Self-reports are the most relied on assessment method in psychology. In the area of personality, informant-reports are a reasonable alternative assessment strategy. However, agreement between self- and informant-reports of personality is only moderately good. A portion of the observed discrepancies between self- and informant-reports of personality may come from differences in psychometric measurement across raters. That is, it is unknown whether the constructs assessed via self- and informant-reports are psychometrically identical. We examined four key personality scales—Well-Being, Social Closeness, Stress Reaction, and Harm Avoidance—in male and female dyads who provided self- and informant-reports for their partner. Similarities in self- and informant-reports of personality were evaluated by testing measurement invariance. Overall, models supported configural, metric, and scalar invariance for each of the four personality dimensions. These results suggest that the same psychometric constructs are assessed via self- and informant-reports of these personality dimensions. Informant-reports can be used in studies to avoid biases from relying solely on self-reports.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. O. (2006). Robust chi square difference testing with mean and variance adjusted test statistics. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles.
2.
BagbyR. M.RectorN. A.BindseilK.DickensS. E.LevitanR. D.KennedyS. H. (1998). Self-report ratings and informants’ ratings of personalities of depressed outpatients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 437-438.
3.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246.
4.
BorkenauP.RiemannR.AngleitnerA.SpinathF. M. (2001). Genetic and environmental influences on observed personality: Evidence from the German Observational Study of Adult Twins. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 655-668.
5.
ChenF. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504.
6.
ChurchA.AlvarezJ. M.MaiN. T.FrenchB. F.KatigbakM. S.OrtizF. A. (2011). Are cross-cultural comparisons of personality profiles meaningful? Differential item and facet functioning in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 1068-1089.
7.
CliftonA.TurkheimerE.OltmannsT. F. (2004). Contrasting perspectives on personality problems: Descriptions from the self and others. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1499-1514.
8.
CliftonA.TurkheimerE.OltmannsT. F. (2005). Self-and peer perspectives on pathological personality traits and interpersonal problems. Psychological Assessment, 17, 123-131.
9.
ConnollyJ. J.KavanaghE. J.ViswesvaranC. (2007). The convergent validity between self and observer ratings of personality: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 110-117.
10.
De Los ReyesA.KazdinA. E. (2005). Informant discrepancies in the assessment of childhood psychopathology: A critical review, theoretical framework, and recommendations for further study. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 483-509.
11.
DurbinC. E.HaydenE. P.KleinD. N.OlinoT. M. (2007). Stability of laboratory-assessed temperamental emotionality traits from ages 3 to 7. Emotion, 7, 388-399.
12.
DurbinC. E.WilsonS. (2012). Convergent validity of and bias in maternal reports of child emotion. Psychological Assessment, 24, 647-660.
13.
FlettG. L.BesserA.HewittP. L. (2005). Perfectionism, ego defense styles, and depression: A comparison of self-reports versus informant ratings. Journal of Personality, 73, 1355-1396.
14.
FloraD. B.CurranP. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
15.
FoxN. A.HendersonH. A.MarshallP. J.NicholsK. E.GheraM. M. (2005). Behavioral inhibition: Linking biology and behavior within a developmental framework. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 235-262.
16.
FunderD. C. (2012). Accurate personality judgment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 177-182.
17.
HarknessA. R.TellegenA.WallerN. (1995). Differential convergence of self-report and informant data for Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire traits: Implications for the construct of negative emotionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 185-204.
18.
HaydenE. P.DurbinC. E.KleinD. N.OlinoT. M. (2010). Maternal personality influences the relationship between maternal reports and laboratory measures of child temperament. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 586-593.
19.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
20.
JohnO. P.RobinsR. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206-219.
21.
JohnsonW.SpinathF.KruegerR. F.AngleitnerA.RiemannR. (2008). Personality in Germany and Minnesota: An IRT-based comparison of MPQ self-reports. Journal of Personality, 76, 665-706.
22.
KesslerR. C.AbelsonJ.DemlerO.EscobarJ. I.GibbonM.GuyerM. E.. . .WaltersE. E. (2004). Clinical calibration of DSM-IV diagnoses in the World Mental Health (WMH) version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI). International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 13, 122-139.
23.
KesslerR. C.UstünT. B. (2004). The World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative Version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 13, 93-121.
24.
KleinD. N. (2003). Patients’ versus informants’ reports of personality disorders in predicting 7 1/2-year outcome in outpatients with depressive disorders. Psychological Assessment, 15, 216-222.
25.
LaverdiereO.MorinA. J.St-HilaireF. (2013). Factor structure and measurement invariance of a short measure of the Big Five personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 739-743.
26.
LezakM. D. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
27.
LittleT. D.CardN. A.SlegersD. W.LedfordE. C. (2007). Representing contextual effects in multiple-group MACS models. In LittleT. D.BovairdJ. A.CardN. A. (Eds.), Modeling contextual effects in longitudinal (pp. 121-147). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28.
MacCallumR. C.BrowneM. W.SugawaraH. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
29.
MarkonK. E.QuiltyL. C.BagbyR. M.KruegerR. F. (2013). The development and psychometric properties of an informant-report form of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Assessment, 20, 370-383.
30.
MarshH. W.HauK. T.WenZ. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341.
31.
MarshH. W.LudtkeO.MuthenB.AsparouhovT.MorinA. J.TrautweinU.NagengastB. (2010). A new look at the big five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471-491.
32.
MarshH. W.NagengastB.MorinA. J. (2013). Measurement invariance of big-five factors over the life span: ESEM tests of gender, age, plasticity, maturity, and la dolce vita effects. Developmental Psychology, 49, 1194-1218.
33.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.HřebíčkováM.UrbánekT.MartinT. A.OryolV. E.. . .SeninI. G. (2004). Age differences in personality traits across cultures: Self-report and observer perspectives. European Journal of Personality, 18, 143-157.
34.
MerzE. L.MalcarneV. L.RoeschS. C.KoC. M.EmersonM.RomaV. G.SadlerG. R. (2013). Psychometric properties of Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) original and short forms in an African American community sample. Journal of Affective Disorders, 151, 942-949.
35.
MillerJ. D.PilkonisP. A.CliftonA. (2005). Self-and other-reports of traits from the five-factor model: Relations to personality disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19, 400-419.
36.
MorN.ZinbargR. E.CraskeM. G.MinekaS.UliaszekA.RoseR.. . .WatersA. M. (2008). Evaluating the Invariance of the Factor Structure of the EPQ–R–N among adolescents. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 66-75.
37.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998-2014). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
38.
OhI.-S.WangG.MountM. K. (2011). Validity of observer ratings of the five-factor model of personality traits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 762-773.
39.
OlinoT. M.KleinD. N.DysonM. W.RoseS. A.DurbinC. E. (2010). Temperamental emotionality in preschool-aged children and depressive disorders in parents: Associations in a large community sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119, 468-478.
40.
PatrickC. J.CurtinJ. J.TellegenA. (2002). Development and validation of a brief form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. Psychological Assessment, 14, 150-163.
41.
PharesV.CompasB. E.HowellD. C. (1989). Perspectives on child behavior problems: Comparisons of children’s self-reports with parent and teacher reports. Psychological Assessment, 1, 68-71.
42.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ.-Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
43.
ReadyR. E.ClarkL. A. (2002). Correspondence of psychiatric patient and informant ratings of personality traits, temperament, and interpersonal problems. Psychological Assessment, 14, 39-49.
44.
ReiseS. P.SmithL.FurrR. M. (2001). Invariance on the NEO PI-R neuroticism scale. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 83-110.
45.
RisoL. P.KleinD. N.AndersonR. L.OuimetteP. C.LizardiH. (1994). Concordance between patients and informants on the personality disorder examination. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 568-573.
46.
RowinskiT.CieciuchJ.OaklandT. (2014). The factorial structure of four temperament styles and measurement invariance across gender and age groups. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32, 77-82.
47.
SmithL. L.ReiseS. P. (1998). Gender differences on negative affectivity: An IRT study of differential item functioning on the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire Stress Reaction scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1350-1362.
48.
SouranderA.HelsteläL.HeleniusH. (1999). Parent-adolescent agreement on emotional and behavioral problems. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 34, 657-663.
49.
SouthS. C.OltmannsT. F.JohnsonJ.TurkheimerE. (2011). Level of agreement between self and spouse in the assessment of personality pathology. Assessment, 18, 217-226.
50.
SpenceR.OwensM.GoodyerI. (2013). The longitudinal psychometric properties of the EAS Temperament Survey in adolescence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 633-639.
51.
SteigerJ. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.
52.
VandenbergR. J.LanceC. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-70.
53.
VazireS. (2006). Informant reports: A cheap, fast, and easy method for personality assessment. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 472-481.
54.
VazireS. (2010). Who knows what about a person? The self–other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 281-300.
55.
WidamanK. F.FerrerE.CongerR. D. (2010). Factorial invariance within longitudinal structural equation models: Measuring the same construct across time. Child Development Perspectives, 4(1), 10-18.
56.
WooS. E.ChernyshenkoO. S.LongleyA.ZhangZ.-X.ChiuC.-Y.StarkS. E. (2014). Openness to experience: Its lower level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96, 29-45.
