Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Frame‐of‐reference ( FOR ) effects in personality assessment are demonstrated when self‐rated items oriented to specific contexts (e.g., workplace) show better predictive validity than noncontextualized items. Empirical support of FOR effects typically relies on job performance ratings or academic grades for criteria. The current study evaluates FOR effects using ratings of personality provided by informants from the home or school context. Items from the NEO Five‐Factor Inventory ( NEO‐FFI ; Costa & McCrae, 1992) were contextualized to the home and school contexts to create NEO ‐Home and NEO ‐School versions. One hundred fifty‐eight college students completed the NEO ‐Home and NEO ‐School questionnaires, and 161 college students completed the standard, noncontextualized NEO‐FFI . All participants recruited one peer from college and at least one parent to complete standard rater versions of the NEO‐FFI . Contextualized self‐ratings did not show FOR effects. NEO ‐Home self‐ratings did not correlate higher with parent ratings than with peer ratings, and NEO ‐School self‐ratings did not correlate higher with peer ratings than with parent ratings. Standard NEO‐FFI self‐ratings generally showed higher self‐informant agreement with both types of informants than contextualized self‐ratings. The pattern of correlations suggests that validity is enhanced more by specific trait‐informant combinations than by the contextualization of items to social contexts.
Kurtz et al. (Mon,) studied this question.