Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27273802›Full record

ArticlePsychophysiology2016

Comparing the validity of informant and self-reports of personality using laboratory indices of emotional responding as criterion variables.

Lynne Lieberman, Huiting Liu, Ashley A Huggins, Andrea C Katz, Michael J Zvolensky, Stewart A Shankman

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Psychophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Lynne LiebermanDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Huiting LiuDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Ashley A HugginsDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Andrea C KatzDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Michael J ZvolenskyDepartment of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Stewart A ShankmanDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Funding

Family Study of Reward and Threat Sensitivity in Internalizing PsychopathologyR01MH098093 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI SHANKMAN, STEWART AARON · 2012 to 2015
$2.7M
Anticipating reward & threat: A test of biobehavioral processes in MDD vs anxietyR21MH080689 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI SHANKMAN, STEWART AARON · 2009 to 2010
$408k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH098093NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH080689
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Personality traits relate to risk for psychopathology and can inform predictions about treatment outcome. In an effort to obtain a comprehensive index of personality, informant reports of personality are sometimes obtained in addition to self-reports of personality. However, there is limited research comparing the validity of self- and informant reports of personality, particularly among those with internalizing psychopathology. This is important given that informants may provide an additional (and perhaps different) perspective on individuals' personality. The present study therefore compared how both reports of positive affectivity (PA) and negative affectivity (NA) relate to psychophysiological and subjective measures of emotional responding to positive and negative stimuli. Given that our sample (n = 117) included individuals with no history of psychopathology, as well as individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) and/or panic disorder (PD), we were also able to explore whether these internalizing diagnoses moderated the association between personality reports and measures of emotional responding. Informant-reported PA predicted physiological responses to positive stimuli (but not negative). Informant-reported NA predicted physiological responses to negative stimuli (but not positive). Self-reported personality did not predict physiological responding, but did predict subjectively measured emotional responding (NA for negative responding, PA for positive responding). Diagnoses of internalizing psychopathology (PD or MDD) did not moderate these associations. Results suggest self- and informant reports of personality may each provide valid indices of an individual's emotional response tendencies, but predict different aspects of those tendencies.

Indexed as

Self-AssessmentAdultElectroencephalographyEmotionsFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMiddle AgedPanic DisorderPersonalitySelf ReportEEG asymmetryInformant-reported personalityMajor depressive disorderPanic disorderPersonalityStartle

Identifiers

PMID27273802
PMCPMC4982807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.