Key result
Dichotomous Type D personality assessment shows poor agreement with continuous methods, yielding ~58% false positives.
Why the study?
Recent failures to replicate Type D personality findings may stem from inconsistent assessment methods, particularly dichotomization that may generate false-positive results.
Does the dichotomous method of assessing Type D personality accurately reflect the continuous method?
Systematic Review (n=44)
Does the dichotomous method of assessing Type D personality accurately reflect the continuous method?
The popular dichotomous method for assessing Type D personality yields a high rate of false positives compared to the continuous method, driven by main effects of negative affectivity or social inhibition alone.
INTRODUCTION: Type D personality, operationalized as high scores on negative affectivity (NA) and social inhibition (SI), has been associated with various medical and psychosocial outcomes. The recent failure to replicate several earlier findings could result from the various methods used to assess the Type D effect. Despite recommendations to analyze the continuous NA and SI scores, a popular approach groups people as having Type D personality or not. This method does not adequately detect a Type D effect as it is also sensitive to main effects of NA or SI only, suggesting the literature contains false positive Type D effects. Here, we systematically assess the extent of this problem. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review including 44 published studies assessing a Type D effect with both a continuous and dichotomous operationalization. RESULTS: The dichotomous method showed poor agreement with the continuous Type D effect. Of the 89 significant dichotomous method effects, 37 (41.6%) were Type D effects according to the continuous method. The remaining 52 (58.4%) are therefore likely not Type D effects based on the continuous method, as 42 (47.2%) were main effects of NA or SI only. CONCLUSION: Half of the published Type D effect according to the dichotomous method may be false positives, with only NA or SI driving the outcome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lodder et al. (2021) conducted a systematic review in Type D personality (n=44). Dichotomous operationalization vs. Continuous operationalization was evaluated on Agreement between dichotomous and continuous Type D effects. The dichotomous method for assessing Type D personality showed poor agreement with the continuous method, with 58.4% of significant dichotomous effects likely being false positives.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: