Ten steps toward a better personality science – a rejoinder to the comments
Author(s) / Creator(s)
Leising, Daniel
Thielmann, Isabel
Glöckner, Andreas
Gärtner, Anne
Schönbrodt, Felix
Abstract / Description
We respond to the comments (https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.9227) on our “Ten Steps” paper (https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.6029), focusing on the most prominent themes: (1) What motivates scientists?, (2) Consensus-building (Is our field ready? May there be adverse side-effects? How shall we do it?), (3) How may institutional change be facilitated?, (4) Diversity (of participants, stimuli, methodology, measures, and among researchers), (5) The reliability of our proposed scoring system, and (6) The real-world relevance of personality research. We stand by our call for more concerted consensus-building and offer a few clarifications in this regard. We also issue four specific calls to action to our colleagues in the field: (a) specify legitimate paths to greater consensus, (b) explicate what constitutes good “qualitative” research, (c) help establish a widely used, public domain item database, and (d) determine what the most important contemporary goals of personality research are.
Keyword(s)
personality research quality research evaluation quality criteria reward incentive research methodology consensus buildingPersistent Identifier
Date of first publication
2022-05-06
Journal title
Personality Science
Volume
3
Article number
Article e7961
Publisher
PsychOpen GOLD
Publication status
publishedVersion
Review status
peerReviewed
Is version of
Citation
Leising, D., Thielmann, I., Glöckner, A., Gärtner, A., & Schönbrodt, F. (2022). Ten steps toward a better personality science – a rejoinder to the comments. Personality Science, 3, Article e7961. https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.7961
-
ps.v03.7961.pdfAdobe PDF - 206.76KBMD5: 7d0bcb8d0df2775942f6dc84020aa43f
-
There are no other versions of this object.
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Leising, Daniel
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Thielmann, Isabel
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Glöckner, Andreas
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Gärtner, Anne
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Schönbrodt, Felix
-
PsychArchives acquisition timestamp2023-01-23T14:06:52Z
-
Made available on2023-01-23T14:06:52Z
-
Date of first publication2022-05-06
-
Abstract / DescriptionWe respond to the comments (https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.9227) on our “Ten Steps” paper (https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.6029), focusing on the most prominent themes: (1) What motivates scientists?, (2) Consensus-building (Is our field ready? May there be adverse side-effects? How shall we do it?), (3) How may institutional change be facilitated?, (4) Diversity (of participants, stimuli, methodology, measures, and among researchers), (5) The reliability of our proposed scoring system, and (6) The real-world relevance of personality research. We stand by our call for more concerted consensus-building and offer a few clarifications in this regard. We also issue four specific calls to action to our colleagues in the field: (a) specify legitimate paths to greater consensus, (b) explicate what constitutes good “qualitative” research, (c) help establish a widely used, public domain item database, and (d) determine what the most important contemporary goals of personality research are.en_US
-
Publication statuspublishedVersion
-
Review statuspeerReviewed
-
CitationLeising, D., Thielmann, I., Glöckner, A., Gärtner, A., & Schönbrodt, F. (2022). Ten steps toward a better personality science – a rejoinder to the comments. Personality Science, 3, Article e7961. https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.7961en_US
-
ISSN2700-0710
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/8009
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12468
-
Language of contenteng
-
PublisherPsychOpen GOLD
-
Is version ofhttps://doi.org/10.5964/ps.7961
-
Is related tohttps://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12453
-
Keyword(s)personalityen_US
-
Keyword(s)research qualityen_US
-
Keyword(s)research evaluationen_US
-
Keyword(s)quality criteriaen_US
-
Keyword(s)rewarden_US
-
Keyword(s)incentiveen_US
-
Keyword(s)research methodologyen_US
-
Keyword(s)consensus buildingen_US
-
Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)150
-
TitleTen steps toward a better personality science – a rejoinder to the commentsen_US
-
DRO typearticle
-
Article numberArticle e7961
-
Journal titlePersonality Science
-
Volume3
-
Visible tag(s)Version of Recorden_US