Despite enthusiasm for using intensive longitudinal designs to measure day-to-day manifestations of personality underlying differences between people, the validity of personality state scales has yet to be established. In this study, we evaluated the psychometrics of 20-item and 10-item daily, Big Five personality state scales in three independent samples (N = 1,041). We used multilevel models to separately examine the validity of the scales for assessing personality variation at the between- and within-person levels. Results showed that a five-factor structure at both levels fits the data well, the scales had good convergent and discriminative associations with external variables, and personality states captured similar nomological nets as established global, self-report personality inventories. Limitations of the scales were identified (e.g., low reliability, low correlations with external criterion) that point to a need for more, systematic psychometric work. Our findings provide initial support for the use of personality state scales in intensive longitudinal designs to study between-person traits, within-person processes, and their interrelationship.

尽管热衷于使用密集的纵向设计来衡量人与人之间潜在差异的人格日常表现，但人格状态量表的有效性尚未确定。在这项研究中，我们在三个独立样本中评估了 20 项和 10 项每日大五人格状态量表的心理测量（N= 1,041）。我们使用多层次模型来分别检验量表在人与人之间和人内层次上评估人格差异的有效性。结果表明，两个级别的五因素结构都很好地拟合了数据，量表与外部变量具有良好的收敛性和判别性关联，并且人格状态捕获了与已建立的全球自我报告人格清单相似的法则网。确定了量表的局限性（例如，可靠性低、与外部标准的相关性低），这表明需要更多、系统的心理测量工作。我们的研究结果为在强化纵向设计中使用人格状态量表来研究人与人之间的特征、人内部过程及其相互关系提供了初步支持。