|
Post by arrane on Oct 12, 2017 21:49:18 GMT
A. Choose one of the three methods of personality assessment listed below and indicate what factors might limit its reliability and validity.
- Observations of the person being assessed by a trained observer, isn't always accurate as the person observing wouldn't know the person being observed in a more personal level. They might not know who the person actually is, what their character is life, what lead to the person to behave in a certain way and etc. For example: there is an observer in a crowd of audience who is observing my stage behaviour. I might be really nervous to present on the stage that day, as a mean bully from my school showed up to make fun of me while I was performing. Due to the anxiety the bully had caused me, I would probably become super nervous. The observer in this case, who doesn't know why I'm really nervous, might just conclude the observation by saying that I'm nervous to perform on stages. But thats not really the case here. Therefore having a trained observer wouldn't always be a reliable/ valid result.
B. If you had to argue for the superiority of one of these methods over the others, which one would you choose and why? - I would argue that reports from close friends and relatives of the person being assessed would be more of an accurate result. As they would know the individual in a more personal manner. They would know the reason as to why the person is acting a certain way. Whereas if it was the person assessing themselves they can lie about certain things, and a trained observer wouldn't know the person
|
|
Asees
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by Asees on Nov 6, 2017 13:27:17 GMT
Do you think there are things close friends and relatives might now know because of your behavior with them, and they only know you well in specific contexts? Do you think it is possible that friends and relatives might not be able to give accurate feedback in your example?
|
|