Potential of the Internet for personality research

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the opportunities offered by the Internet for the psychometric approach to personality research. It highlights some of the problems associated with online personality research and describes a series of studies focused on the feasibility of such an endeavor along with offering some methodological recommendations on the basis of findings to date. Although the tests and assessment instruments used in online studies are usually presented as forms on Web pages, other Internet resources and technologies are also employed such as, communicating the participant through e-mail or recruiting participants by means of advertisements placed in Usenet newsgroups. A number of professional psychologists and test publishers are already beginning to offer such services. The Internet offers access to very large numbers of participants with little cost or effort. For researchers without easy access to large “captive” participant populations, such as undergraduate students who may participate in return for course credit, recruiting the numbers needed may prove difficult.

[1]  P. Glick.  Orientations toward relationships: Choosing a situation in which to begin a relationship ☆ , 1985 .

[2]  Stephanie J. Platz,et al.  Self-Monitoring and Eyewitness Accuracy , 1984 .

[3]  William C. Schmidt,et al.  World-Wide Web survey research: Benefits, potential problems, and solutions , 1997 .

[4]  Scott T. Meier,et al.  The Chronic Crisis in Psychological Measurement and Assessment: A Historical Survey , 1994 .

[5]  Shellie D. Locke,et al.  Method of psychological assessment, self-disclosure, and experiential differences: A study of computer, questionnaire, and interview assessment formats. , 1995 .

[6]  Karen A. Pasveer,et al.  The making of a personality inventory: Help from the WWW , 1998 .

[7]  John L. Smith,et al.  Research on the Internet: Validation of a World-Wide Web mediated personality scale , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[8]  Richard Lennox,et al.  The problem with self-monitoring: a two-sided scale and a one-sided theory , 1988 .

[9]  Carl Vogel,et al.  Proper methodologies for psychological and sociological studies conducted via the Internet , 1996, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers.

[10]  E. Berscheid,et al.  Focusing on the Exterior and the Interior. Two Investigations of the Initiation of Personal Relationships , 1985 .

[11]  Michael A. Smith,et al.  Virtual subjects: Using the Internet as an alternative source of subjects and research environment , 1997 .

[12]  S. Gangestad,et al.  On the nature of self-monitoring: matters of assessment, matters of validity. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  Mark Snyder,et al.  "To Carve Nature at Its Joints": On the Existence of Discrete Classes in Personality , 1985 .

[14]  T. Buchanan,et al.  Internet research: Self-monitoring and judgments of attractiveness , 2000, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[15]  Diane J. Schiano,et al.  Convergent methodologies in cyber-psychology: A case study , 1997 .

[16]  A Stones,et al.  Survey questionnaire data on panic attacks gathered using the world wide web , 1997, Depression and anxiety.

[17]  John L. Smith,et al.  Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web. , 1999, British journal of psychology.

[18]  P. Vitaliano,et al.  A Brief Measure for the Assessment of Anger and Aggression , 1987 .

[19]  John H. Krantz,et al.  Comparing the results of laboratory and World-Wide Web samples on the determinants of female attractiveness , 1997 .

[20]  Dave Bartram,et al.  Automated testing: Past, present and future , 1984 .

[21]  A. Pines.  A prospective study of personality and gender differences in romantic attraction , 1998 .

[22]  Mark L. Miller,et al.  On the existence of discrete classes in personality: Is self-monitoring the correct joint to carve? , 1989 .

[23]  L. Aiken.  Psychological testing and assessment , 1976 .

[24]  Reginald G. Smart,et al.  Subject selection bias in psychological research. , 1966 .

[25]  John H. Krantz,et al.  Linked Gopher and World-Wide Web services for the American Psychological Society and Hanover College Psychology Department , 1995 .

[26]  Alfred Binet,et al.  The Development Of Intelligence In Children , 1916 .

[27]  Paul Kline,et al.  Personality: The Psychometric View , 1993 .

[28]  Haya Bechar-Israeli,et al.  From "Bonehead" to "cLoNehEAd": Nicknames, Play and Identity on Internet Relay Chat , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[29]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Response Effects in the Electronic Survey , 1986 .

[30]  L. R. Anderson.  Test-Retest Reliability of the Revised Self-Monitoring Scale over a Two-Year Period , 1991, Psychological Reports.

[31]  William Oakes,et al.  External validity and the use of real people as subjects. , 1972 .

[32]  H. Skinner,et al.  Challenge of computers in psychological assessment. , 1986 .

[33]  S. Briggs,et al.  On the nature of self-monitoring: Problems with assessment, problems with validity. , 1988 .

[34]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Taxonomic Analysis Redux: Some Statistical Considerations for Testing a Latent Class Model , 1991 .

[35]  R. Lennox,et al.  Latent Structure of Self-Monitoring. , 1991, Multivariate behavioral research.