EtcheberrigarayR.ReesR. (1987). ‘Hemispheric asymmetry of augmenting/reducing in visual and auditory evoked potentials’, Biological Psychiatry, 22:1413–1416.
40.
LukasJ. H. (1987). ‘Visual evoked potential augmenting–reducing and personality: the vertex augmenter is a sensation seeker’, Personality and Individual Differences, 8:385–395.
41.
ManganG. L. (1982). The Biology of Human Conduct: East‐West Models of Temperament and Personality, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
42.
MehrabianA. (1977). ‘Individual differences in stimulus screening and arousability’, Journal of Personality, 45:237–250.
43.
MischelW. (1968). Personality and Assessment, Wiley, New York.
44.
MischelW. (1983). ‘Alternatives in the pursuit of the predictability and consistency of persons: stable data that yield unstable interpretations’, Journal of Personality, 51:578–604.
45.
MyrtekM. (1984). Constitutional Psychophysiology, Academic Press, New York.
46.
NebylitsynV. D. (1957). ‘Individual differences in strength‐sensitivity in visual and auditory analyzers’, Voprosy Psikhologii, 3:53–69(in Russian).
47.
Nebylitsyn.V. D. (1972). Fundamental Properties of the Human Nervous System, Plenum Press, New York.
48.
NebylitsynV. D.GolubevaE. A.Ravich‐ShcherboI. V.Yermolayeva‐TominaL. B. (1965). ‘ A comparative study of short methods of measuring basic properties of the nervous system in man’. In: Teplov, B. M. (Ed.), Typological Features of Higher Nervous Activity in Man, Vol. 4, pp.60–83, Prosveshcheniye, Moscow, (in Russian).
49.
O'ConnorK. P. (1983). ‘The authors' reply to Gale and Edwards’, Personality and Individual Differences, 4:437–438.
50.
OlweusD. (1980). ‘The consistency issue in personality psychology revisited–with special reference to aggression’, British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19:377–390.
51.
PaleyI. M.ZazulinaP. L.IvanovaE. A.LeviyevaS. N.LisenkovaV. P. (1966). ‘ An attempt at a complex investigation of some individual typological properties in man’. In: Ananyev B. G. and Kerimov, D. A. (Eds), Man and Society, pp.162–175, Leningrad University Press, Leningrad, (in Russian).
52.
PavlovI. P. (1951–1952). Complete Works,2nd edn, SSSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow and Leningrad(in Russian).
53.
PetrieA. (1967). Individuality in Pain and Suffering, Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.
54.
RaineA.MitchellD. A.VenablesP. H. (1981). ‘Cortical augmenting‐reducing–modality specific?’, Psychophysiology, 18:700–708.
55.
RozhdestvenskayaV. I.NebylitsynV. D.BorisovaM. N.Yermolayeva‐TominaL. B. (1960). ‘A comparative study of different indices of strength of the nervous system in man’, Voprosy Psikhologii, 6:41–56(in Russian).
56.
SchweizerK.WittmannW. (1989). ‘An evaluation of the replicability of psychophysiological relations for aggregate data’, Personality and Individual Differences, 10:427–435.
57.
StelmackR. M. (1990). ‘Biological bases of extraversion: psychophysiological evidence’, Journal of Personality, 58:293–311.
58.
StelmackR. M.CampbellK. B. (1974). ‘Extraversion and auditory sensitivity to high and low frequency’, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 38:875–879.
59.
StenbergG.RosenI.RisbergJ. (1988). ‘Personality and augmenting/reducing in visual and auditory evoked potentials’, Personality and Individual Differences, 9:571–579.
60.
StenbergG.RosenI.RisbergJ. (1990). ‘Attention and personality in augmenting/reducing of visual evoked potentials’, Personality and Individual Differences, 11:1243–1254.
61.
StrelauJ. (1965).Problemy i Metody Badan Typow Ukladu Nerwowego Czlowieka[Problems and Methods of Research into Types of Nervous System in Man], Ossolineum, Wroclaw.
62.
StrelauJ. (1969). Temperament i Typ Ukladu Nerwowego[Temperament and Type of Nervous System], Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warsaw.
63.
StrelauJ. (1972). ‘ The general and partial nervous system types–data and theory’. In: Nebylitsyn V. D. and Gray, G. A. (Eds), Biological Bases of Individual Behavior, pp.62–73, Academic Press, New York.
64.
StrelauJ. (1982). ‘Biologically determined dimensions of personality or temperament?’, Personality and Individual Differences, 3:355–360.
StrelauJ. (1987). ‘ Personality dimensions based on arousal theories: search for integration’. In: Strelau, J. and Eysenck, H. J. (Eds), Personality Dimensions and Arousal, pp.269–286, Plenum Press, New York.
67.
Strelau, J. and Eysenck, H. J. (Eds) (1987). Personality Dimensions and Arousal, Plenum Press, New York.
68.
StrelauJ.AngleitnerA.RuchW. (1990). ‘ Strelau Temperament Inventory (STI): general review and studies based on German samples’. In: Butcher J. N. and Spielberger, C. D. (Eds), Advances in Personality Assessment, Vol. 8, pp.187–241, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
69.
TeplovB. M. (1964). ‘ Problems in the study of general types of higher nervous activity in man and animals’. In: Gray, J. A. (Ed.), Pavlov's Typology, pp.3–153, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
70.
TurovskayaZ. G. (1963). ‘ The relation between some indices of strength and mobility of the nervous system in man’. In: Teplov, B. M. (Ed.), Typological Features of Higher Nervous Activity in Man, Vol. 3, pp.248–261, RSFSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, Moscow, (in Russian).
71.
VandoA. (1974). ‘The development of the R‐A scale: a paper‐and‐pencil measure of pain tolerance’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1:28–29.
72.
VenablesP. (1984). ‘ Arousal: an examination of its status as a concept’. In: Coles, M. G. H. , Jennings J. R. and Stern, J. A. (eds), Psychophysiological Perspectives. Festschrift for Beatrice and John Lacey, pp.134–142, Van Nostrand, New York.
73.
WestS. G. (1986). ‘Methodological developments in personality research: an introduction’, Journal of Personality, 54:1–17.
74.
WrightJ. C.MischelW. (1987). ‘A conditional approach to dispositional constructs: the local predictability of social behavior’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53:1159–1177.
75.
ZuckermanM. (1984). ‘Sensation seeking: a comparative approach to a human trait’, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7:413–471.
76.
ZuckermanM. (1985). ‘ Biological foundations of the sensation‐seeking temperament’. In: Strelau, J. , Farley F. H. and Gale, A. (Eds), The Biological Bases of Personality and Behavior: Theories, Measurement Techniques, and Development, Vol. 1, pp.97–113, Hemisphere, Washington, DC.
77.
ZuckermanM. (1986). ‘Sensation seeking and augmenting‐reducing: evoked potentials and/or kinesthetic figural aftereffects?’, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9:749–754.
78.
ZuckermanM. (1990). ‘The psychophysiology of sensation seeking’, Journal of Personality, 58:313–345.
79.
ZuckermanM.KuhlmanD. M.CamacC. (1988a). ‘What lies beyond E and N? Factor analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54:96–107.
80.
ZuckermanM.SimonsR. F.ComoP. G. (1988b) ‘Sensation seeking and stimulus intensity as modulators of cortical, cardiovascular, and electrodermal response: a cross‐modality study’, Personality and Individual Differences, 9:361–372.
