The reciprocal impacts of adversity and personality traits: A prospective longitudinal study of growth, change, and the power of personality.

OBJECTIVE: We integrate the study of post-traumatic growth with personality science by examining the reciprocal effects of adversity and core personality traits. We implemented conceptual (i.e., incorporating personality traits into the study of adversity-related growth, examining trait-specific and configural personality change, and adopting a cumulative approach to adversity) and methodological (i.e., three-wave prospective design, assessing many life events, sampling from populations likely to experience adversity) innovations to advance the study of personality development and of the generality of adversity-related growth. METHOD: A diverse sample (41% nonwhite, 48% low-income, 68% female, Mage  = 44, 30% diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder) participated in a three-wave prospective longitudinal study (N = 258-128 across waves). Participants completed a personality inventory and a battery of life-event surveys (including 105 events) at each wave. RESULTS: Personality was generally stable from trait-specific and configural perspectives, and all traits were correlated with adversity. All traits, particularly Extraversion and Conscientiousness, predicted adversity. Adversity predicted increases in Emotionality and decreases in Agreeableness. CONCLUSIONS: Although personality growth is not the typical response to adversity within a 3-year period, findings underscore the real-world impact of personality, and they provide some support for developmental theories emphasizing the effects of life events.

How Does the Number of Response Options Impact the Psychometric Properties of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale?

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is the most frequently used measure of self-esteem in the social sciences. These items are often administered with a different number of response options, but it is unclear how the number of response options impacts the psychometric properties of this measure. Across three experiments (Ns = 739, 2,358, and 1,461), we evaluated how different response options of the Rosenberg influenced (a) coefficient alpha estimates, (b) distributions of scores, and (c) associations with criterion-related variables. Observed coefficient alpha estimates were lowest for a 2-point format compared with response formats with more options. However, supplemental analyses using ordinal alpha pointed to similar estimates across conditions. Using four or more response options better approximated a normal distribution for observed summary scores. We found no consistent evidence that criterion-related correlations increased with more response options. Collectively, these results suggest that the Rosenberg should be administered with at least four response options and we favor a 5-point Likert-type response format.

Brief Report: Does the Number of Response Options Matter for the BFI-2? Conceptual Replication and Extension.

We evaluated how the number of response options affects the psychometric properties of the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2). Using two large samples collected from a market research company (Ns = 893 and 1,213), we tested how different response options of the BFI-2 influenced scale score distributions, internal consistency estimates, convergent validity correlations, and criterion validity correlations. Results suggest that score distributions were impacted by the number of response options such that ceiling and floor effects were more common when using two or three response options than when using more options. Estimates of Cronbach's alpha were generally lower with fewer scale points as compared with more scale points, but these effects disappeared when ordinal alpha was used. There were no systematic effects of response options on convergent validity and criterion validity correlations. Given these results, there seems to be few psychometric reasons for deciding whether to administer personality items with five, six, or seven scale points.

Common Factors in Pediatric Psychiatry: A Review of Essential and Adjunctive Mechanisms of Treatment Outcome.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review the literature on hypothesized behavioral correlates of pharmacotherapy treatment response. A particular focus is placed on what have been referred to as "common factors" across mental health treatments, including medication adherence, therapeutic alliance, motivation for behavior change, and expectancies for positive treatment outcomes. These understudied factors may provide unique explanations for mechanisms of symptom change, patient risk as a result of protocol deviation, and attenuated treatment outcomes. METHOD: A literature search was conducted to evaluate the relationship between treatment processes in pediatric psychiatry and medication adherence, therapeutic alliance, motivation for behavior change, and expectancies for positive treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Substantial variability and room for improvement was identified for each common factor. Behavioral protocols have already been developed to address many aspects of common factors in pediatric psychiatric treatment, but are not yet a part of many practice parameters. CONCLUSION: Interventions to improve common factors can be used immediately in tandem with psychopharmacological interventions to provide increased symptom relief and reduce patient risk. Furthermore, incorporating instruction in common factors interventions can positively affect training of future providers and enhance understanding of the mechanisms of effect of medications. An increased focus on common factors, with a particular emphasis on quantifying the magnitude and mechanisms of their effects on psychopharmacological interventions stand to benefit child patients, their families, treatment providers, training facilities, and pharmaceutical manufacturers.