RUNNING HEAD: Importance of Personality in Job Placement
Importance of Personality Testing in Job Placement
Name
Class
Affiliation
Instructor
Date
1
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
2
Purpose of the study
The purpose of the proposed thesis is to determine the importance of personality testing
in job placement. What is the importance of personality testing in job placement? This question
relates to several personality tests used in organizations and career development. Specifically
used is the Myer Briggs Personality Test. Throughout the paper a wealth of information will be
provided on this specific test and its uses, benefits, disadvantages, reliability, validity, and more
information. Also, other personality assessments will be explored and compared as it applies to
industrial/organizational psychology.
Research Themes
(1) Personality and multidimensional models of performance
(2) Personality taxonomies and the five-factor model
(3) The effects of situations on personality performance relationships
(4) The incremental validity of personality over cognitive ability
(5) The need to differentiate personality constructs from personality measures
(6) The concern with faking on personality tests
(7) The use of personality tests in attempting to address adverse impact.
The paper will investigate the relative validity of personality testing and the assessment center in
order to evaluate the incremental validity of both assessment methods in the prediction of
managerial performance. Managers from organizations will be evaluated with an assessment tool
and selected traits on the Personality Research Form (D. N. Jackson, 1984). Performance and
promotability will serve as the criteria.
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
3
Myers- Briggs Personality Test.
The MBTI was developed by Isabel Briggs Myers and her mother, Katherine Briggs.
Katherine Briggs became interested in type theory after reading Carl Jung's book, Psychological
Type. Isabel Briggs Myers shared her mother's interest in type theory and began to create the
MBTI in the early l940s as a test to be used for personnel selection. Myers believed that different
occupations favored different personality orientations, and that Jung's theory provided a
theoretical link between personality and job performance. In 1957, the Educational Testing
Service (ETS) began to distribute the MBTI for research purposes. ETS spent considerable time
and resources in deciding whether the MBTI should have been adopted as a part of its vast
library of proprietary tests. After an unfavorable internal review of the test, ETS chose not to
pursue the further development and ended its relationship with Myers.
In 1975, Consulting Psychologists Press acquired the right to sell the MBTI. Since then,
the test has been successfully marketed to an extremely wide audience. The test is now available
to licensed counselors and psychologists, to college instructors and personnel who have had
graduate training in the theory of testing, and to individuals who have completed short courses
on the administration and interpretation of the MBTI. There are currently many professional
organizations that support the study of type.
The primary feature of the theory behind the MBTI is that each person's personality fits
into only one of 16 types. These categories are based on four features of personality, each
consisting of two opposite preferences. According to the theory, all people have an innate
preference that determines how they will behave in all situations. The four dimensions are:
Extroversion (E) vs Introversion (I)
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
4
This dimension reflects the perceptual orientation of the individual. Extroverts are said to react to
immediate and objective conditions in the environment. Introverts, however, look inward to their
internal and subjective reactions to their environment.
Sensing (S) vs Intuition (N)
People with a sensing preference rely on that which can be perceived and are considered to be
oriented toward that which is real. People with an intuitive preference rely more on their
nonobjective and unconscious perceptual processes.
Thinking (T) vs Feeling (F)
A preference for thinking indicates the use of logic and rational processes to make
Deductions and decide upon action. Feeling represents a preference to make decisions that are
based on subjective processes that include emotional reactions to events.
Judgment (J) vs Perception (P)
The judgrnent-perception preferences were invented by Briggs and Myers to indicate if rational
or irrational judgments are dominant when a person is interacting with the environment. The
judgmental person uses a combination of thinking and feelings when making decision, whereas
the perception person uses the sensing and intuition processes.
Because the MBTI is a theory of types, a person can have only one preference. Although
it is possible for people to develop the complimentary style for instance an introvert, for
example, could learn to be more extroverted when speaking in groups the primary preference
will always dominate the person's personality. A person's MBTI score determines his or her type,
a label based on his or her dominate preference for each of the four dimensions. Since there are
two preferences within each dimension, there are 16 potential personality types.
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
5
This test can be used for applicants of serious consideration to a specific organization.
This test can assist in placing departments with meshing personalities. Once your Myers-Briggs
type is known, your employer can form a picture of your personality and how you are liable to
react in various work situations. The MTBI helps to predict how employees will fare in particular
job functions, and especially in relation to other employees. I chose this test specifically because
it speaks to psychological personality of employers and employees. It is interesting how the
questioning determines the various personality traits stemming from introversion and
extroversion.
“Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers created the MBTI as a
way of describing and understanding personality types”. MBTI was originally created so that
people could make wise career choices and help others to understand normal personality
differences. Knowing various personality types helps people recognize and appreciate their own
strengths and provides perspective on how and why we're all different. The MBTI has several
characteristics that clearly distinguish it from other personality indicators. This is beneficial to
employers in placement and staffing. Industrial/Organizational Psychologists use this test to
match employees to departments, partner teams to leaders, and organize the employee structure
of an organization.
The MBTI is not intended to be used as a tool for employee selection, promotion, or
assigning projects. The MTBI can be used in conjunction with a program or workshop.
The standardization of using the MTBI is typically in leadership coaching. A sample group that
is often given the MTBI is leaders within an organization. It is a helpful tool in determining
leaders and teams necessary to benefit the organization. Myers-Briggs recommends that the test
be interpreted by a certified, trained professional. Many companies have staff trained to
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
6
understand and interpret the MBTI. They will provide confidentiality, give appropriate feedback,
help you assess your type and apply the results to your career and life.
There are concerns about the MBTI, however it still holds validity. Researchers believe
the test is based on temperament and can be skewed by situation as and circumstances.
“Temperment may be a critical component of job satisfaction”(Kaplan and Saccuzzo, 2013). The
Myers Briggs assessment provides the reliable insights you need to improve the performance of
your people, teams and organization. By creating a common language to easily communicate the
complexities of an individual's personality, it supplies invaluable inputs for your ongoing team
building, leadership and coaching, conflict management, career development and retention
efforts. This testing method provides a multitude of benefits to an organization and individual by
helping people understand their personality type and how it relates to team dynamics and
performance. It also helps to hone leadership skills, improves efficiency at the workplace by
reducing conflict and helps in the overall development of an individual.
Statistical Structure
Because the MBTI is a typology, we would expect that its scores would be distributed
bimodally and not be normally distributed. For instance, If you randomly selected 500 people
between the ages 18 and 25, measured their heights, and then drew a graph of the results, you
would probably have a normal or bell-shaped distribution. Most people would have a height
close to the man, say 5'8". Of course, some people would be very short, and others would be very
tall, but these extreme scores would be rare. Now, imagine what would happen if you divided
your sample by sex. When you redraw the data you should get a bimodal distribution. Women,
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
7
on average, are shorter than men; but within each sex there will be a normal distribution of
heights. The same thing should happen for the MBTI.
We would expect that since people are either introverts or extroverts, the test results
should yield two different curves. One curve would represent all the introverts, the other, all the
extroverts. True, some people may be more extroverted than others, but we would expect that all
the extroverts would be different from all the introverts. What we should find is that there are
two normal curves representing the two preferences, and that there is little or no overlap of the
curves. Instead, most people score between the two extremes. This means that although one
person may score as an E, his or her test results may be very similar to those of another person's,
who scores as an I.
Evaluation of a Psychological Measure
Personality tests are a form of psychological testing employers often use for screening
job applicants and for making promotion and other job-related decisions. Numerous tests have
been developed that companies may use. These tests measure motivational, emotional,
interpersonal and attitudinal characteristics. However, the use of such tests may lead to litigation.
The legality of employment testing has been addressed under federal and state constitutional and
legislative law. Thus, employers need to manage the legal risk when such tests are going to be
used. Precautionary legal guidelines for employers using personality tests are presented.
The business world places great importance on personality tests when assessing job
applicants. The evidence for the predictive value of these tests is frequently overstated and
wrongly assessed. This article speaks specifically to the disadvantages and lack of necessity of
personality testing. Although psychologists know a great deal about leadership, persons who
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
8
make decisions about real leaders seem largely to ignore their accumulated wisdom. In an effort
to make past research more accessible, interpretable, and relevant to decision makers, this paper
looks into leadership and decisions are made about leadership e.g., whom to appoint, how to
evaluate them, when to terminate them.
An innovative new approach to preemployment screening for loss control involves
testing for personality characteristics. Research has shown certain traits to be associated with an
increased frequency of accidents. Although broad, general purpose personality inventories
abound, few have been developed specifically for loss control. One safety-oriented screening test
is the St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co.'s Job Candidate Profile (JCP), which measures 4
work-related characteristics:
1. Working safety
2. Driving safety
3. Dependability
4. People relations
Each is measured with a separate scale consisting of nearly 35 individual items. A score
is produced for each scale by comparing an applicant's responses across all scale items to a
national norm group, thus determining a percentile score. Research has shown that the JCP does
predict actual on-the-job safety. For instance, across all companies that have tested the JCP in
research to date, low scorers on the working safety scale have averaged 5 times as many on-thejob injuries as high scorers.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is one of the most common personality
assessments and a frequently used instrument for team development. However, in relation to
team development processes, there is little research and literature on the role of personality in
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
9
general and the usefulness of MBTI in particular. For instance in one research that was done a
review of the MBTI was used to explore the relationship between MBTI profiles and team
processes using a sample of 1,630 people working in 156 teams in a Swedish industrial
organization. The results show that only a small number of MBTI personality profiles have a
significant relationship with team processes. Overall, the composition of teams in terms of MBTI
profiles does not seem to predict team development very well. Findings suggest that the MBTI
may be used as an instrument for personal development and as a vehicle for group members to
gain a better understanding of each other.
A review covering the year 1933 unraveled that the most serious problem in the field
remains the gap between the demands of broad character objectives on the one hand and on the
other the use of questionnaires and inventories having dubious validity or else of behavior tests
over-emphasizing specificity. The 269 references covered are grouped under the following
headings: tests and testing techniques such as summaries, those involving behavior, those of
emotional adjustment, attitudes and interests, aptitudes, etc.; objective studies e.g. social,
emotional, and educational adjustments, attitudes and interests.
Personality tests are often used in selection and have demonstrated predictive validity
across a variety of occupational groups and performance criteria. Although different selection
decision methods can be used to make selection decisions from personality test results, there is
little research addressing the influence of these different selection decision methods on issues
such as, adverse impact and differential hiring rates. This gap in the literature is redressed in the
current study. His information is pertinent in knowing the benefits of personality testing.
Historically, the degree to which personality tests have been used as employee selection
and placement tools has varied considerably. After enjoying a period of popularity during the
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
10
earlier part of this century, during the 1960’s the prevailing view (e.g., Guion & Gottier, 1965)
shifted to a much more negative assessment: namely, that “the validity of standard personality
measures for personnel selection was so poor that their continued use seemed unwarranted”
(Hogan, 1991, p. 896). However, in more recent years personality-based employee selection tests
have staged a resurgence in popularity, spurred by the appearance of empirical studies and metaanalyses that supported their utility as assessment devices (e.g., Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hough,
Eaton, Dunnette, Kamp, & McCloy, 1990; Mount, Barrick, & Strauss, 1994; Schmit & Ryan,
1993; Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991).
One factor that has energized and directed research and practice in this area has beenthe
growing acceptance of the Big Five view of the structure of personality (e.g., Cortina, Doherty,
Schmitt, Kaufman, & Smith, 1992; Digman, 1990; Hogan & Hogan, 1992; McCrae & Costa,
1987; Schmit & Ryan, 1993). According to the Big Five taxonomy, the primary dimensions of
personality are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and
Openness to Experience; the taxonomy presents a summary of the prototypical characteristics
and illustrative adjectives that have been offered for each of these constructs. Although debate
continues regarding the question of which Big Five scales are the most generally useful in
selection contexts (e.g., Barrick & Mount, 1991; Tett et al., 1994; Ones, Mount, Barrick, &
Hunter, 1994; Tett, Jackson, Rothstein, & Reddon, 1994) -- as well as the question of whether
subscales of the Big Five provide higher levels of predictability than the main scales (e.g., Hogan
& Hogan, 1992; Hough et al., 1990) -- it is evident that the Big Five taxonomy has exerted a
major positive impact on current uses of personality tests for employee selection.
Despite the fact that it was not developed in the Big Five tradition, the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator (MBTI; Briggs & Myers, 1976; Myers & McCauley, 1985) has enjoyed
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
11
widespread popularity in applied organizational contexts. Indeed, by some estimates the MBTI
has become the most widely used personality assessment instrument in corporate America, with
an estimated 1.5 million workers having completed the MBTI in 1986 alone (Moore, 1987); in
1991, that estimate had risen to over 2 million people (Suplee, 1991). The MBTI is used in a
wide variety of organizational applications: for example, Poilitt (1982) described the use of the
MBTI for career guidance and personal development; Hartzler and Hartzler (1982) described the
application of the MBTI for "planning, organizing, directing, and controlling" (p. 20) the actions
of other workers; Garden (1989) used MBTI profiles to predict employee turnover; Gauld and
Sink (1985) and Sample and Hoffman (1986) described the use of the MBTI for organizational
development; and several studies (e.g., Gough, 1976; Hall & MacKinnon, 1969; Kirton, 1976)
have used the MBTI to predict aspects of job performance (in these examples, creativity and
innovation).
The MBTI has even found application in job analysis and synthetic test validation: based
on a job's Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ; McCormick, Jeanneret, & Mecham, 1972)
profile, an estimate of the MBTI profile one would expect to find among job incumbents can be
produced by the PAQ’s scoring service using synthetic validity (e.g., Jeanneret, 1992; Mecham,
1989). In contrast to recent inventories that were inspired by the relatively a theoretical Big Five
research (e.g., the NEO PI of Costa & McCrae, 1985), the MBTI was developed over 40 years
ago based on a Jungian view of personality. The MBTI seeks to measure four primary
dimensions: Extraversion-Introversion (EI), Sensing-Intuition (SN), Judging-Perceiving (JP), and
Thinking-Feeling (TF). Although the MBTI produces continuous preference scores to measure
each of these four dimensions, in most cases individuals are assigned to one of 16 type categories
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
12
based on their profile of dichotomized preference scores (e.g., an INTP would denote an
Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Perceiving type).
Although the MBTI far predated the empirical research studies that produced the Big
Five taxonomy, some authors (e.g.,. McCrae & Costa, 1989) have noted that a strong similarity
exists between the MBTI’s scales and four of the five Big Five dimensions. Specifically, MBTI’s
EI scale (on the ‘E’ pole) corresponds to the Big Five’s Extraversion, the SN scale (‘N’ pole)
corresponds to Openness to Experience, the TF scale (‘F’ pole) corresponds to Agreeableness,
and the JP scale (‘J’ pole) corresponds to Conscientiousness. Using the NEO-PI to quantify the
Big Five traits, McCrae and Costa (1989) examined the degree of empirical convergence
between the MBTI preference scores and the five NEO-PI scales, concluding that “each ofthe
four [MBTI] indices showed impressive evidence of convergence with one of the five major
dimensions of normal personality” (pp. 32.33).
However, among the four main MBTI scales, McCrae and Costa (1989) found that none
exhibited any significant degree of correspondence to the Emotional Stability/Neuroticism
dimension from the Big Five. This is not entirely surprising, given the MBTI’s goal of not
assessing individuals on dimensions that might be perceived as being “undesirable” (e.g., as low
scores on Emotional Stability, or high scores on Neuroticism, might easily be viewed). As
Saunders (1986) noted, “one of the greatest strengths of the MBTI was its positive, affirming
nature” (p. 1). Although this lack of a scale to measure the Emotional Stability/Neuroticism
dimension of the Big Five may not be of concern to MBTI users whose primary goal is to simply
assign individuals to one of its 16 type categories, it does pose a limitation to practitioners who
would like to use the MBTI to measure the full profile of personality dimensions specified in the
Big Five taxonomy (e.g., to make use of published validity studies that have documented the
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
13
predictive power of the Big Five scales for various kinds of jobs). As McCrae and Costa (1989)
concluded, although the absence of the Big Five’s Neuroticism dimension from the MBTI
“makes interpretation of results palatable to most respondents, this approach also omits
information that may be crucial to employers, co-workers, counselors, and the individuals
themselves. For many, if not most, applications, some measure of Neuroticism would be useful”
(p. 36).
The goal of MBTI is to determine the degree to which the existing MBTI item pool could
be scored to provide a measure of the Big Five’s missing Emotional Stability dimension. As
Saunders (1986) noted, “every version of the Indicator, with the exception of Form E, includes
unscored research items” (p. 1) in addition to the 95 items used to score the four main scales
(e.g., Form F contains 71 such items). Although Myers (1980) claimed that these research items
were not included for the purpose of assessing scales with “clinical” overtones (e.g., the
Emotional Stability/Adjustment/Neuroticism dimension from the Big Five), our examination of
the content of these unused items suggested that a number of them (e.g., those dealing with
obsessive worrying, pronounced mood swings, suspicious views of people in general) might
indeed be able to serve as indicators of the missing Emotional Stability dimension.
To determine whether these research items could serve in this capacity, a series of
exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses is conducted on the combined item pool from
samples studied. A two-wave strategy is followed: exploratory factor analyses that is conducted
on a “derivation” sample in an attempt to generate one or more new MBTI factor structures that
might tap the missing Emotional Stability dimension; and then a confirmatory factor analyses
were conducted in a second “validation” sample to test the degree to which the new factor which
checks to ensure that the models would fit in an independent sample of respondents.
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
14
Conclusion
Although opinions vary regarding the desirability of scoring the MBTI to produce
categorical “types” (e.g., Harvey & Murry, 1994; Harvey et al., 1994), such methods remain
popular, and our Big Five-based scoring system may provide a valuable alternative for MBTI
users who have previously relied on the categorical type-based scoring system. Second, by virtue
of the fact that its items were written to project a “positive, affirming” image to examinees
(Saunders, 1986, p.1), using the MBTI’s item pool to estimate scores on the Big Five dimensions
might offer significant advantages in the area of legal defensibility. That is, unlike the typical
employee selection lawsuit in which plaintiffs challenge a test by demonstrating that it produces
disparate impact with respect to some protected class of applicants, at least one recent case
(Soroka v. Dayton Hudson) claimed instead that items on the personality test violated the right to
privacyof applicants (e.g., by asking questions dealing with such sensitive topics as sex, religion,
bodily functions, etc.).
Among currently available personality tests especially ones that use items like those
found in the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and California Psychological
Inventory (CPI), which were the targets of criticism in Soroka,- the MBTI undoubtedly ranks as
one of the least likely to elicit averse reactions from examinees due to sensitivity regarding item
content. Because the MBTI’s item pool is free of items that deal with sexual orientation,
religious beliefs, and similar “hot button” topics, the likelihood of having a Big Five-scored
MBTI challenged on invasion-of-privacy grounds would appear to be remote.
Although the Big-Five based scoring methods we derived for the MBTI in this study
appear to offer a number of advantages, some concerns remain. First, as McCrae and Costa
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
15
(1989) noted, it can be argued that “the MBTI does not give comprehensive information on the
four domains it does sample” (p. 36). Consistent with previous research that has indicated that
the measurement precision of the MBTI’s four a priori scales could stand some improvement -especially around the cutoff scores used to dichotomize each dimension (e.g., Harvey & Murry,
1994) -- it would obviously be desirable to broaden the domain of content assessed by the
MBTI’s item pool, especially for the Emotional Stability/Neuroticism dimension.
Although a few of the research items were found to load on the original four MBTI
dimensions, additional items are needed for these scales as well before the MBTI can claim to
measure the Big Five dimensions as comprehensively as instruments that were designed
specifically to assess these constructs and their subconstructs (e.g., Costa & McCrae’s NEO PI,
or the Hogan Personality Inventory [HPI]). Second, whenever any personality test is used as the
basis for making an employee selection or placement decision, the issue of response
dissimulation or faking must be considered. Although some studies (e.g., Hough et al., 1990)
have argued that faking may not be an especially serious problem, others (e.g., Furnham, 1990;
Snell & Harvey, 1994) demonstrated that the MBTI can indeed be faked, and that some
individuals are much more able to distort their profiles in the desired direction than others.
Additional research is needed to resolve the question of how inappropriate personality test
profiles should be detected, and this objective assumes even greater importance when
administration conditions may encourage dissimulation (e.g., employee selection).
In summary, McCrae and Costa (1989) recommended that “if the MBTI is used, evidence
to date suggests that it may be better to abandon its Jungian framework and reinterpret the MBTI
in terms of the five-factor model” (p. 37). Although we continue to see merit in using the
categorical 4-factor MBTI structure in some situations (e.g., those in which the presentation of
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
16
personality information must be made in as nonthreatening a fashion as possible, or in which
feedback using MBTI terminology is preferred), the fact that the Big Five taxonomy has
achieved such a dominant position in the literature provides a compelling argument for switching
to a Big Five-based view of the MBTI. Now that an initial method for scoring the missing
Neuroticism dimension has been developed, those researchers and practitioners who choose to
heed McCrae and Costa’s (1989) recommendation to interpret the MBTI in Big Five terms have
the tools available to do so.
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
17
References
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job
performance. Personnel Psychology, 44,1-26.
Briggs, K. C., & Myers, I. B. (1976). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Form F. Palo Alto:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Cortina, J. M., Doherty, M. L., Schmitt, N., Kaufman, G., & Smith, R. G. (1992). The “Big Five”
personality factors in the IPI and MMPI: Predictors of police performance. Personnel
Psychology, 45, 119-140.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO PI personality inventory. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review
of Psychology, 41, 417-440.
Furnham, A. (1990). The fakability of the 16PF, Myers-Briggs and FIRO-B personality
measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 711-716.
Gauld, V., & Sink, D. (1985). The MBTI as a diagnostic tool in organization development
interventions. Journal of Psychological Type, 9, 24-29.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big Five factor structure.
Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
Hartzler, G. J., & Hartzler, M. T.(1982). Management uses of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
Research in Psychological Type, 5, 20-29.
Harvey, R. J., Murry, W. D., & Markham, S. E. (1994). Evaluation of three short form versions
of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 181-184.
Importance of Personality in Job Placement
18
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (1992). Hogan Personality Inventory manual. Tulsa, OK: Hogan
Assessment Systems.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across
instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the
perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57, 17-40.
Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Strauss, J. P. (1994). Validity of observer ratings of the Big
Five personality factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 272-280.
Myers, I. B. (1980). Introduction to type. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Ones, D. S., Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Hunter, J. E. (1994). Personality and job
performance: A critique of the Tett,
Schmit, M. J., & Ryan, A. M. (1993). The Big Five in personnel selection: Factor structure in
applicant and nonapplicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 966-974.
Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., Rothstein, M., & Reddon, J. R. (1994). Meta-analysis of personalityjob performance relations: A reply to Ones, Mount, Barrick, and Hunter (1994).
Personnel Psychology, 47, 157-172.