Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Self‐ratings of personality predict academic success above general intelligence. The present study replicated these findings and investigated the increment of other‐ratings or intentionally distorted self‐ratings. Participants (N = 145) had to compile a personality questionnaire twice. First they were given neutral instructions. The second time they were asked to imagine a specific applicant setting. Furthermore, two peers rated each participant. Additionally, verbal, numerical and figural reasoning scores were obtained. Grades on a statistics exam obtained 2 months later served as the criterion. Results replicated prior findings and showed incremental validity for self‐ and other‐rated personality, which was stable after controlling for intelligence. Faking had no impact on the domain‐score level, but results on the facet‐score level were less encouraging. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords

abilities and aptitudes achievement learning and memory educational psychology personality scales and inventories specific aptitude theory faking

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amthauer

Brocke

Liepmann

Beauducel

(2001). I‐S‐T 2000 R (Intelligenz‐Struktur‐Test 2000 R) Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Ashton

M. C.

Jackson

D. N.

Helmes

Paunonen

S. V.

(1998).Joint factor analysis of the personality research form and the jackson personality inventory: Comparisons with the big five. Journal of Research in Personality, 32,243–250.

Beauducel

Brocke

Liepmann

(2001).Perspectives on fluid and crystallized intelligence: Facets for verbal, numerical, and figural intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 30,977–994.

Biesanz

J. C.

West

S. G.

(2004).Towards understanding assessments of the big five: Multitrait‐multimethod analyses of convergent and discriminant validity across measurement occasion and type of observer. Journal of Personality, 72,845–876.

Bratko

Chamorro‐Premuzic

Saks

(2006).Personality and school performance: Incremental validity of self‐ and peer‐ratings over intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 41,131–142.

Brown

K. G.

Schmidt

F. L.

(2006).Specific aptitude theory revisited: Is there incremental validity for training performance? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14,87–100.

Chamorro Premuzic

Furnham

(2005). Personality and Intellectual Competence. London: LEA Publishers.

Cohen

West

S. G.

Aiken

L. S.

(2003). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences(3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Costa

P. T.

McCrae

R. R.

(1995).Domains and facets—hierarchical personality‐assessment using the revised neo personality‐inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64,21–50.

10.

Cureton

Ralph

(1983). Factor Analysis: An Applied Approach. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

11.

Dollinger

S. J.

Matyja

A. M.

Huber

J. L.

(2008).Which factors best account for academic success: Those which college students can control or those they cannot? Journal of Research in Personality, 42,872–885.

12.

Farsides

Woodfield

(2003).Individual differences and undergraduate academic success: The roles of personality, intelligence, and application. Personality and Individual Differences, 34,1225–1243.

13.

Furnham

Chamorro Premuzic

(2004).Personality and intelligence as predictors of statistics examination grades. Personality and Individual Differences, 37,943–955.

14.

Glass

McGaw

Smith

(1981). Meta‐analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills, California: Sage publications, Inc.

15.

Goldberg

L. R.

(1990).An alternative ‘description of personality’: The Big‐Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59,1216–1229.

16.

Gray

E. K.

Watson

(2002).General and specific traits of personality and their relation to sleep and academic performance. Journal of Personality, 70,177–206.

17.

Holden

R. R.

(2008).Underestimating the effects of faking on the validity of self‐report personality scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 44,311–321.

18.

Kenny

D. A.

(1994). Interpersonal Perception: A Social Relations Analysis. New York: Guilford.

19.

Kuncel

N. R.

Hezlett

S. A.

Ones

D. S.

(2001).A comprehensive meta‐analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127,162–181.

20.

Kuncel

N. R.

Hezlett

S. A.

Ones

D. S.

(2004).Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86,148–161.

21.

Laidra

Pullmann

Allik

(2007).Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement: A cross‐sectional study from elementary to secondary school. Personality and Individual Differences, 42,441–451.

22.

Lounsbury

J. W.

Sundstrom

Loveland

J. L.

Gibson

L. W.

(2002).Broad versus narrow personality traits in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Learning and Individual Differences, 14,65–75.

23.

Martin

B. A.

Bowen

C. C.

Hunt

S. T.

(2002).How effective are people at faking on personality questionnaires? Personality and Individual Differences, 32,247–256.

24.

O'Connor

M. C.

Paunonen

S. V.

(2007).Big five personality predictors of post‐secondary academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 43,971–990.

25.

Ones

D. S.

Viswesvaran

Reiss

A. D.

(1996).Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81,660–679.

26.

Ostendorf

Angleitner

(2004). NEO‐PI‐R. NEO Persönlichkeitsinventar nach Costa und McCrae. Revidierte Fassung. (NEO‐PI‐R. NEO Personality Inventory). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

27.

Paunonen

S. V.

Ashton

M. C.

(2001).Big five predictors of academic achievement. Journal of Research in Personality, 35,78–90.

28.

Roberts

B. W.

Chernyshenko

O. S.

Stark

Goldberg

L. R.

(2005).The structure of conscientiousness: An empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Personnel Psychology, 59,103–139.

29.

Roberts

B. W.

Kuncel

N. R.

Shiner

Caspi

Goldberg

L. R.

(2007).The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2,313–345.

30.

Rogers

(1997). Researching Dissimulation(2 ed.). New York: Guilford.

31.

Wagerman

S. A.

Funder

D. C.

(2007).Acquaintance reports of personality and academic achievement: A case for conscientiousness. Journal of Research in Personality, 41,221–229.

32.

Wittmann

W. W.

Süß

H. M.

(1999). Investigating the paths between working memory, intelligence, knowledge, and complex problem‐solving performances via Brunswik symmetry. In P. L. Ackerman , P. C. Kyllonen , & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Learning and individual differences. process, trait content determinants(pp.77–104). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

33.

Ziegler

Bühner

(2009).Modeling socially desirable responding and its effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2009,548–565.

34.

Ziegler

Knogler

Bühner

(2009).Conscientiousness, achievement striving, and intelligence as performance predictors in a sample of German psychology students: Always a linear relationship? Learning and Individual Differences, 19,288–292.

35.

Ziegler

Schmidt‐Atzert

Bühner

Krumm

(2007).Fakability of different measurement methods for achievement motivation: Questionnaire, semi‐projective, and objective. Psychology Science, 49,291–307.

Predicting academic success with the Big 5 rated from different points of view: Self‐rated,other rated and faked

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References