Consistency, self-consciousness, and the predictive validity of typical and maximal personality measures

Turner, Robert G.

doi:10.1016/0092-6566(78)90088-0

Cited by 114 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research (e.g., Froming & Carver, 1981;Gibbons, 1983;Scheier et al, 1978;Scheier & Carver, 1980;Turner, 1978a) has demonstrated greater correspondence between self-reports about behavioral dispositions and criterion measures of actual behavior among individuals high in private self-consciousness than among individuals low in private self-consciousness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…For example, studies have consistently revealed positive correlations between private self-consciousness and the validity of self-reports across several domains (e.g., Froming & Carver, 1981;Gibbons, 1983;scheier, Buss, & Buss, 1978;scheier & Carver, 1980;Turner, 1978a). Therefore, self-reports from individuals high in private self-consciousness predict and postdict more accurately, and hence correspond more closely to, behavioral (nontest) criteria than do self-reports from individuals low in private self-consciousness.…”

Section: William Nasbymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Private self-consciousness, self-awareness, and the reliability of self-reports.

Nasby

1989

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies found that individuals high in private self-consciousness provide self-reports of greater reliability across time than individuals low in private self-consciousness. In addition, Study 2 found that a successful manipulation of self-awareness did not affect test-retest reliability of self-reports among Ss either high or low in private self-consciousness. The hypothesis that individuals high in private self-consciousness have articulated self-schemata of greater temporal stability than individuals low in private self-consciousness received support. The discussion considers (a) how private selfconsciousness, but not self-awareness, influenced test-retest reliability of self-reports, (b) how private self-consciousness and self-awareness may both influence, albeit differentially, the eriterionrelated validity of self-reports, and (c) the possibility that current models of self-consciousness-selfawareness require reformulation.Private self-consciousness (e.g., Fenigstein, scheier, & Buss, 1975), a cognitive style, denotes habitual attentiveness to or awareness of the self. Since Fenigstein et al. (1975) originally proposed the construct, research has examined numerous correlates of private self-consciousness, which Buss (1980), Carver and Scheier (1981), and scheier and Carver (1983) have reviewed.Not surprisingly, several correlates pertain to the processing of self-referent information. For example, individuals high in private self-consciousness (a) write more detailed self-descriptions (Turner, 1978b), (b) decide more quickly whether trait adjectives describe the self (Mueller, 1982;Turner, 1978c), (c) recall more self-referent material under conditions of incidental learning (Agatstein & Buchanan, 1984; Hull & Levy, 1979, Experiment 1;Turner, 1980), and (d) commit more false alarms to self-descriptive traits but fewer to non-self-descriptive traits during a recognition memory task (Nasby, 1985(Nasby, , 1989) than do individuals low in private self-consciousness.The previous studies have established relations between private self-consciousness and either the accuracy or the efficiency (e.g., speed, productivity) of processing self-referent information. Cognitive tasks that assess either accuracy or efficiency provide two means of inferring the degree to which an articulated schema has guided performance (e.g., Fiske & Taylor, 1984; Kihlstrom & Nasby, 1981;Nasby & Kihlstrom, 1986). Consequently, from the convergent results of the previous studies, several investigators (e.g., Agatstein & Buchanan, 1984;Nasby, 1985) have concluded that individuals high in private self-consciousness have articulated self-schemata (e.g., Kihlstrom & Cantor, 1983;Markus, 1980;Rogers, 1981) 950third means of inferring the degree to which an articulated schema has guided performance (e.g., Fiske & Taylor, 1984;Markus, 1977). Considering the relation between schematic articulation and response consistency, individuals high in private self-consciousness should also process self-referent information more consistently than do i...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: William Nasbymentioning

confidence: 99%

Private self-consciousness, self-awareness, and the reliability of self-reports.

Nasby

1989

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Public self-consciousness indicates the tendency to direct attention to those aspects of one's behaviour that are observable by others. People high in public self-consciousness should tune their behaviour more strongly to social expectations (Turner, 1978). Hofmann et al (2005b) found that public self-consciousness moderated implicit -explicit consistency in one study on stereotyping, but not in an attempted replication.…”

Section: Implicit -Explicit Consistency 355mentioning

confidence: 99%

What moderates implicit—explicit consistency?

Hofmann¹,

Gschwendner²,

Nosek³

2005

European Review of Social Psychology

182

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicit and explicit indicators of attitudes or personality traits are positively, and variably, related. This review places the question of implicit -explicit consistency into the tradition of attitude/trait -behaviour consistency (e.g., Wicker, 1969). Drawing on dual-process models, such as the recent distinction between associative and propositional representations (Strack & Deutsch, 2004), we identify a working model of implicit -explicit consistency that organises the empirical evidence on implicit -explicit moderation into five factors: translation between implicit and explicit representations (e.g., representational strength, awareness), additional information integration for explicit representations (e.g., need for cognition), properties of explicit assessment (e.g., social desirability concerns), properties of implicit assessment (e.g., situational malleability), and research design factors (e.g., sampling bias, measurement correspondence).A significant proportion of psychological research over the last three decades concerns the automatic nature of information processing (Bargh, 1997;Khilstrom, 1999;Wegner & Bargh, 1998). Theory and empirical data have broadened notions of core psychological concepts like attitudes, stereotypes, self-concept, goals, personality, and self-esteem to include not Correspondence should be addressed to Wilhelm Hofmann, Fachbereich 8 -Psychologie Universita¨t Koblenz-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829 Landau, Germany. Email: hofmannw@ uni-landau.de Preparation of this chapter was supported by a grant from the German Science Foundation (DFG) to Manfred Schmitt (Schm 1092/5-1) and by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health to Brian Nosek (R01 MH-068447). We would like to thank Rainer Banse, Boris Egloff, Malte Friese, Bertram Gawronski, and Jane Thompson for valuable comments on an earlier version of this chapter.EUROPEAN REVIEW OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2005, 16, 335 -390 2005 European Association of Experimental Social Psychology http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/10463283.html DOI: 10.1080/10463280500443228 just the explicit assessments that are products of introspection, but also implicit components of these constructs that may occur outside of conscious awareness or control (Asendorpf, Banse, & Mu¨cke, 2002;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000). Whereas implicit constructs are assumed to operate automatically and may be inaccessible to conscious experience, their explicit counterparts are conceptualised as reflective (conscious) and capacity-consuming mental representations that influence action through deliberation (e.g., Bargh, 1994;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). This distinction plays a role in a variety of dual-process theories that distinguish two modes of information processing such as implicit vs explicit (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Wilson et al., 2000), automatic vs controlled (Bargh, 1994), impulsive vs reflective (Strack & Deutsch, 2004), and associative vs rule-based (Sloman, 1996;Smith & DeCoster, 2000). These theories share an assumpti...

show abstract

“…Empirical research devoted to self-consciousness suggests that private and public self-consciousness are two independent dimensions that operate as important mediating variables. These exert similar effects as private and public self-awareness on different occasions, such as in the engagement of public or private self-consciousness during the day (Franzoi & Brewer, 1984); in the correlation with social or personal identity (Cheek & Briggs, 1982); in the correlation with 'suggestibility' (Scheier ef al., 1979); in the exhibition of the 'reactance' effect (Carver & Scheier,198 1); in the 'dissonance' phenomena (Davis, 1984;Scheier & Carver, 1980); in self-schema articulation (Mueller, Thompson & Dugan, 1986;Nasby, 1989Nasby, , 1985Turner, 1978a); in predictive validity of self-reports (Franzoi, 1983;Turner, 1978b); in accessibility of 'physical attractiveness schema' (Turner,Gilliland & Klein,198 1); in recall of self-reference tasks (Agatstein & Buchanan, 1984).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Private and public self-consciousness subscales of the Fenigstein, Scheier and Buss self-consciousness scale: A Turkish translation

Rugancı

1995

Personality and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study was to analyze the psychometric properties of public and private subscales of the self-consciousness scale (Fenigstein, Scheier & Buss, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522-527, 1975) on a sample of Turkish University students. Two pilot studies were carried out to explore the efficacy of the translated version. Then, in the main study, the final reliability and construct validity analysis were carried out on a sample of 253 students from various departments of Middle East Technical University. Results confirmed both the two factor structure of the private self-consciousness scale which had been reported by Bunkrant and Page (Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 629-637, 1984), and Piliavin and Chamg (Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 587-595, 1988) and the psychometric properties of the public self-consciousness scale which had been reported in the original study (Fenigstein et al., 1975). The Turkish version of each subscale is seemingly applicable on Turkish populations. © 1995

show abstract

Consistency, self-consciousness, and the predictive validity of typical and maximal personality measures

Cited by 114 publications

References 14 publications

Private self-consciousness, self-awareness, and the reliability of self-reports.

Private self-consciousness, self-awareness, and the reliability of self-reports.

What moderates implicit—explicit consistency?

Private and public self-consciousness subscales of the Fenigstein, Scheier and Buss self-consciousness scale: A Turkish translation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About