How are personality judgments made? A cognitive model of reference group effects, personality scale responses, and behavioral reactions.

This article suggests that personality judgments are wholly relative, being the outcome of a comparison of a given individual to a reference group of others. The underlying comparison processes are the same as those used to judge psychophysical stimuli (as outlined by range frequency theory and decision by sampling accounts). Five experimental studies show that the same person's personality is rated differently depending on how his or her behavior (a) ranks within a reference group and (b) falls within the overall range of behavior shown by other reference group members. Results were invariant across stimulus type and response options (7-point Likert scale, 990-point allocation task, or dichotomous choice). Simulated occupational scenarios led participants to give different-sized bonuses and employ different people as a function of context. Future research should note that personality judgments (as in self-report personality scales) only represent perceived standing relative to others or alternatively should measure personality through behavior or biological reactivity. Personality judgments cannot be used to compare different populations when the population participants have different reference groups (as in cross-cultural research).

Pain ratings reflect cognitive context: a range frequency model of pain perception.

When painful stimuli are evaluated at the time they are experienced, judgments are made not in isolation but with reference to other experienced stimuli. We tested a specific quantitative model of how such context effects occur. Participants experienced 3 blocks of 11 different pressure pain stimuli, and rated each stimulus on a 0-10 scale of intensity. Stimulus distribution was varied between participants. Study 1 found that that the rating of a stimulus of a particular pressure was higher in the context in which it ranked highest. Study 2 found that pain ratings were higher in a context where most stimuli were relatively intense, even when the mean stimulus was constant. It is suggested that pain judgments are relative, involve the same cognitive processes as are used in other psychophysical and socioemotional judgments, and are well described by range frequency theory. This approach can further inform the existing body of research on context-dependent pain evaluation.