The DOI matches its Crossref record; 173 of the 173 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach
Abstract
The "accuracy paradigm" for the study of personality judgment provides an important, new complement to the "error paradigm" that dominated this area of research for almost 2 decades. The present article introduces a specific approach within the accuracy paradigm called the Realistic Accuracy Model (RAM). RAM begins with the assumption that personality traits are real attributes of individuals. This assumption entails the use of a broad array of criteria for the evaluation of personality judgment and leads to a model that describes accuracy as a function of the availability, detection, and utilization of relevant behavioral cues. RAM provides a common explanation for basic moderators of accuracy, sheds light on how these moderators interact, and outlines a research agenda that includes the reintegration of the study of error with the study of accuracy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This is problematic because (1) accessible behavior cues often are irrelevant to extrapolating about a person’s personality, (2) other relevant information is often unavailable that could provide insight, and (3) when forming judgments, we often inflate the value of information at our disposal and over extend this information at the expense of attending to personal and situational variability (F”
From Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health (2010) · cites this paper as Funder, 1995
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception
Bornstein, M. H., & Gibson, J. J. (1980) · The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism · doi:10.2307/429816 · Cited by 22,935
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G. E., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,518
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition
Gibson, J. J. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9781315740218 · Cited by 12,132
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,252
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
DeLamater, J., & Ward, A. (2013) · Handbooks of sociology and social research · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6772-0 · Cited by 7,590
On the psychology of prediction.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0034747 · Cited by 6,202
Bem, D. J. (1972) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60024-6 · Cited by 5,241 · cited 5×
“In the past, some social psychologists have treated self-perception as essentially a special case of the process of other perception (Bern, 1972).”
BackgroundInfluentialHuman Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment.
Cherniak, C., Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. D. (1983) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2184495 · Cited by 4,196
Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications
Anderson, J. R. (2014) · Cited by 4,121
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Baumeister, R. E., & Tice, D. M. (1988). Metatraits. Journal of Personality, 30, 571–597.
- Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Funder, D. C., & Colvin, C. R. (in press). Congruence of self and others' judgments of personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Funder, D. C., & West, S. G. (1993b). Viewpoints on personality: Consensus, self-other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment [Special issue]. Journal of Personality, 61, 457–476.
- Gangestad, S. W., Simpson, J. A., DiGeronimo, K., & Beik, M. ( 1992). Differential accuracy across traits: Examination of a functional hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 688–698.
- Hastie, R., & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). The concept of accuracy in social judgment. In D. Bar-Tal & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), The social psychology of knowledge (pp. 193–208). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Ickes, W. (1993). Empathic accuracy. Journal of Personality, 61, 587– 610.
- Robins, R. W., & John, O. P. (in press). The quest for self-insight: Theory and research on the accuracy of self-perception. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Rorer, L. G. (1991). Some myths of science in psychology. In D. Cicchetti & W. Grove (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology: Essays in honor of Paul E. Meehl (pp. 61–87). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
- Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 174–214). New York: Academic Press.
- Schneider, D. J., Hastorf, A. H., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1979). Person perception (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
- Westbrook, M. (1974). Judgment of emotion: Attention vs. accuracy. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 383–389.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health
Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.001 · Cited by 3,054
“…is often unavailable that could provide insight, and (3) when forming judgments, we often inflate the value of information at our disposal and over extend this information at the expense of attending to personal and situational variability (Funder, 1995; Gilovich, Griffin, & Kahneman, 2002).”
BackgroundBelief and feeling: Evidence for an accessibility model of emotional self-report.
Robinson, M. D., & Clore, G. L. (2002) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.6.934 · Cited by 1,806
Taras, V., Kirkman, B. L., & Steel, P. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0018938 · Cited by 1,160
Who knows what about a person? The self–other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model.
Vazire, S. (2010) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0017908 · Cited by 1,080
Connelly, B. S., & Ones, D. S. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0021212 · Cited by 1,059
Metadata
- Authors
- Funder, D. C.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Riverside (US)
- Corresponding author
- Funder, David C.
- ORCID
- Funder, David C.
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 1995
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 652-670
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W2067129080
- Cited by
- 1,342
- References
- 173
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 125 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 68 · 2016: 60 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 75 · 2012: 45
- FWCI
- 30.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH42427, R01MH042427, R01-MH42427)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- personality judgment, personality traits, behavioral cues, judgment accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Judgment, Personality, Personality Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
