@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00002020,
 author = {大橋, 正夫 and OHASHI, Masao and 平林, 進 and HIRABAYASHI, Susumu and 長戸, 啓子 and NAGATO, Keiko and 吉田, 俊和 and YOSHIDA, Toshikazu and 佐伯, 道治 and SAHEKI, Michiharu},
 journal = {名古屋大學教育學部紀要. 教育心理学科},
 month = {Sep},
 note = {The present study has two purposes. The first is to investigate the differential effects of interview vs. questionnaire method upon personality impression ratings. The second is to cast some lights upon the importance of using not only a "like-dislike" scale but also some scales which represent important personality dimensions. Ninety-nine female undergraduates served as subjects in the interview method. They were given one of three sets of stimulus each of which is composed of two personality traits, and asked to describe orally impressions of each of three stimulus-persons (SP) who were described by each of two traits and by both two traits. Then they were asked to rate impressions of each SP on ten personality-rating scales (7-points) and a "like-dislike" scale (21-points) After description followed by ratings of the first, of the second, and of the third SP, they were asked to answer the questions about changes of denotation of each trait when presented in a set from presented alone, and to rate the relative degree of contribution of the two traits in making impressions of the two-size SP, difficulty of making images of SPs in mind, and the degree of relatedness of the two traits. In the questionnaire method, subjects were two hundreds and fifteen female undergraduates. They were given two sets and were asked to rate six SPs on twelve rating scales, which were composed of the same eleven scales as in the interview method and 7-points "like-dislike" scale. Stimulus sets were also the same as in the interview method. They were not asked to describe SPs verbally. The rersults obtained are as follows : (1) 11 rating scales were classified into three groups, referring results obtained by means of factor analysis. They were designated as the social desirability scales (4 scales), the activity scales (2), and others (5), respectively. (2) Three response patterns were discriminated in terms of the relationship among the three rating values in the set : the averaging, the additive, and the odd. The odd pattern which were unaccountable by any of linear models, appeared more frequently in the interview than the questionnaire method. The rest were, on the other hand, observed more frequently in the questionnaire than in the interview method. (3) Fitness of data obtained to the simple averaging model was better in the questionnaire than in the interview method. (4) The odd pattern appeared more frequently and fitness to the simple averging model was worse in the social desirability scales than in the activity scales., 国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。},
 pages = {83--102},
 title = {<原著>性格の印象評定における面接法と質問紙法},
 volume = {22},
 year = {1975}
}