| Abstract: | Responds to M. Zuckerman's (see record 1984-00261-001) comment on the authors' (see record 1982-09834-001) paper that argued that trait–state distinctions are arbitrary. It is concluded that without the state–trait distinction, psychologists would be free to use whatever measure "works best" for a given task and thus, state–trait labels for methods of measurement would no longer act as prohibitions against the use of the methods wherever these might provide successful prediction. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
