Timing and selection effects within a psychology subject pool: Personality and sex matter

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 355-359

  Witt, Edward A ^a   Donnellan, M Brent ^a   Orlando, Matthew J ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

External validity; Personality; Research methodology; Research participation; Subject pool

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649629311     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.019     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Aviv A.L., Zelenski J.M., Rallo L., Larsen R.J. Who comes when: Personality differences in early and later participation in a university subject pool. Personality and Individual Differences 2002, 33:487-496.
2. Buhrmester, M. D., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (in press). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data? Perspectives in Psychological Science.
3. Carnahan T., McFarland S. Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: Could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2007, 33:603-614.
4. Costa P.T., McCrae R.R. Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual 1992, Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL.
5. Fraley R.C. How to conduct behavioral research over the Internet: A beginner's guide to HTML and CGI/Perl 2004, Guilford Press, New York.
6. Goldberg L.R. A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality psychology in Europe 1999, Vol. 7:7-28. Tilburg University Press, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
7. Gosling S.D., Vazire S., Srivastava S., John O.P. Should we trust Web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist 2004, 59:93-104.
8. Henry P.J. College sophomores in the laboratory redux: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice. Psychological Inquiry 2008, 19:49-71.
9. Johnson, J. A. (2000). Developing a short form of the IPIP-NEO: A report to HGW Consulting. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, DuBois, PA.
10. McAdams K.K., Donnellan M.B. Facets of personality and alcohol use in first year college students. Personality and Individual Differences 2009, 46:207-212.
11. Mook D.G. In defense of external invalidity. American Psychologist 1983, 38:379-387.
12. Noftle E.E., Robins R.W. Personality predictors of academic outcomes: Big Five correlates of GPA and SAT scores. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2007, 93:116-130.
13. Paunonen S.V. Big Five factors of personality and replicated predictions of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 84:411-424.
14. Paunonen S.V., Ashton M.C. Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2001, 81:524-539.
15. Peterson R.A. On the use of college students in social science research: Insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research 2001, 28:450-461.
16. Rothman K.J. No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons. Epidemiology 1990, 1:43-46.
17. Sears D.O. College sophomores in the lab: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:515-530.
18. Sears D.O. College student-itis redux. Psychological Inquiry 2008, 19:72-77.
19. Sieber J.E., Saks M.J. A census of subject pool characteristics and policies. American Psychologist 1989, 44:1053-1061.
20. Zelenski J.M., Rusting C.L., Larsen R.J. Consistency in the time of experiment participation and personality correlates: A methodological note. Personality and Individual Differences 2003, 34:547-558.