Across various fields of application there is an increasing demand for personality and social psychological
scales/measures that are valid and reliable, as well as being defensible in more general social, economic and legal
terms. At the same time, practitioners are also aware of the well-known limitations of the self-report questionnaires
that are most commonly used, including their vulnerability to conscious and unconscious motivational response
distortion (see Helmes et al., Chapter 2), and their neglect of implicit traits and attitudes that require assessment
via behavioral measures. Good practice in social-personality scale development and use can mitigate some of
these limitations, but advances in standardized objective test measures (cf. Schuerger, 2008 ) as well as structured
observation and interview (cf. Rogers et al., 2010 ), will likely feature strongly in any future edition of this volume.
Key Themes in Personality and Social Psychological Assessment
The time when a single volume could hope to include coverage of all important constructs in personality and
social psychology is long past. Instead, the editors of this volume have aimed to highlight constructs that are
influential in theory and practice, and for which there have been substantial advances in measurement since
1991. Some of these constructs (e.g., anger/hostility, sensation-seeking, self-esteem) are well established but
development of measures is ongoing. Others (e.g., measures of alexithymia, emotional intelligence, dark person-
alities) are of more recent vintage and define newer areas of inquiry (cf. Matthews et al., 2004 ). Our selection of
constructs was guided by five themes that are prominent in the current social-personality literature (some con-
structs attach to multiple themes):
Emotional dispositions. Many researchers habitually think of stable emotional tendencies in terms of negative
affectivity (overlapping with neuroticism) and positive affectivity (overlapping with extraversion)
(cf. Saklofske et al., 2012 ). While the importance of such trait constructs is undeniable, researchers often
require more fine-grained assessments of emotionality and mood states, in relation to constructs such as anger
and hostility , and hope and optimism . By contrast, there are also practical needs for the more broad-based
construct of life satisfaction , a source of interest even to national governments. Whether narrowly or broadly
defined, emotional dispositions also overlap with cognitive constructs such as self-esteem and confidence.
Emotion regulation. Emotion reflects not only emotional dispositions but styles of emotion-regulation, because
emotions are actively constructed and managed. Regulation implies both the capacity to be aware of the
emotions of self and others, and capacities for modifying and managing emotion. Thus, measures of empathy
and of alexithymia identify individual differences in awareness, and scales for resilience and for coping
discriminate emotion management capabilities. Sensation-seeking may also be conceptualized as a style of
emotion management in that experiencing thrills and excitement is a key personal goal. The construct of trait
emotional intelligence represents an over-arching factor of this kind around which specific dimensions for
awareness and management may cohere.
Interpersonal styles. Convergence with personality trait perspectives allows social psychology to address
stable interpersonal dispositions, although the relative importance of dispositional and situational factors
remains a topic for debate. Individual differences in interpersonal style may be rooted in the attachment
patterns established early in life. Like emotional dispositions, interpersonally defined constructs also bring
together cognitive and affective dimensions. People differ cognitively in relation to concerns with public image
and social evaluation. The ways in which people interpret themselves as social beings also influences /C0and is
influenced by /C0social emotions such as forgiveness. Indeed, social psychologists emphasize the interpersonal
roots of seemingly personal qualities including self-esteem and emotional intelligence .
Vices and virtues. In the natural science tradition, personality psychologists have been wary of value-laden
constructs. However, values have always been central to studies of social attitudes. In recent years, values
have attracted more attention in personality as well as social psychological research, as shown most directly
in studies of values and moral personality . Measures of religiosity and the transcendental are also relevant in this
context. Values are not always benign. Researchers have also been interested in traits that are closer to vice
than virtue, described as dark personalities or the dark triad of narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy.
Some seemingly beneficial traits such as perfectionism may also represent a misapplication of values such as
striving for excellence.
Sociocultural interaction and conflict . In a globalized and culturally fluid world, many people are
challenged by the need to get along with others whose interpersonal style and values are different from
their own. Relationships between people affiliated with different social groups are a perennial concern
of social psychology, but the last 20 years have seen major developments in inter-cultural assessment.6 1. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION AND EVALUATION OF SCALES AND MEASURES
I. INTRODUCTION: CORE ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT