Big 5. Use the same test each time. Ideally you’d also have an external assessor complete a questionnaire about you (someone who interacts with you closely) and compare the 4 results.
This seems reasonable. I’d expect an increase in conscientiousness and openness and a decrease in neuroticism with no change to agreeableness or extroversion.
Big 5 is a personality test. Personality is not supposed to change over a short period of time. All results should be measurement errors and random fluctuations from testing conditions. It would be interesting to see personality changes over a long period of time though.
But you’re not supposed to see large changes in a personality test, Big 5′s dimensions are theorically stable over time. Very large changes can be attributed inter alia to a Pygmalion effect due to self-evaluation (It can also be founded in hetero-evaluation). In these conditions it’s common to see very large changes in Big 5, i’m agreed that it is a language abuse to qualify this as measurement errors but the result is the same, it do not measure real changes. Correct me if i’m wrong but this is why it is very common to confirm the fidelity of a big five with a test-retest process, because Big five is supposed to have a strong over time consistency.
I agree there should be skepticism when people report significant changes on psychometrics that are in general testing populations stable. The same thing arises in small studies sowing meditation boosting IQ. But the hypothesis that meditation can change things that other interventions can’t should be chased down since if true it’s very important.
Yup, this was the conclusion of my first answer ! It would be wonderful, but I truly believe that a two weeks study won’t show any valid result in terms of personnality. But yes i agree, what are they waiting to for to conduct a large scale study ?! :)
Oh, right I was not paying much attention to the two week thing. I got a large effect with a retest one year later with daily practice and multiple retreats.
Big 5. Use the same test each time. Ideally you’d also have an external assessor complete a questionnaire about you (someone who interacts with you closely) and compare the 4 results.
This seems reasonable. I’d expect an increase in conscientiousness and openness and a decrease in neuroticism with no change to agreeableness or extroversion.
Rationalist types are often already maxed on openess. I experienced an uptick in extraversion in addition to the effects you mentioned.
Big 5 is a personality test. Personality is not supposed to change over a short period of time. All results should be measurement errors and random fluctuations from testing conditions. It would be interesting to see personality changes over a long period of time though.
Very large changes that are concordant with others’ reported changes in your behavior are likely not measurement error.
But you’re not supposed to see large changes in a personality test, Big 5′s dimensions are theorically stable over time. Very large changes can be attributed inter alia to a Pygmalion effect due to self-evaluation (It can also be founded in hetero-evaluation). In these conditions it’s common to see very large changes in Big 5, i’m agreed that it is a language abuse to qualify this as measurement errors but the result is the same, it do not measure real changes. Correct me if i’m wrong but this is why it is very common to confirm the fidelity of a big five with a test-retest process, because Big five is supposed to have a strong over time consistency.
I agree there should be skepticism when people report significant changes on psychometrics that are in general testing populations stable. The same thing arises in small studies sowing meditation boosting IQ. But the hypothesis that meditation can change things that other interventions can’t should be chased down since if true it’s very important.
Yup, this was the conclusion of my first answer ! It would be wonderful, but I truly believe that a two weeks study won’t show any valid result in terms of personnality. But yes i agree, what are they waiting to for to conduct a large scale study ?! :)
Oh, right I was not paying much attention to the two week thing. I got a large effect with a retest one year later with daily practice and multiple retreats.
Yes of course a year is a priori enough to see changes.