. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 May 1.

Published in final edited form as: Eur J Pers. 2010 May 1;24(3):207–221. doi: 10.1002/per.763

Table 2.

Self-informant agreement by informant wording type

	Self-informant correlation

Scale	TIW	MPIW	r_TIW:MPIW
EPDQ scales
Positive valence composite	.34	.39	.61
Distinction	.27	.26	.63
Intellect	.25	.32^*	.57
Attractiveness	.34	.41^*	.54
Self-worth	.29	.29	.64
Depravity	.27	.31	.78
Oddity	.28	.32	.80
M	.29	.33	.65
BFI scales
Neuroticism	.36	.34	.76
Extraversion	.62	.59	.85
Conscientiousness	.43	.41	.73
Agreeableness	.36	.36	.76
Openness	.34	.38	.74
M	.40	.40	.75

Note: N = 606 (303 dyads). TIW, traditional informant wording; MPIW, meta-perception of the target wording; EPDQ, Evaluative Person Descriptors Questionnaire; BFI, Big Five Inventory. All rs ≥.15 are significant (p < .01).

Higher self-informant agreement (p < .05).