Interpreting Convergences and Divergences in Multi-Informant, Multi-Method Assessment

Individuals often vary in how they display signs and symptoms of personality disturbances and psychopathology. As such, comprehensive assessments of these signs and symptoms ought to capture how they manifest within and across time and contexts (e.g., community, home, work). Contexts may vary in the degree to which they influence personality and psychopathology concerns. Thus, practitioners and researchers often rely on multiple informants and methodologies to characterize intervention targets, monitor intervention progress, and inform the selection of evidence-based services. Across research teams and assessment domains, researchers commonly observe diverging outcomes among assessments, depending on the informant and/or method. We review theory and research that demonstrates how patterns of divergence observed in multi-informant, multi-method assessments represent valid individual differences in clinical presentations. This divergence may inform interpretations of personality and psychopathology functioning clinically, and we advance a research agenda to improve their use when assessing and diagnosing adult personality and psychopathology. [At time of submission to ERIC this chapter was in press with J. Mihura (Ed.), "The Oxford Handbook of Personality and Psychopathology Assessment." 2nd Edition. New York, NY: Oxford.]