Why has personality psychology played an outsized role in the credibility revolution?

Abstract

Personality is not the most popular subfield of psychology. But, in one way or another, personality psychologists have played an outsized role in the ongoing “credibility revolution” in psychology. Not only have individual personality psychologists taken on visible roles in the movement, but our field’s practices and norms have now become models for other fields to emulate (or, for those who share Baumeister’s (2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.003) skeptical view of the consequences of increasing rigor, a model for what to avoid). In this article we discuss some unique features of our field that may have placed us in an ideal position to be leaders in this movement. We do so from a subjective perspective, describing our impressions and opinions about possible explanations for personality psychology’s disproportionate role in the credibility revolution. We also discuss some ways in which personality psychology remains less-than-optimal, and how we can address these flaws. An account of personality psychology’s outsized role in the credibility revolution. Strengths include historical events, field norms, and methodological/statistical approaches. Weaknesses include methodological/statistical approaches, establishing causality, and diversity/generalizability. This is our subjective perspective. We might be wrong. In the future, philosophers of science, historians, and researchers alike may want to understand what it was like “living” through the credibility revolution in psychology and beyond. We provide our subjective view as personality psychologists.