The Accuracy of Stereotypes About Personality

This chapter first reviews general conceptual and methodological issues in the study of the (in)accuracy of stereotypes. First, the authors define stereotype accuracy. Second, different types of accuracy are discussed and standards for considering a stereotype belief accurate or inaccurate are presented. Finally, the chapter reviews the empirical evidence produced thus far that bears on the (in)accuracy of stereotypes regarding personality. The strongest evidence regarding the (in)accuracy of stereotypes regarding personality have focused on gender, age, and national character stereotypes. Weaker evidence relying primarily on self-reports of individual differences with respect to racial stereotypes and miscellaneous stereotypes (e.g., jazz vs. ballet dancers) is also reviewed. The chapter concludes by developing hypotheses that could help explain the pattern of (in)accuracy in stereotypes regarding personality.

Self–Other Knowledge Asymmetry (SOKA) Model

Despite the strong intuition that people know themselves well, much research in self-perception demonstrates the biases present when evaluating one’s own personality traits. What specifically are these blind spots in self-perceptions? Are self-perceptions always disconnected from reality? And under what circumstances might other people actually be more accurate about the self? The self–other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model suggests that because individuals and others differ in their susceptibility to biases or motivations and in the information they have access to, self- and other-knowledge will vary by trait. The present chapter outlines when and why other-perceptions are sometimes more accurate than self-perceptions, as well as when self-reports can be most trusted. Also discussed are next steps in the study of self- and other-knowledge, including practical, methodological, and interdisciplinary considerations and extensions. In sum, this chapter illustrates the importance of taking multiple perspectives in order to accurately understand a person.

The Accuracy of Self-Judgments of Personality

How accurate are self-judgments of personality traits? When it comes to judging our own enduring personality characteristics, are we hopelessly blind, deluded, and biased, or are we generally accurate? In order to answer these questions, this chapter reviews the empirical evidence regarding the accuracy of trait self-judgments. Although self-judgments are not always perfectly accurate, the majority of studies suggest that self-judgments of personality have considerable validity. Self-judgments of both narrow, specific traits and the broad personality factors of the Big Five agree with judgments provided by knowledgeable others and predict personality-relevant states, experiences, behaviors, and consequential life outcomes. Suggestions for improving the accuracy of our self-judgments and directions for future research on the accuracy of trait self-judgments are discussed.

The Accuracy of Personality Trait Judgments

How accurately can we judge the personality traits of ourselves and others? What are the factors that influence our ability to make correct judgments? How can we use this information to improve our social interactions and relationships? In this introduction to the Oxford Handbook of Accurate Personality Judgment, the reader is introduced to the study of personality trait accuracy. Foundations of this research are reviewed and an overview of the volume is provided. Chapters explore current judgment models and review empirical work on moderators of accuracy, including characteristics of judges, targets, traits, and information. They explain the challenges encountered when judging different types of targets and examine how different kinds of information contribute to the judgment process. The applications and implications of this work for relationships, workplace interactions, and evaluations of psychological health and functioning are discussed. Ways to improve accuracy and future directions for research on trait accuracy are offered.

The Social Accuracy Model

The social accuracy model (SAM) is a componential model of interpersonal perception that estimates perceiver, target, dyadic, and other effects for different components or elements of accuracy. For instance, Percy may be a good judge in that she is generally accurate in her perceptions of others. As well, Taylor may be a good target in that she is generally accurately perceived by others. The SAM allows one to estimate such individual differences in components related to accuracy, bias, and generalized knowledge as well as examine moderators of such components. The present chapter provides a broad overview of the SAM, its history, and how it compares to other modeling approaches, and provides a detailed discussion of how to interpret the elements of the SAM. Finally, an appendix is provided that discusses how to create variables, analyze the model, and interpret the output from a social accuracy model analysis using R.

Social Relations Modeling of Interpersonal Accuracy

Interpersonal perception is a dyadic phenomenon with multiple perspectives; dyad members reciprocally perceive one another (perceptions), while also assessing how the other perceives them (meta-perceptions). Because accuracy is inherently dyadic, social relations modeling is appropriate for partitioning interpersonal perceptions into theoretically meaningful components called perceiver, target, and relationship. Estimation of accuracy should use only the relevant components when assessing if perceptions conform to a validity criterion. Moreover, interpersonal perception exists within a broader nomological network of perceptual phenomena. People assume that others’ traits are similar to their own traits (assumed similarity), and that others judge them as they judge others (assumed reciprocity). Each has implications for accuracy. Theoretical models are developed that specify the effect of perceivers’ assumptions about others (i.e., top-down processes), and the effect of others’ behaviors (i.e., bottom-up processes) on perceivers’ judgments of targets’ traits, and their impact on accuracy.

Conclusions and Future Directions for the Study of Accurate Personality Judgment

This chapter identifies several well-established findings and overarching themes within personality trait accuracy research, and highlights especially promising directions for future research. Topics include (1) theoretical frameworks for accuracy, (2) moderators of accuracy and the context or situation in which judgments are made, (3) the important consequences of accuracy, (4) interventions and training programs to increase judgmental ability and judgability, (5) the generalizability of previous findings, and (6) standardized tests of the accuracy of judging personality traits. The chapter ends by stating that it is an exciting time to be a researcher studying the accuracy of personality trait judgments.

Training and Improving Accuracy of Personality Trait Judgments

Given that accurate trait judgments are related to myriad positive characteristics and outcomes, this chapter focuses on approaches for improving trait judgment accuracy. The chapter outlines potential trait judgment training approaches aligned with the realistic accuracy model (RAM) and presents available evidence from previous training research in other domains of person perception and basic personality research. In addition, the chapter examines how characteristics of the trait, target, and judge can potentially impact training effectiveness. More research is needed to develop effective, generalizable, and impactful training interventions for personality and trait judgment accuracy.

Contributions of Nonverbal Cues to the Accurate Judgment of Personality Traits

This chapter summarizes research on nonverbal expressions of behavior (nonverbal cues) and how they contribute to the accuracy of personality judgments. First, it presents a conceptual overview of relevant nonverbal cues in the domains of facial expressions, body language, paralanguage, and appearance as well as approaches to assess these cues on different levels of aggregation. It then summarizes research on the validity of nonverbal cues (what kind of nonverbal cues are good indicators of personality?) and the utilization of nonverbal cues (what kind of nonverbal cues lead to personality impressions?), resulting in a catalog of those cues that drive judgment accuracy for different traits. Finally, it discusses personal and situational characteristics that moderate the expression and utilization of nonverbal cues and give an outlook for future research.

Characteristics of the Judge That Are Related to Accuracy

There exists a substantial body of work, dating back nearly a century, exploring individual differences in the ability to accurately judge the personality traits and characteristics of other people. While the picture of the good judge of others’ personality remains somewhat abstract, there are some characteristics that consistently bear out as important, such as intelligence and emotional stability. Overall, there are five characteristics that have been investigated as correlates of this ability: (1) cognitive functioning, (2) personality, (3) motivation, (4) gender, and (5) behavior. This chapter opens with an introduction to this area of scholarship, a brief coverage of the conceptual framework, and the definitions and measurement of accuracy. A description of the research within each of the five areas is then provided. Next, some theoretical considerations for ongoing research on the good judge are illuminated. Finally, this chapter concludes with some worthy directions for future research related to the good judge of personality.