An other perspective on personality: meta-analytic integration of observers' accuracy and predictive validity.

By Brian S. Connelly, Deniz S. Ones. Psychological bulletin, 2010

914 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8fdabb0aa9c49cb601e385d402a3fc1aadbf0ce6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Other-rated personality and academic performance: Evidence and implications (2014, methodology): “However, these results also raise a methodological caution with respect to meta-analyses using the FFM, as demonstrated by comparison with Connelly and Ones (2010).”
Keep on Truckin’ or Stay the Course? Exploring Grit Dimensions as Differential Predictors of Educational Achievement, Satisfaction, and Intentions (2015, background): “Given the usefulness of observers’ personality ratings in predicting academic and occupational success (Connelly & Ones, 2010; RobertsonKraft & Duckworth, 2014), letters of recommendation, personal statements, and curricular and extracurricular records may all provide useful and valid information…”
Self-presentation style in job interviews: the role of personality and culture (2013, background): “Although self-reports have their place, research is accumulating on the value of observer ratings (Connelly & Ones, 2010; Oh, Wang, & Mount, 2011; Vazire, 2006).”
Toward understanding understanding : The importance of feeling understood in relationships (2017, neutral): “In addition, understanding seems to be greater for highly visible traits, such as extraversion and conscientious-ness, relative to less visible traits, such as emotional stability (Connelly & Ones, 2010; Funder & Colvin, 1988; Vazire, 2010).”
Five-Factor Model of Personality (2013, result): “Integrating and extending previous research on accuracy and bias, Connelly and Ones 2010 and Vazire 2012 identify the conditions under which personality ratings do and do not accurately predict behavior.”
Measurement Matters: Assessing Personal Qualities Other Than Cognitive Ability for Educational Purposes (2015, neutral): “Questionnaires are cheap, quick, reliable, and in many cases, remarkably predictive of objectively measured outcomes (Connelly & Ones, 2010; Duckworth, Tsukayama, & May, 2010; Hightower et al., 1986; J. Jackson et al., 2015; Lucas & Baird, 2006; B. Roberts, Kuncel, 240 EDUCATIONAL…”
Trait emotional intelligence in sports: A protective role against stress through heart rate variability? (2011, background): “In self-report evaluations concerning traits, when a great social value is placed on a trait, the participant ‘‘may try to conceal undesirable behavior and highlight desirable behavior’’ (Connelly & Ones, 2010, p. 1095).”
The General Factor of Personality (GFP) as social effectiveness: Review of the literature. (2016, background): “Overall, the average, uncorrected, overlap between GFPs is approximately r = 0.60, which is rather similar to the overlap in several other psycholog- ical constructs (e.g., the Big Five; Connelly & Ones, 2010).”
Constructing Validity: New Developments in Creating Objective Measuring Instruments (2019, background): “It also is important to note that self-informant correlations are typically modest (.20–.30) to moderate (.40–.60) for a wide variety of reasons (see Achenbach et al., 2005; De Los Reyes et al., 2015; and Connelly & Ones, 2010 for meta-analyses and discussions).”
How leader humility helps teams to be humbler, psychologically stronger, and more effective: a moderated mediation model (2017, background): “Observers' ratings of personality have been found valid (Connelly & Ones, 2010; Oh et al., 2011).”
Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children and adolescents: Evidence from a population-based study (2018, background): “In addition, informant reports are often considered a strength in study design, as in some cases observers can provide more accurate information than is possible via self-report (Connelly and Ones, 2010); that is especially true for younger children.”