Psychology Commons^™

Personality And Flourishing In Seminarians: A Single Case Study, Kylee M. Peterson

Doctor of Psychology (PsyD)

This research study utilized a single case design to meet the dual need of applying personality research to clinical populations (Costa Jr, 1991) and the necessity of creating a formative assessment for first-year master and doctoral students to facilitate flourishing in a complex profession. This was done with the primary aim of evaluating the effectiveness of the formative assessment program pilot across stake holders including the executive dean of a Portland seminary, psychologist consultant, and ministry students. The method for this pursuit was an explanatory single case study which includes reviewing quantitative & qualitative student feedback survey data and interviews …

The Personality Profile Of China’S Empress Wu Zetian, Ruoyue Wang, Yunyiye Chen, Aubrey Immelman

Psychology Faculty Publications

This paper presents the results of an indirect assessment of the personality of Empress Wu Zetian, de facto ruler of China from 665 to 705, from the conceptual perspective of personologist Theodore Millon.

Psychodiagnostically relevant data about Empress Wu were collected from biographical sources and media reports and synthesized into a personality profile using the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC), which yields 34 normal and maladaptive personality classifications congruent with DSM-III-R, DSM-IV, and DSM-5.

The personality profile yielded by the MIDC was analyzed in accordance with interpretive guidelines provided in the MIDC and Millon Index of …

Faking Is As Faking Does: A Rejoinder To Marcus (2021), Robert P. Tett, Daniel Simonet, Neil D. Christiansen

Personnel Assessment and Decisions

Applicant faking poses serious threats to achieving personality-based fit, negatively affecting both the worker and the organization. In articulating this “faking-is-bad” (FIB) position, Tett and Simonet (2021) identify Marcus’ (2009) self-presentation theory (SPT) as representative of the contrarian “faking-is-good” camp by its advancement of self-presentation as beneficial in hiring contexts. In this rejoinder, we address 20 of Marcus’ (2021) claims in highlighting his reliance on an outdated empiricist rendering of validity, loosely justified rejection of the negative and moralistic “faking” label, disregard for the many challenges posed by blatant forms of faking, inattention to faking research supporting the FIB position, …