[IPAC-List] Divergent views of validation

[Bryan Baldwin]

It's also available here (at least is it right now):
 
http://www.tc.umn.edu%2F~cdeyoung%2FPubs%2FDeYoung_2010_Big_Five_brain_structure_PS.pdf&rct=j&q=%22Testing%20predictions%20from%20personality%20%3E%20neuroscience%3A%20Brain%20structure%20and%20the%20big%20five%22&ei=UjmBTN6wA4aCsQOk8MX3Bw&usg=AFQjCNHLv-pZ7L6g5vECsCj1FdllGOxzYg&sig2=WWe6I11tdkKe1v5B9-sBuQ&cad=rja

 
If this doesn't work, just Google "Testing predictions from personality

> neuroscience: Brain structure and the big five"

 
Bryan


>>> "Winfred Arthur, Jr." <w-arthur at neo.tamu.edu> 9/3/2010 8:40 AM >>>

  i will send you a copy of the paper offline.  if anyone else is 
interested in a copy as well, just let me know.

- winfred


On 9/3/2010 7:24 AM, Shekerjian, Rene wrote:

> I'd be interested in knowing the extent to which the measures of

volume for the various brain regions covaried with the measures of the
personality traits. My internet access to journals does not allow access
to the most recent year for Psychological Science.

>

> Has anyone had a chance to see what it says?

>

> René

>

> René Shekerjian | Testing Services Division | NYS Department of Civil

Service | 518-474-3778

>

==========================================================================

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Reid Klion [mailto:RKlion at panpowered.com] 

> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 5:00 PM

> To: ipac-list at ipacweb.org 

> Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Divergent views of validation

>

> Good discussion!  ...there is also a literature that delves into some

of the challenges that have been found when attempting to replicate fMRI
research. Here is a quick overview from Science News:
http://tinyurl.com/ycveaac. Enjoy-

>

> Reid

>

>

> Reid E. Klion, Ph.D.

> Chief Science Officer

> pan - A TALX Company

> 11590 North Meridian St.

> Suite 200

> Carmel, IN 46032 USA

> 317.814.8808  Office

> 317.908.4312  Mobile

> 317.814.8888  Fax

> rklion at panpowered.com 

> www.panpowered.com 

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org

[mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Baldwin

> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 9:25 AM

> To: ipac-list at ipacweb.org; w-arthur at neo.tamu.edu 

> Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Divergent views of validation

>

> ..and to piggyback on Winfred's post, there are a couple articles in

the September Psych Bulletin dealing in some sense with biological bases
of personality (Kotov et al. and Dietrich et al.):

>

> http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/136/5/ 

>

> Bryan

>

> Bryan Baldwin

> Staff Services Manager II

> California Department of Justice

> Division of Administrative Support

> Personnel Programs

> (916) 322-5446

>>>> "Winfred Arthur, Jr."<w-arthur at neo.tamu.edu>  09/01/10 6:03 PM>>>

>    as  a follow up to Jeff's last paragraph, DeYoung et al.'s (2010)

> mri/FFM study might be of interest to some of you.  the full

reference is:

>

> DeYoung et al. (2010), "Testing predictions from personality

> neuroscience: Brain structure and the big five", /Psychological

Science,

> 21,/ 820-828.

>

> and the abstract reads as follows:

>

> "We used a new theory of the biological basis of the Big Five

> personality traits to generate hypotheses about the association of

each

> trait with the volume of different brain regions. Controlling for

age,

> sex, and whole-brain volume, results from structural magnetic

resonance

> imaging of 116 healthy adults supported our hypotheses for four of

the

> five traits: Extraversion, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and

> Conscientiousness. Extraversion covaried with volume of medial

> orbitofrontal cortex, a brain region involved in processing reward

> information. Neuroticism covaried with volume of brain regions

> associated with threat, punishment, and negative affect.

Agreeableness

> covaried with volume in regions that process information about the

> intentions and mental states of other individuals. Conscientiousness

> covaried with volume in lateral prefrontal cortex, a

 region involved
in

> planning and the voluntary control of behavior. These findings

support

> our biologically based, explanatory model of the Big Five and

> demonstrate the potential of personality neuroscience (i.e., the

> systematic study of individual differences in personality using

> neuroscience methods) as a discipline."

>

>

> - winfred

>

>

> On 9/1/2010 3:21 PM, Jeff Feuquay wrote:

>> If Borsboom asserts validity is what a test "should" measure, then

it seems

>> he is discussing a concept quite different from what most assessment

folk

>> think of as validity, i.e., whether a test measures what it purports

to

>> measure. That idiosyncratic definition would quite reasonably be

expected to

>> lead him down the rabbit hole to a very different world.

>>

>> Some of the discussion seems to imply we are again caught in the

trap of

>> hoping/believing that correlation reflects causation. Ah, were it

only so.

>> Then, maybe we could say that whatever our tests are measuring (not

>> predicting . . . actually measuring) cause the future behavior

sought. But,

>> we continue to measure the employee version of phlogiston. We've got

some

>> understanding of which characteristics are likely to result in

improved

>> performance, but it remains rudimentary. I mean, as Borsboom knows,

it would

>> be a whole lot simpler if we were measuring temperature, something

we now

>> undersatnd way better than we understand ourselves.

>>

>> As to the level of measurment: Unless one has gone through a

thorough

>> scaling process, certainly variations in item difficulty make us

fall short

>> of interval mesurement. But on a practical level, how short of

interval is

>> too short? When some jurisdictions continue to round T&E scores to

>> thousandths of a point and then take the top 3, is ordinal versus

interval

>> or even ratio a big issue? Yeah, it is. Scaling is an issue,

significant

>> digits is an issue, but most scales and most of the stats we

commonly use

>> are extremely robust. We may bend the prediction but we're unlikely

to break

>> it.

>>

>> Given another hundred years to work on this, measurement of

employee

>> phlogistan could conceivably evolve into something more direct and

more

>> definitive . . . I mean, everybody knows that variations in the long

arm of

>> chromsome 6 of the human genome account for 4% of the variance in

>> intelligence. See, we're on the way.

>> Jeff

>> -----------------------------------------

>> Dr. Jeffrey P Feuquay, I/O Psychologist&   Attorney

>> Managing Consultant, Psychology-Law Center, LLC

>> 108 W. Walnut, Nevada, Mo 64772

>> ofc: 417-667-5076   cell: 417-549-0997

>>

>>

>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Mark

Hammer<Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca>wrote:

>>

>>> Would it be wrong to suggest that this is one of those perpetual

>>> discrepancies between theoreticians and clinicians?  In this case,

the

>>> discrepancy is between test/measurement specialists (the

theoreticians),

>>> and test-users (the clinicians).

>>>

>>> Mark Hammer

>>> Ottawa

>>>

>>> This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may

>>> contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt

from

>>> disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying

or

>>> re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or

not

>>> authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this

>>> e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and

delete

>>> the message and any copies.

>>>    >

>>> Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en

titre

>>> et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou

>>> soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables.

Toute

>>> divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement

est

>>> interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou

n'êtes

>>> pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez

reçu

>>> par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiateme

nt à l'expéditeur et

>>> supprimer le courriel et les copies.

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________________

>>> IPAC-List

>>> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 

>>> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list 

>>>

>> _______________________________________________________

>> IPAC-List

>> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 

>> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list 

> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 

> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list 

>

>

> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may

contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely
for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception,
review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws
including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of
the communication.

> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 

> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list 

>

> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 

> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list 

_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may contain
confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely for the
use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review, use
or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
communication.