Who should own the definition of personality?

Abstract

The averaged judgment of knowledgeable others provides the best available point of reference both for the definition of personality structure in general and for assessing someone's personality in particular. Self‐judgments, as in personality questionnaires, are intrinsically deficient because judgment errors cannot be averaged out. The recommended procedure for assessing someone's personality is to give a personality questionnaire, phrased in the third person singular, to those who know the target best. This set may or may not include the target person as a judge.

Using Multiple Methods in Personality Psychology.

“…There is a tendency to consider observer ratings, or in this case, reputational ratings, as higher quality than self-reports (Hofstee, 1994). This position holds some merit, as a good assessment of a person's reputation entails asking the opinion of more than one person.…”

“…Clearly, identity-related assessments permit greater access to internal states and experiences that do not happen or are not visible in the company of others. Reputations, on the other hand, may be less tarnished with self-enhancement tendencies and provide a more objective profile of the information that is publicly available to people or experts (Hofstee, 1994). Reputational information may not be ideal because its validity is undermined by the fact that observers do not have complete access to a person's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (Spain, Eaton, & Funder, 2000), although conversely, individuals may be unaware of some of their own behavioral tendencies that impact their reputations.…”

“…Thus, we have had hyperbolic statements made for and against particular methods made since the 1960s. People have argued that self-reports are fundamentally flawed and indistinguishable from response styles (Hogan & Nicholson, 1988;Rorer, 1965), that observer ratings are the seat of personality psychology (Hofstee, 1994), that projective tests do not work (Dawes, 1994), and that we should prioritize online measures over all other techniques (Kahn-eman, 1999). As will be seen in the following reviews, none of these positions is defensible.…”

Beyond self-report in the study of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: Correlations with acquaintance reports, clinician judgments and directly observed social behavior

“…The way others perceive a particular person (e.g., as friendly or unfriendly) greatly influences important social outcomes for him or her (e.g., being embraced or avoided by others). Moreover, self-reports of personality are not always equivalent to the way an individual is seen by others (Hofstee, 1994;Kolar, Funder, & Colvin, 1996). Clinician judgments might be important to examine, in addition, because of clinicians' special training and experience in diagnosing and assessing mental health.…”

“…Accurate descriptions of personality depend upon observing what people do, not just what they say about themselves (Gosling, John, Craik, & Robins, 1998;Hofstee, 1994;Kolar et al, 1996). The "behaviors" associated with happiness in the leading meta-analysis (Lyubomirsky et.…”