Self-Ratings of Personality - Case Study Example

Abstract The aim of the study has been to find out factors that has been done to determine the personality factors and the study has been done on the Griffith university.The total no of the sample survey that has been done has been 250 students and of these 201 students has been taken.The questionnaire method has been taken for the study and the method that has been done for the data analysis has been the corelational method. A correlation is statistical relationship between two measures. In other words, as one of the measures changes, so does the other. If they both get bigger together it is a positive correlation (e.g., height and weight). If one gets bigger and the other gets smaller it is a negative correlation (e.g., stress and health - the more stressed you are, the less healthy you are). Research Report Hypotheses Ratings on scales such as personality are based on information that the raters have access to. Consequently, if a person has access to information based on observations within a specific situation, this will make the corresponding personality rating more strongly correlated with measures of how the ratee (the person whose personality is being rated) behaves in that situation. For example, if a person observed you only at work, their rating of your personality would be more closely linked to your work performance than would be someone who rated your personality based on whether they had observed you in social settings. In our research study, we had people whose personalities were rated by others as well as by themselves. Self-rated personality includes information that people have about themselves, including their feelings and thoughts, while other-rated personality is based largely on observations of behaviour. Consequently, one would expect self-rated personality to be a better predictor of factors linked to internal feelings. Self-perceived health is associated with emotions and physiological perceptions that are directly available to self-raters and either not available to other-raters or only available by report. Consequently, the first hypothesis for the research project is: Hypothesis 1: Self-perceived health will be more strongly correlated with self-rated personality than with other-rated personality. At the same time, self-ratings of personality, which are based on observations of one’s own behaviour but also one’s own thoughts and feelings, will be less closely associated with measures of behaviour. In contrast, other-rated measures of personality are likely to be more strongly correlated with measures of behaviour because they are not confounded with observations of thoughts and feelings. Engaging in sport is very clearly a behaviour, so it is expected that other-rated personality measures will be more strongly correlated with measures of involvement in sport. The Result This sample comprised of 249 participants (180 females and 69 males) who were undergraduate students from Griffith University Mt. Gravatt campus who completed the study as part of their requirement for the introduction to psychology course. Of these, only 201 participants provided other-rated measures of personality. Ages ranged from 16 to 52 years (M = 21.1, SD=5.86). The reason for having more females for the study: The students who had enrolled in the university for the course had been predominantly female and that has meant the survey had included more females. Approximately it has been 72.2 % females for the study and the rest had been 28%.That mean the study has been more female oriented. The total no of other rated of personality has been given by 201 Out of these the males has been :35 The females has been :166 That means 34 males and 14 females has not given back the total no of other rated of personality. Discussion There have been a large number of studies that had examined the relationship of personality traits to job performance. The studies have shown that there have been significant relationships between personality traits and performance dimensions. (Adam, E.E. Jr. (1994). Personality traits would mean enduring patterns of thought, emotion, and behavior that are not likely to change over time and explain people’s behavior across different situations (Adam, E.E. Jr. 1994). The Five-Factor Model of personality (FFM) will usually influence the field of personality and would provide a significant degree of convergence in the trait-factor analytic psychology. (Adam, E.E. Jr. 1994). The Five-Factor Model (FFM) of Personality The FFM has achieved popular acceptance as a meaningful description of personality traits (Ahire, S. L. & Dreyfus, P. 2000). These five factors have been identified across a number of cultures and different languages, providing further support for the existence of the FFM and its universal application (Ahire, S. L. & Dreyfus, P. 2000). The five factors are usually labeled Extraversion (sociable vs. introverted), Agreeableness (cooperative vs. competitive), Conscientiousness (organized and planful vs. unorganized and careless), Emotional Stability (emotional stability vs. instability), and Openness to Experience (intellectual curiosity vs. preference for routine) (Ahire, S. L. & Dreyfus, P. 2000). The Key Factors Interpersonal helping: helping co-workers in their jobs when such help is needed. Individual initiative: communicating to others in the work place to improve individual and group performance. Personal industry: the performance of specific tasks above and beyond the call of duty. Loyal boosterism: promotion of the organizational image to outsiders (Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. 1991). There has been lot of research studies that has found that values like conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability has been related in a positive manner to different aspects of contextual performance (Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. 1998) It has been seen that in an organization personality affects individuals’ performance once they are hired into an organization (Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. 1998) has argued that individual differences would be playing an important role in predicting whether an employee would exhibit personality that would be benefitting the organization. Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). had predicted that agreeableness would be sharing some common points like altruism, courtesy, and sportsmanship. The study would know the relationship between personality traits and OCB. Barrick, et al. (1998) has described extraversion as the main factor that would be determining social behavior. People has been showing attributes like extraversion has been found to be more sociable, assertive, active, bold, energetic, adventuresome, and expressive (Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. 1998). This has been in stark contrast, with introverts who has been timid, submissive, silent, and inhibited. Extroversion has been the main personality factor that would be determining the social behavior. Empirical evidence showed that agreeableness is significantly related to interpersonal performance (Mount, Barrick & Stewart, 1998). People who are high in agreeableness are generally friendly, good natured, cooperative, helpful, courteous, and flexible (Barrick & Mount, 1998).There has been work context that has been shown that agreeable employees that has been showing high level of interpersonal competence and that has been seen as joint action is needed (Barry, B. & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Persons who have been high on agreeableness are more likely to perform much better in work and that has to be matched more in work. There has been a counter argument that the personality trait of conscientiousness, people who would be high in conscientiousness would be performing better at work than those who are low in conscientiousness (Barrick & Mount, 1991). The other advantageous is that they would be performing the work in an organization with minimum of fuss and minimum of oversight. (Barry, B. & Stewart, G. L. (1997). These types of individuals would be normally possessing traits of dependable, efficient, and hardworking, taking initiative in solving problems and are more methodical and thorough in their work (Barry, B. & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Dalal (2005) had described emotional stability as key factor of social behavior. People who would be possessing high in emotional stability would be generally calm and even-tempered in the way they would be coping with daily life (Barrick & Mount, 1991). Personalities who would be having emotionally stable usually will not be expressing much emotion. The personality trait that has been not shown has been anxious, depressed, angry, embarrassed, worried and insecure and these factors would be absent when they work. Reference Adam, E.E. Jr. (1994). Alternative quality improvement practices and organization performance. Journal of Operations Management, 12: 27-44. Ahire, S. L. & Dreyfus, P. (2000). The impact of design management and process management on quality: An empirical examination. Journal of Operations Management, 18: 549-575. Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44: 1-26. Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 43-51. Barry, B. & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: The role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 62-78. Dalal, S. R. (2005). A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Organizational Citizenship Behavior And Counterproductive Work Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, No. 6, 1241-1255. Read More