Hidden framings and hidden asymmetries in the measurement of personality--A combined lens-model and frame-of-reference perspective.
Big Five
frame-of-reference
personality
personality measurement
symmetry principle
validity
Journal
Journal of personality
ISSN: 1467-6494
Titre abrégé: J Pers
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985194R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
received:
09
01
2020
revised:
10
08
2020
accepted:
11
08
2020
pubmed:
16
1
2021
medline:
29
10
2021
entrez:
15
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The symmetry principle and the frame-of-reference perspective have each made contributions to improving the measurement of personality. Although each perspective is valuable in its own right, we argue that even greater improvement can be achieved through the combination of both. Therefore, the goal of the current article was to show the value of a combined lens-model and frame-of-reference perspective. We conducted a literature review to summarize relevant research findings that shed light on the interplay of both perspectives and developed an integrative model. Based on the literature review and on theoretical grounds, we argue that a basic premise of the frame-of-reference literature--that personality items are open to interpretation and allow individuals to impose their own contextual framings--should be considered from a symmetry perspective. Unintended context-specificity in items may "spread" to personality facets and domains, and thus, impact the symmetry of personality measures with other criteria. As the individuals´ frames-of-reference and (a)symmetric relationships are not always apparent, we term them as "hidden." The proposed combination of lens-model and frame-of-reference perspectives provides further insights into current issues in personality research and uncovers important avenues for future research.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
357-375Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Personality published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Ajzen, I. (2005). Laws of human behavior: Symmetry, compatibility, and attitude-behavior correspondence. In A. Beauducel, B. Biehl, M. Bosnjak, W. Conrad, G. Schönberger, & D. Wagener (Eds.), Multivariate research strategies: Festschrift in honor of Werner W. Wittmann (pp. 3-19). Aachen, Germany: Shaker.
Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Anastasi, A. (1983). Traits, states, and situations: A comprehensive view. In H. Wainer & S. Messick (Eds.), Principals of modern psychological measurement. A Festschrift for Frederic M. Lord (pp. 345-356). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Angleitner, A., John, O. P., & Löhr, F.-J. (1986). It's what you ask and how you ask it: An itemmetric analysis of personality questionnaires. In A. Angleitner & J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaires. Current issues in theory and measurement (pp. 61-108). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Asendorpf, J. B. (1992). A Brunswikean approach to trait continuity: Application to shyness. Journal of Personality, 60, 53-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00265.x
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 340-345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890902935878
Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2011). “… And how about now?”: Effects of item redundancy on contextualized self-reports of personality. Journal of Personality, 79, 1081-1112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00716.x
Baird, B. M., Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2017). The role of response styles in the assessment of intraindividual personality variability. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 170-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.015
Bandura, A. (2015). On deconstructing commentaries regarding alternative theories of self-regulation. Journal of Management, 41, 1025-1044. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315572826
Barnett, L. A. (2013). What people want from their leisure: The contributions of personality facets in differentially predicting desired leisure outcomes. Journal of Leisure Research, 45, 150-191. https://doi.org/10.18666/jlr-2013-v45-i2-3010
Beauducel, A., Kersting, M., & Liepmann, D. (2005). A multitrait-multimethod model for the measurement of sensitivity to reward and sensitivity to punishment. Journal of Individual Differences, 26, 168-175. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.26.4.168
Bing, M. N., Whanger, J. C., Davison, H. K., & VanHook, J. B. (2004). Incremental validity of the frame-of-reference effect in personality scale scores: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 150-157. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.150
Bleidorn, W., Hopwood, C. J., & Lucas, R. E. (2018). Life events and personality trait change. Journal of Personality, 86, 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12286
Bongard, S., Martin, N. M., Seip, M., & al'Absi, M. (2011). Evaluation of a domain-specific anger expression assessment strategy. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 56-61. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.513705
Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1992). Trait inferences: Sources of validity at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 645-657. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.4.645
Brunner, M., Nagy, G., & Wilhelm, O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796-846. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Cantor, N., Mischel, W., & Schwartz, J. C. (1982). A prototype analysis of psychological situations. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 45-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90004-4
Connelly, B. S., & Ones, D. S. (2010). An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers' accuracy and predictive validity. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1092-1122. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021212
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual, Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1995). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 21-50. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6401_2
Costa, P. T. Jr., McCrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for Agreeableness and Conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887-898. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90177-d
Davison, H. K., & Bing, M. N. (2009). Content validity does matter for the criterion-related validity of personality tests. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 501-503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01182.x
Debus, M. E., Greulich, B., König, C. J., & Kleinmann, M. (2019). Insecure about how to rate your job insecurity? A two-study investigation into time frames applied to job insecurity measures. Occupational Health Science, 3, 421-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-019-00049-x
De Raad, B. (1993). Have trait psychologists been ignorant of context? Commentary on the chapter by N.S. Endler. In J. Hettema & I. J. Deary (Eds.), Foundations of personality (pp. 269-273). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1660-2_22
De Raad, B. (2005). Situations that matter to personality. In A. Eliasz, S. E. Hampson, & B. De Raad (Eds.), Advances in personality psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 179-204). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
De Raad, B., Sullot, E., & Barelds, D. P. H. (2008). Which of the Big Five factors are in need of situational specification? European Journal of Personality, 22, 269-289. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.668
Eid, M., Geiser, C., & Koch, T. (2016). Measuring method effects: From traditional to design-oriented approaches. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 275-280. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416649624
Eid, M., Geiser, C., Koch, T., & Heene, M. (2017). Anomalous results in G-factor models: Explanations and alternatives. Psychological Methods, 22, 541-562. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000083
Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., Nussbeck, F. W., & Trierweiler, L. I. (2003). Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait-multimethod models: A multiple indicator CT-C (M-1) model. Psychological Methods, 8, 38-60. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.8.1.38
Eisenberg, P. (1941). Individual interpretation of psychoneurotic inventory items. The Journal of General Psychology, 25, 19-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1941.10544702
Epstein, S. (1979). The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people much of the time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1097-1126. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.37.7.1097
Fisher, D. M., Cunningham, S., Kerr, A. J., & Allscheid, S. P. (2017). Contextualized personality measures in employee selection: Extending frame-of-reference research with job applicant samples. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 25, 18-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12156
Fleeson, W., & Gallagher, P. (2009). The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1097-1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016786
Funder, D. C. (2012). Accurate personality judgment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 177-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412445309
Funder, D. C. (2016). Taking situations seriously: The situation construal model and the Riverside Situational Q-Sort. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416635552
Funder, D. C., & West, S. G. (1993). Consensus, self-other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 61, 457-476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00778.x
Geukes, K., Nestler, S., Hutteman, R., Küfner, A. C. P., & Back, M. D. (2017). Trait personality and state variability: Predicting individual differences in within-and cross-context fluctuations in affect, self-evaluations, and behavior in everyday life. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 124-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.003
Gignac, G. E., Bates, T. C., & Jang, K. L. (2007). Implications relevant to CFA model misfit, reliability, and the five-factor model as measured by the NEO-FFI. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1051-1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.024
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007
Guttman, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1998). Facet theory: Its development and current status. European Psychologist, 3, 13-36. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.3.1.13
Hayes, A. F., & Dunning, D. (1997). Construal processes and trait ambiguity: Implications for self-peer agreement in personality judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 664-677. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.664
Heller, D., Perunovic, W. Q. E., & Reichman, D. (2009). The future of person-situation integration in the interface between traits and goals: A bottom-up framework. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 171-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.011
Hirschmüller, S., Egloff, B., Schmukle, S. C., Nestler, S., & Back, M. D. (2015). Accurate judgments of Neuroticism at zero acquaintance: A question of relevance. Journal of Personality, 83, 221-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12097
Holtz, B. C., Ployhart, R. E., & Dominguez, A. (2005). Testing the rules of justice: The effects of frame-of-reference and pre-test validity information on personality test responses and test perceptions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0965-075x.2005.00301.x
Jackson, J. J., Hill, P. L., & Roberts, B. W. (2012). Misconceptions of traits continue to persist: A response to Bandura. Journal of Management, 38, 745-752. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312438775
Jobe, J. B. (2003). Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods. Quality of Life Research, 12, 219-227. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023279029852
Johnson, J. A. (2014). Measuring thirty facets of the Five Factor Model with a 120-item public domain inventory: Development of the IPIP-NEO-120. Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.05.003
Judge, T. A., Rodell, J. B., Klinger, R. L., Simon, L. S., & Crawford, E. R. (2013). Hierarchical representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: Integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 875-925. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033901
Kim, L. E., Dar-Nimrod, I., & MacCann, C. (2018). Teacher personality and teacher effectiveness in secondary school: Personality predicts teacher support and student self-efficacy but not academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110, 309-323. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000217
Klein, S. B., Babey, S. H., & Sherman, J. W. (1997). The functional independence of trait and behavioral self-knowledge: Methodological considerations and new empirical findings. Social Cognition, 15, 183-203. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1997.15.3.183
Klein, S. B., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., & Chance, S. (2002). Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions. Psychological Review, 109, 306-329. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.2.306
Kurtz, J. E., & Palfrey, A. P. (2016). On being the same in different places: Evaluating frame-of-reference effects across two social contexts. Journal of Personality, 84, 113-120. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12144
Lievens, F., De Corte, W., & Schollaert, E. (2008). A closer look at the frame-of-reference effect in personality scale scores and validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 268-279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.268
Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2017). The effects of predictor method factors on selection outcomes: A modular approach to personnel selection procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 43-66. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000160
Lundmann, L., & Villadsen, J. W. (2016). Qualitative variations in personality inventories: Subjective understandings of items in a personality inventory. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 13, 166-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1134737
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Schutte, N. S., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2010). The five-factor model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 124-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.09.004
McCrae, R. R. (2015). A more nuanced view of reliability: Specificity in the trait hierarchy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314541857
McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr., & Martin, T. A. (2005). The NEO-PI-3: A more readable revised NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 261-270. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8403_05
McCrae, R. R., Stone, S. V., Fagan, P. J., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1998). Identifying causes of disagreement between self-reports and spouse ratings of personality. Journal of Personality, 66, 285-313. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00013
McCune, E. A. (2010). Who am I? Well, it depends: How frame-of-reference imposes context in non-contextualized personality inventories, Portland, OR: [Doctoral dissertation, Portland State University]. PDXScholar. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.725
Meitinger, K. (2017). Necessary but insufficient: Why measurement invariance tests need online probing as a complementary tool. Public Opinion Quarterly, 81, 447-472. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfx009
Meyer, J., Fleckenstein, J., Retelsdorf, J., & Köller, O. (2019). The relationship of personality traits and different measures of domain-specific achievement in upper secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences, 69, 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.11.005
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246-268. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.246
Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60, 683-729. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00089.x
Mõttus, R., Allik, J., & Realo, A. (2020). Do self-reports and informant-ratings measure the same personality constructs? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36, 289-295. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000516
Murtha, T. C., Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1996). Toward an interactionist taxonomy of personality and situations: An integrative situational-Dispositional representation of personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.71.1.193
Nye, C. D., Allemand, M., Gosling, S. D., Potter, J., & Roberts, B. W. (2016). Personality trait differences between young and middle-aged adults: Measurement artifacts or actual trends? Journal of Personality, 84, 473-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12173
Olaru, G., Schroeders, U., Wilhelm, O., & Ostendorf, F. (2019). “Grandpa, do you like roller coasters?”: Identifying age-appropriate personality indicators. European Journal of Personality, 33, 264-278. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2185
Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322-338. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014996
Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001
Rauthmann, J. F., Gallardo-Pujol, D., Guillaume, E. M., Todd, E., Nave, C. S., Sherman, R. A., … Funder, D. C. (2014). The Situational Eight DIAMONDS: A taxonomy of major dimensions of situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 677-718. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037250
Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., Nave, C. S., & Funder, D. C. (2015). Personality-driven situation experience, contact, and construal: How people's personality traits predict characteristics of their situations in daily life. Journal of Research in Personality, 55, 98-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.02.003.
Roberts, B. W. (2007). Contextualizing personality psychology. Journal of Personality, 75, 1071-1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00467.x
Roberts, B. W., Lejuez, C., Krueger, R. F., Richards, J. M., & Hill, P. L. (2014). What is Conscientiousness and how can it be assessed? Developmental Psychology, 50, 1315-1330. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031109
Robie, C., Risavy, S. D., Holtrop, D., & Born, M. P. (2017). Fully contextualized, frequency-based personality measurement: A replication and extension. Journal of Research in Personality, 70, 56-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.05.005
Robie, C., Schmit, M. J., Ryan, A. M., & Zickar, M. J. (2000). Effects of item context specificity on the measurement equivalence of a personality inventory. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 348-365. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810034003
Robinson, O. C. (2009). On the social malleability of traits: Variability and consistency in Big 5 trait expression across three interpersonal contexts. Journal of Individual Differences, 30, 201-208. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.30.4.201
Saucier, G., Bel-Bahar, T., & Fernandez, C. (2007). What modifies the expression of personality tendencies? Defining basic domains of situation variables. Journal of Personality, 75, 479-504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00446.x
Saucier, G., & Conley, M. (2015). Separating personality and situation. European Journal of Personality, 29, 410-411. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2005
Schäpers, P., Mussel, P., Lievens, F., König, C. J., Freudenstein, J.-P., & Krumm, S. (2020). The role of situations in situational judgment tests: Effects on construct saturation, predictive validity, and applicant perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105, 800-818. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000457
Schmit, M. J., Ryan, A. M., Stierwalt, S. L., & Powell, A. B. (1995). Frame-of-reference effects on personality scale scores and criterion-related validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 607-620. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.80.5.607
Seeboth, A., & Mõttus, R. (2018). Successful explanations start with accurate descriptions: Questionnaire items as personality markers for more accurate predictions. European Journal of Personality, 32, 186-201. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2147
Shaffer, J. A., & Postlethwaite, B. E. (2012). A matter of context: A meta-analytic investigation of the relative validity of contextualized and noncontextualized personality measures. Personnel Psychology, 65, 445-494. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01250.x
Sherman, R. A., Rauthmann, J. F., Brown, N. A., Serfass, D. G., & Jones, A. B. (2015). The independent effects of personality and situations on real-time expressions of behavior and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 872-888. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000036
Small, E. E., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2006). The impact of contextual self-ratings and observer ratings of personality on the personality-performance relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 297-320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00009.x
Ten Berge, M. A., & De Raad, B. (1999). Taxonomies of situations from a trait psychological perspective. A review. European Journal of Personality, 13, 337-360. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199909/10)13:5<337:AID-PER363>3.0.CO;2-F
Tett, R. P., & Guterman, H. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 397-423. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2292
Uher, J. (2018). Quantitative data from rating scales: An epistemological and methodological enquiry. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2599. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02599
Van Heck, G. L., Perugini, M., Caprara, G.-V., & Fröger, J. (1994). The Big Five as tendencies in situations. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 715-731. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90213-5
Werner, P. D., & Pervin, L. A. (1986). The content of personality inventory items. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 622-628. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.622
Wittmann, W. W. (1988). Multivariate reliability theory. Principles of symmetry and successful validation strategies. In J. R. Nesselroade & R. B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 505-560). New York, NY: Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0893-5_16
Wittmann, W. W., & Klumb, P. L. (2006). How to fool yourself with experiments in testing theories in psychological research. In R. R. Bootzin & P. E. McKnight (Eds.), Strengthening research methodology: Psychological measurement and evaluation (pp. 185-211). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11384-010
Wright, J. C., & Mischel, W. (1987). A conditional approach to dispositional constructs: The local predictability of social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1159-1177. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1159
Wrzus, C., Wagner, G. G., & Riediger, M. (2016). Personality-situation transactions from adolescence to old age. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 782-799. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000054
Zech, A., Bühner, M., Kröner, S., Heene, M., & Hilbert, S. (2017). The impact of symmetry: Explaining contradictory results concerning working memory, reasoning, and complex problem solving. Journal of Intelligence, 5, 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5020022
Ziegler, M., Horstmann, K. T., & Ziegler, J. (2019). Personality in situations: Going beyond the OCEAN and introducing the Situation Five. Psychological Assessment, 31, 567-580. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000654