Abstract
Two studies were conducted (Ns # 48 and 36 men and women undergraduate and graduate students) to assess the stability of the Personal Responsibility (PR) rating system over time and under stress. A third study (N # 48 men and women graduate students) evaluated the validity of PR using an experienced clinical psychologist as a referent. It was found that (a) PR ratings were highly reliable (r # .86); (b) high PR people were more personally responsible after a stress situation than low PR people (p < .001); and (c) PR ratings had construct validity when compared with an experienced Ph.D. level psychologist's ratings of psychological effectiveness.

This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit: