Raters correlate the importance of a trait with how much of it they credit themselves, an average correlation of +.52 read as a self-defense mechanism¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1921 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Using Mendenhall's Moral Character Scale, reporters showed an average correlation of +.52 between the relative importance of traits and the amounts of each trait they rated themselves as possessing. → Knight 1921

Evidence¶

Knight 1921¶

Knight, F. B., & Franzen, R. H. (1921). Pitfalls in rating schemes. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073817

q2 · i? · associational · r1

A group of graduate students, under-classmen, and professors rated trait importance and their own possession of each trait on Mendenhall's Moral Character Scale. The article reports an average correlation of "+52" and interprets it as a self-defense mechanism.

"Using Mendenhall's Moral Character Scale, we get an average correlation of +52 between the relative importance of the traits—in the opinion of the reporter, and the amounts of each trait he thinks he possesses."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students give themselves higher self-ratings on qualities they judge more important, averaging 14.75 points on A qualities versus 7.0 on F qualities — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Self-raters show very little association between their introspective self-order of interests and the order attributed to them by peers, indicating a tendency to overrate themselves — related
• Self-overrating persists with a simplified grading method and on a behavioral self-analysis test, where raters claim far more 'Always' and far fewer 'Sometimes' for themselves than for others