Date of this Version
Engvik (1998) has challenged our critique of (1) the ungrounded and excessive reliance on item-transparent, self-report personality measures (Q-data), and of (2) the naive appeal of five-factor models (FFM), in which personality is conceived as a set of static traits not influenced by social experience. In addition, Engvik has attempted to disparage our call for greater emphasis on objective (non-fakeable) performance/test measures of personality (T-data). Despite Engvik's assertion that our arguments are indefensible, there is a great body of empirical evidence and published literature that verifies our view that self-report methodology is seriously flawed, and that conclusions drawn from such measures may be dubious.
This document has been peer reviewed.