Multi-method personality assessment of butchers and hunters: Beliefs and reality

Martin Voracek, Daniela Gabler, Carmen Kreutzer, Stefan Stieger, Viren Swami, Anton K. Formann

Research output: Journal article (peer-reviewed)Journal article

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two studies examined beliefs about the personality of male butchers and hunters and the factuality of such beliefs. These professions' daily routines involve killing animals and handling their carcasses, acts that could be facilitated by specific personality constellations. Study 1 (102 raters) evidenced perceptions of higher aggressiveness and masculinity of butchers/hunters and higher self-esteem (hunters only), as compared with average men. In contrast, Study 2 found little evidence for the factuality of such beliefs, based on multi-method personality assessments in a case-control design of 96 men (23 and 25 dyads including one butcher or hunter, matched with same-generation, other-occupation friends or relatives). Only implicit, but not explicit, aggressiveness (measured with an Implicit Association Test) was higher in butchers/hunters than in controls. Both masculinity (whether measured unobtrusively [digit ratio, 2D:4D] or explicitly) and self-esteem (whether measured implicitly [name-letter effect] or explicitly) were comparable for butchers/hunters and controls. Lower self-reported conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness in butchers/hunters than controls were not generalizable to informant reports of these Big Five dimensions. Discussion focuses on the merits of utilizing belief-factuality contrasts, controlled designs, and multi-method assessments in personality research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)819-822
Number of pages4
JournalPersonality and Individual Differences
Volume49
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Multi-method personality assessment of butchers and hunters: Beliefs and reality'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this