|
Post by victancredi17 on Oct 11, 2017 17:30:10 GMT
What factors might limit the reliability and validity of each of the following methods of personality assessment? If you had to argue for the superiority of one of these methods over the others, which one would you choose and why? a) Self reports from the persons being assessed: The way someone perceives themselves is not the way they actually are. For example: if a person say's they're outgoing and you put them in a situation they might holdback b) Reports from close friends and relatives of the person being assessed: A family member or relative can be biased towards you being a person who is close to them. For example: they try to portray a negative or positive approach c) Observations of the person being assessed by a trained observer: Observations from trained observers can be unbiased because they are assessing a person with only a certain amount of time. I would personally argue that observations from a trained observer is the superiority over others because you can't judge a book by its cover however it also depends on the questions that the observer is asking. Overall you cannot base your assumptions on a person with only a research. I feel that it takes more time to get to know a person.
|
|