Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Accuracy: Accuracy refers to the degree of correctness or precision in measurements, assessments, or predictions. See also Method, Predictions, Measurements._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
David C. Funder on Accuracy - Dictionary of Arguments
Corr II 212 Accuracy/Personality Rating/Funder/Biesanz: Funder (1995)(1) argues that a complementary programme of research focusing on accuracy is needed – when and for whom are perceptions more accurate? The key to understanding this argument and perspective is that accuracy and bias can be unrelated conceptually and empirically. Eliminating bias may not change accuracy as they are not flip sides of the same coin. (…) all combinations of high and low accuracy and bias can coexist. The mere existence of bias – or the magnitude of it – does not inform us of the existence or magnitude of accuracy except at the extreme theoretical limits. Thus the existence of reliable and replicable biases and errors in judgments and impressions does not inform us of the accuracy of our impressions of others. Personality psychologists need to systematically examine and document the levels of accuracy in impressions of personality traits and dimensions. II 2013 (…) the constructivist perspective examines accuracy as a social construction (e.g., consensus among observers) and the actual personality of the person in question is, in a certain manner, irrelevant. If everyone agrees that Jack is annoying, then he is truly and really annoying. If Jack would be friendly and sociable and a pleasure to have around (…) those alternative and unobserved realities are not considered under this perspective. The pragmatic perspective defines accuracy in relation to how well assessments allow one to function and successfully interact with that person. Jack’s personality is, in a certain sense, not relevant as the only concern is how well do judgments of Jack’s personality allow one to interact successfully with Jack. In contrast, Funder defined realistic accuracy as a broader construct. >Realistic Accuracy Model/Funder. 1.Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652–670. Biesanz, Jeremy C.: “Realistic Ratings of Personality Revisiting Funder (1995)”, In: Philip J. Corr (Ed.) 2018. Personality and Individual Differences. Revisiting the classical studies. Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: Sage, pp. 209-223._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Funder, David C. Corr I Philip J. Corr Gerald Matthews The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology New York 2009 Corr II Philip J. Corr (Ed.) Personality and Individual Differences - Revisiting the classical studies Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne 2018 |
||
