Premium
Acceptance of bogus personality interpretations: Face validity reconsidered
Author(s) -
Jackson Donald E.,
O'Dell Jerry W.,
Olson Deborah
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
journal of clinical psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.124
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1097-4679
pISSN - 0021-9762
DOI - 10.1002/1097-4679(198207)38:3<588::aid-jclp2270380319>3.0.co;2-i
Subject(s) - psychology , interpretation (philosophy) , social psychology , jargon , face (sociological concept) , face validity , personality , psychometrics , clinical psychology , computer science , social science , linguistics , philosophy , sociology , programming language
One‐hundred and fifty‐three students took one of four tests differing in face validity. They subsequently received computer‐generated feedback of a traditional bogus interpretation (Barnum) or a jargon‐filled negatively‐toned interpretation (Prosecuting Attorney). Each S rated the feedback for accuracy and likability. Face validity was independent of both accuracy and likability scores regardless of type of feedback. Barnum feedback was judged both more accurate and likable than was Prosecuting Attorney feedback. Females had higher accuracy scores than did males. Accuracy and likability scores were significantly correlated. These results confirm Delprato's (1975) findings relative to face validity and Barnum feedback. That this finding extends to Prosecuting Attorney feedback refutes the notion that Delprato's results were due to the high base rate of the Barnum statements.