R. Michael Furr

Personality and Life Satisfaction: A Facet-Level Analysis

At the global level of the Big Five, Extraversion and Neuroticism are the strongest predictors of life satisfaction. However, Extraversion and Neuroticism are multifaceted constructs that combine more specific traits. This article examined the contribution of facets of Extraversion and Neuroticism to life satisfaction in four studies. The depression facet of Neuroticism and the positive emotions/cheerfulness facet of Extraversion were the strongest and most consistent predictors of life satisfaction. These two facets often accounted for more variance in life satisfaction than Neuroticism and Extraversion. The findings suggest that measures of depression and positive emotions/cheerfulness are necessary and sufficient to predict life satisfaction from personality traits. The results also lead to a more refined understanding of the specific personality traits that influence life satisfaction: Depression is more important than anxiety or anger and a cheerful temperament is more important than being active or sociable.

A New Measure of Perfectionism: The Perfectionism Inventory

In this investigation, we produced a new 8-scale measure of perfectionism called the Perfectionism Inventory (PI) that is designed to capture the important constructs provided by 2 existing Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1991b) measures, along with new perfectionism scales. In the results from 3 studies, we describe scale development, scale psychometric properties, and criterion-related validity evidence for the 8 PI scales: Concern Over Mistakes, High Standards for Others, Need for Approval, Organization, Parental Pressure, Planfulness, Rumination, and Striving for Excellence. We present relationships between the 8 PI scales, relevant MPS scales, and other criterion measures. Second-order exploratory and confirmatory analyses provide support for the 8-scale PI model as well as support for 2 composite PI factors labeled Conscientious Perfectionism and Self-Evaluative Perfectionism.

The Riverside Behavioral Q‐sort: A Tool for the Description of Social Behavior

The Riverside Behavioral Q-sort (RBQ) is a flexible technique for gathering a wide-ranging description of the behavior of individuals in dyadic social interaction. Ratings of RBQ items can attain adequate reliability to reflect behavioral effects of experimental manipulations and to manifest meaningful correlations with a variety of personality characteristics. The RBQs flexibility, validity, and relative ease of use may facilitate the more frequent inclusion of behavioral data in personality and social psychology.

A Framework for Profile Similarity: Integrating Similarity, Normativeness, and Distinctiveness

Many questions in personality psychology lend themselves to the analysis of profile similarity. A profile approach to issues such as personality judgment, personality similarity, behavioral consistency, developmental stability, and person-environment fit is intuitively appealing. However, it entails conceptual and statistical challenges arising from the overlap among profile similarity and normativeness, which presents potential confounds and potential opportunities. This article describes the normativeness problem, articulating the need to evaluate profile similarity alongside normativeness and distinctiveness. It presents conceptual and psychometric foundations of a framework differentiating these elements for pairs of profiles. It derives two models from this framework, and it discusses the application of their components to a variety of research domains. Finally, it presents recommendations and implications regarding the use of these components and profile similarity more generally. This approach can reveal and manage potential confounds, and it can provide theoretical insights that might otherwise be overlooked.

Personality psychology as a truly behavioural science

Personality psychology has been accused of neglecting behaviour—of devoting insufficient attention to what people actually do. The current paper addresses four important issues regarding the study of behaviour as separate from other important psychological responses—the definition of behaviour, the importance of studying behaviour, the strengths and weaknesses of core methods through which behaviour is studied and the degree to which behaviour actually has been studied in personality psychology over the past 15 years (along with information about the use of specific methods of studying behaviour). Analysis of publication trends indicates that behaviour is not studied to the degree it merits; furthermore, it indicates that, when behaviour is studied, it is usually studied at a very generalized level relying on relatively weak methods. The current paper is offered as a starting point for focused discussion of these important issues, potentially enhancing the fields standing as a truly behavioural science. Copyright

The Double-Entry Intraclass Correlation as an Index of Profile Similarity: Meaning, Limitations, and Alternatives

As applied to many psychological phenomena, analysis of profile similarity has an intuitive appeal that masks complex statistical issues. Psychologists have long debated the methods of indexing similarity between 2 psychological profiles, but the double-entry intraclass correlation may be emerging as a preferred approach. Unfortunately, the double-entry intraclass correlation has not been articulated clearly in terms of fundamental facets of profiles—elevation, scatter, and shape—which prevents full understanding of its meaning. In this article, I (a) articulate these effects, (b) discuss potential limitations and confusions arising from these effects, (c) present a failure to replicate previous empirical findings regarding the double-entry intraclass correlation, and (d) present alternative recommendations for analysis of profile similarity. The conceptual, mathematical, and empirical points may enhance the insights emerging from analyses of profiles and profile similarity.

Impulsivity, attention, memory, and decision-making among adolescent marijuana users

RationaleMarijuana is a popular drug of abuse among adolescents, and they may be uniquely vulnerable to resulting cognitive and behavioral impairments. Previous studies have found impairments among adolescent marijuana users. However, the majority of this research has examined measures individually rather than multiple domains in a single cohesive analysis. This study used a logistic regression model that combines performance on a range of tasks to identify which measures were most altered among adolescent marijuana users.ObjectivesThe purpose of this research was to determine unique associations between adolescent marijuana use and performances on multiple cognitive and behavioral domains (attention, memory, decision-making, and impulsivity) in 14- to 17-year-olds while simultaneously controlling for performances across the measures to determine which measures most strongly distinguish marijuana users from nonusers.MethodsMarijuana-using adolescents (n = 45) and controls (n = 48) were tested. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to test for: (1) differences between marijuana users and nonusers on each measure, (2) associations between marijuana use and each measure after controlling for the other measures, and (3) the degree to which (1) and (2) together elucidated differences among marijuana users and nonusers.ResultsOf all the cognitive and behavioral domains tested, impaired short-term recall memory and consequence sensitivity impulsivity were associated with marijuana use after controlling for performances across all measures.ConclusionsThis study extends previous findings by identifying cognitive and behavioral impairments most strongly associated with adolescent marijuana users. These specific deficits are potential targets of intervention for this at-risk population.

Evaluating Theories Efficiently: The Nuts and Bolts of Contrast Analysis

Contrast analysis is a way to evaluate theories efficiently and relatively easily, but despite its efficiency, informativeness, and simplicity, contrast analysis is rarely found in the research literature. We present and illustrate step-by-step outlines of contrast procedures for 4 basic kinds of analyses, and we highlight the ways in which they provide focused information that complements more conventional analytic techniques such as omnibus analysis of variance-based F tests and count-based chi-squares. In addition, we provide examples of contrast analysis using 2 widely used statistical packages. We believe that the social sciences will profit if researchers, teachers, students, reviewers, and editors have a deeper understanding and appreciation of the advantages, informativeness, and ease of contrast analysis.

Meta-Insight: Do People Really Know How Others See Them?

Although people can accurately guess how others see them, many studies have suggested that this may only be because people generally assume that others see them as they see themselves. These findings raise the question: In their everyday lives, do people understand the distinction between how they see their own personality and how others see their personality? We examined whether people make this distinction, or whether people possess what we call meta-insight. In 3 studies, we assessed meta-insight for a broad range of traits (e.g., Big Five, intelligent, funny) across several naturalistic social contexts (e.g., first impression, friends). Our findings suggest that people can make valid distinctions between how they see themselves and how others see them. Thus, people seem to have some genuine insight into their reputation and do not achieve meta-accuracy only by capitalizing on the fact that others see them similarly to how they see themselves.

Distinctions in Behavioral Impulsivity: Implications for Substance Abuse Research

ObjectivesResearchers have clearly implicated impulsivity as having a key role in substance use disorders, and comparisons of self-report measures suggest that there are measurably different components of impulsive behavior. However, comparatively little research has been devoted to understanding the multidimensional nature of this construct using laboratory measures of impulsivity that may be more sensitive to tracking changes across time. Many studies have measured impulsivity, but this construct has been measured using methodologically different types of laboratory impulsivity paradigms that are often used in isolation. As a result, it is important to determine whether some of the most frequently used types of behavioral measures of impulsivity account for unique variance. MethodsHere, we used factor analytical techniques in 2 studies to evaluate the independence of 3 of the most commonly used behavioral impulsivity paradigms. First, a factor analysis was conducted using previously collected data (n=204), and second, data were gathered specifically to replicate and extend the results of our original analysis (n=198). ResultsBoth studies revealed 3 distinct factors, confirming our hypothesis of at least 3 components of impulsive behavior that can be measured by these methodologic approaches. ConclusionsThese findings suggest that researchers should carefully consider their selection of laboratory behavioral impulsivity measures, and that the measure(s) selected should be related to the particular underlying processes relevant to substance use disorders and treatment success.