Literature Review

Annotated Bibliography

Bronisch, T., & Mombour, W. (1998). The modern assessment of personality disorders: Part 2: Reliability and validity of personality disorders. Psychopathology, 31(6), 293. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/233344887?accountid=3783 The authors believed there are two approached to the assessment for personality disorders, the dimensional approach to the assessment for PD and an instruments for the assessment of PD. It has been found that the reliability of the diagnostic assessment of PD in clinical interviews has proven to not be satisfactory, this has led to other instruments to be developed since 1980 to assess PD according to the criteria of the DSM and the ICD-10 (Bronisch & Mombour, 1998). Abstract from the authors: Although both dimensional and categorical approaches to an assessment of personality disorders (PD) exist, only instruments for a categorical approach to the assessment of PD have been developed. The reliability of the diagnostic assessment of PD could be improved by using questionnaires, checklists, and structured interviews. However, a comparison of structured interviews among themselves and with checklists or self-rating questionnaires showed only insufficient to satisfactory agreement. Therefore, there are no instruments for the assessment of DSM-III/DSM-IV and ICD-10 PD that could be clinically and scientifically interchanged. There is an increasing tendency to a dimensional approach to the assessment of PD. Lampe, J. C. (2004). Alternative personality measurements commentary on accounting information systems research opportunities using personality type theory and the Meyers-Briggs type indicator. Journal of Information Systems, 18(1), 21-34. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/235944931?accountid=3783 The introduction from the author is; Four primary themes are presented in “Accounting Information Systems Research Opportunities Using Personality Type Theory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator”; (Wheeler et al., 2004) (1) the need for personality-based research to supplement cognitive science research in AIS, (2) the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) as a personality measurement instrument, (3) a summary of MBTI-based accounting research and (4) potential uses of the MBTI as an AIS research tool. Because most of the paper either discusses the MBTI directly or its potential use in the future AIS research, I shall refer to it as the MBTI paper. I appreciate and applaud the authors for the discussions and admonishments in all of the areas. This response compares the MBTI with two alternative personality instruments in order to provide AIS researchers with the option of selecting the instrument that best fits research needs. The first section of the response discusses evaluation measurement instruments, the second section describes the Millon Inventory of Personality Styles (MIPS) and is followed by discussion of the Big Five Traits of Personality (Lampe, 2004). This article compares the different measurement instruments used for personality tests. The major tests that are compared are the MIPS and the MBTI, the author reports that “each researcher including personality measurements is a project should first determine why the impact of personality type is important and evaluate which instrument is best to accomplish the research objective” (Lampe, 2004, p. 21). What was found with this research was that more personality base research will increase the understanding, improve development and ease the user acceptance of the AIS. The two most widely used instruments for personality testing are the MIPS and the MBTI, the research for AIS need an understanding of more than just these two tests for the research of personality testing (Lampe, 2004). Reich, J. H. (1987). Instruments measuring DSM-III and DSM-III-R personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 1(3), 220-240. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1987.1.3.220 The authors discuss the need for further development of the DSM-III, the rusts of the research showed that a person’s depressive state affects their personality. What this show is that it is important for the researcher to measure the person’s state of anxiety and depression when measuring the personality. The author explains that the most pressing issue when developing the personality instrument was to overcome to as large extent as possibility of contamination effect of the personality measurement (Reich, 1987). Abstract from the authors: Four self-report and 10 semi structured interviews for diagnosing DSM-III or DSM-III-R personality disorders are described in terms of their diagnoses, reliability, and validity data. Evidence is presented for the validity of the DSM-III personality disorder clusters. The distorting effects of state depression and anxiety on personality measurement are determined to be the most difficult methodologic hurdle facing these instruments at present Siever, L. J., Trestman, R. L., & Silverman, J. M. (1992). Validation of personality disorder assessment by biologic and family studies. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6(4), 301-312. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1992.6.4.301 This article discusses the utilization of the entire family when assessing the personality and to further understand the personality. The validity for the personality test should be chosen in regard to the application of the diagnostic categories. Examples are (1) personality assessment might be targeted at identifying populations responsive to a particular pharmacological agent or (2) genetic counseling might be validated by biologic and familial technics. It has been found that it is clear that personality assessments have to go beyond the simple considerations of reliability or statistical analysis (Siever, Trestman & Silverman, 1992). Stansbury, V. K., & Coll, K. M. (1998). Myers-Briggs attitude typology: The influence of birth order with other family variables. The Family Journal, 6(2), 116-122. doi: 10.1177/1066480798062006 The researchers hypothesized that the birth order of children is the cause for the personality differences. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) was used to conduct this study. The study found that the results of the two-way ANOVA showed that family variables of parenting styles, age spacing and gender interact with birth order of influence on the Myers-Briggs attitude scale (Stansbury & Coll, 1998). Abstract from the authors: This study investigated the influence of birth order with the family variables of parenting style, age spacing, gender, and socioeconomic status on the Myers-Briggs attitude scales of Extraversion/Introversion and Judging/Perceiving. Results indicate that age spacing interacted with birth order to influence Extroversion and Introversion scores. Parenting styles and gender interacted with birth order to influence Judging and Perceiving scores (Stansbury & Coll, 1998). Taylor, J., Elkins, I. J., Legrand, L., Peuschold, D., & Iacono, W. G. (2007). Construct validity of adolescent antisocial personality disorder. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(8), 1048-1057. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9163-1 The hypothesis of the authors was that Adolescents ASPD is a valid construct, and this was examined in two different ways. First the researchers compared three different groups, an Adolescent ASPD group, a CD only group and a control group. The predictions for the comparison was Boys and girls in the Adolescent ASPD group will show significantly higher rates of alcohol and drug dependence, ADHD, and depression than adolescents in the CD Only and Control groups. Boys and girls in the Adolescent ASPD group will show significantly lower verbal IQ and a greater PIQ>VIQ discrepancy than those in the CD Only and Control groups. Boys and girls in the Adolescent ASPD group will show significantly greater peer group deviance and poorer academic functioning (lower grades, more suspensions and absences) than those in the CD Only and Control groups. Boys and girls in the Adolescent ASPD group will show a higher rate of paternal ASPD than the other groups. The second part of the hypothesis was comparing the Adolescent ASPD who have ASPD while using all the DSM criteria to include age of onset criterion. This was to show that the ASPD diagnosis would convey similar clinical characteristics whether it was assigned before or after the age of 18, the importance of this was to help use the diagnosis before the age of 18 to help identify the youths at risk (Taylor, Elkins, Legrand, Peuschold, & Iacono, 2007). Abstract from the authors: This study examined the construct validity of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) diagnosed in adolescence. Boys and girls were grouped by history of DSM-III-R conduct disorder (CD) and ASPD: Controls (n=340) had neither diagnosis; CD Only (n=77) had CD by age 17 but no ASPD through age 20; Adolescent ASPD (n = 64) had ASPD by age 17. The Adolescent ASPD group was then compared to 20 young adult men who met criteria for ASPD (ASPD group). As expected, the Adolescent ASPD group had significantly more depression and substance use disorders, a greater performance>verbal IQ discrepancy, more deviant peers, and poorer academic functioning than the CD Only group and Controls. The Adolescent ASPD and ASPD groups did not differ on most variables. Results support the construct validity of Adolescent ASPD and suggest that such a diagnosis could help identify adolescents at risk for persistent antisocial behavior (Taylor, et al., 2007). Zumbo, B. D., & Taylor, S. V. (1993). The construct validity of the extraversion subscales of the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 25(4), 590-604. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/220473870?accountid=3783 The authors for this paper discuss the issue of two tests that claim to measure the exact same trait, in reality do the test actually measure the exact same traits? The thought is that although the two tests claim to measure the same traits, in reality they are actually measuring differently. This could be due to a disparity between the operational definitions or to the inadequacies in the test construction (Zumbo & Taylor, 1993). Abstract from the authors: This paper examined the construct validity of the extraversion and introversion subscales of the Myers - Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) and the Howarth Personality Questionnaire (HPQ). We further explored the accompanying issue of the unitary nature of extraversion. A conjoint factor analysis undertaken at the scale level produced four first - order factors: Factor 1 - MBTI extraversion/introversion, Factor 2 - Inferiority/ Anxiety, Factor 3 - Sociability/EPQ/Impulsiveness and Factor 4 - Dominance. A subsequent higher - order factor analysis revealed one factor. The results suggested that the MBTI subscales were largely a measure of sociability and that extraversion as represented in these three measures is not, at first glance, unitary although inter-factor correlations do exist in varying degrees.

References Bronisch, T., & Mombour, W. (1998). The modern assessment of personality disorders: Part 2: Reliability and validity of personality disorders. Psychopathology, 31(6), 293. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/233344887?accountid=3783 Lampe, J. C. (2004). Alternative personality measurements commentary on accounting information systems research opportunities using personality type theory and the Meyers-Briggs type indicator. Journal of Information Systems, 18(1), 21-34. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/235944931?accountid=3783 Reich, J. H. (1987). Instruments measuring DSM-III and DSM-III-R personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 1(3), 220-240. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1987.1.3.220 Siever, L. J., Trestman, R. L., & Silverman, J. M. (1992). Validation of personality disorder assessment by biologic and family studies. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6(4), 301-312. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1992.6.4.301 Stansbury, V. K., & Coll, K. M. (1998). Myers-Briggs attitude typology: The influence of birth order with other family variables. The Family Journal, 6(2), 116-122. doi: 10.1177/1066480798062006 Taylor, J., Elkins, I. J., Legrand, L., Peuschold, D., & Iacono, W. G. (2007). Construct validity of adolescent antisocial personality disorder. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(8), 1048-1057. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9163-1 Zumbo, B. D., & Taylor, S. V. (1993). The construct validity of the extraversion subscales of the Meyers-Briggs type indicator. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 25(4), 590-604. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/220473870?accountid=3783