Current Opinion in Psychology最新文献_第10页

Collective memory and history textbooks 集体记忆与历史教科书

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-18 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102073

Inari Sakki

引用次数: 0

Using multi-method data for more accurate research findings 使用多方法数据获得更准确的研究结果

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-14 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102075

René Mõttus , Samuel J. Henry

{"title":"Using multi-method data for more accurate research findings","authors":"René Mõttus , Samuel J. Henry","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102075","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102075","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The vast majority of personality research is based on a single method: self-reports. As about half of the variance in single-method trait scores is the result of systematic biases and random error, it is likely that most research findings are biased, even well-replicated ones. While some ‘significant’ associations may be entirely artefactual, most are likely to be underestimated, sometimes by as much as 50 %. Unfortunately, this is rarely discussed explicitly, let alone addressed empirically. After explaining the causes and extent of the problem, we argue that it can be effectively addressed by combining personality trait self-ratings with those of knowledgeable informants. To underscore the feasibility of multi-method research, we review recent large-scale studies that have combined self-reports and informant reports to provide more accurate answers to key questions in personality research, such as the heritability of traits and their association with important life outcomes. Since most associations are likely to be underestimated in typical single-method studies, multi-method studies will likely reveal higher correlations with commensurately stronger theoretical and practical implications. For example, single-method studies may have underestimated heritability by around a third and the predictability of life satisfaction from personality traits by around half. Personality psychologists have made great progress in incentivizing more reliable research; it is now time for the field to incentivize valid research, too.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 102075"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144335499","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

(Don’t) tell me more about myself: Willful ignorance of self-related feedback （不要）告诉我更多关于我自己的事情：故意忽视与自我相关的反馈

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-13 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102071

Matthias Burghart, Alicia Seidl, Nicole Casali, Tatiana Khalaf, Isabel Thielmann

引用次数: 0

Corrigendum to “Misinformation and the epistemic integrity of democracy” [Curr Opin Psychol 54 (2023) 101711] “错误信息和民主的认知完整性”的勘误表，《当代心理学意见》，54 (2023),101711

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-11 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102072

Stephan Lewandowsky , Ullrich K.H. Ecker , John Cook , Sander van der Linden , Jon Roozenbeek , Naomi Oreskes

引用次数: 0

Evolutionary theory and personality 进化论与人格

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-06 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102069

Anthony A. Volk , Alexandra Puchalski

引用次数: 0

The polygenic and poly-environmental nature of personality 人格的多基因性和多环境性

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-06 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102068

Christian Kandler , Jana Instinske

引用次数: 0

Personality and personnel selection: Going beyond self-reports and linear relationships 个性与人员选择：超越自我报告和线性关系

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-03 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102058

Filip Lievens , Jinyan Fan , Jingyi Li

引用次数: 0

Faking on personality assessments in high-stakes settings: A critical review 高风险环境下的人格评估造假：一篇批判性评论

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-02 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102057

Patrick D. Dunlop , Mengting (Rachel) Xia , Jeromy Anglim

引用次数: 0

Personality and job performance: A review of trait models and recent trends 人格与工作表现：特质模型及其最新趋势综述

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-05-30 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102054

Jan Luca Pletzer , Loes Abrahams

{"title":"Personality and job performance: A review of trait models and recent trends","authors":"Jan Luca Pletzer , Loes Abrahams","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102054","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102054","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Personality traits are among the strongest non-cognitive predictors of job performance, but many trait models exist that are used to predict different performance outcomes. To structure and synthesize this vast amount of research, we review empirical evidence and emerging trends regarding the relations of the Big Five, HEXACO, and Dark Triad traits with three indicators of job performance (i.e., task performance, organizational citizenship behavior [OCB], and counterproductive work behavior [CWB]). We find that personality traits explain most variance in CWB, followed by OCB, and then task performance. Conscientiousness is the strongest predictor across performance outcomes, and the HEXACO traits explain more variance in job performance than the Big Five or Dark Triad traits. Yet, traits do not operate in isolation, but rather interact with situational characteristics in guiding behavior (e.g., trait activation). As such, accounting for situational characteristics can further increase the validity of personality for performance. Moreover, we review recent trends in personality-performance research, such as personality development and dynamics, non-self-rated personality measures, and the use of artificial intelligence (AI). We conclude by highlighting practical implications of our findings for personnel selection and for increasing person-job fit.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 102054"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144237446","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The altruistic personality: Insights from research with extraordinary altruists 利他主义人格：来自对非凡利他主义者研究的见解

IF 6.3 2区心理学

Current Opinion in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-05-29 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102055

Paige Amormino, Joseph S. Venticinque, Abigail A. Marsh

{"title":"The altruistic personality: Insights from research with extraordinary altruists","authors":"Paige Amormino, Joseph S. Venticinque, Abigail A. Marsh","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102055","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102055","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Humans possess a remarkable capacity for altruism, frequently providing help to a wide range of beneficiaries, including strangers. But people also vary in their tendency to behave altruistically. A small subset of people engages in extraordinary altruism: rare, costly, non-normative acts such as non-directed organ or marrow donation, heroic rescues, and humanitarian aid work. These extraordinary altruists may be a uniquely valuable population for identifying traits that underlie altruism. This is because extraordinary altruism typically occurs in contexts that offer few potential self-benefits and have weak or absent social norms, helping isolate dispositional from situational influences. Recent research with extraordinary altruists suggests individual variation in altruism reflects stable differences in how much people value others' welfare relative to their own welfare. Measures that most reliably distinguish extraordinary altruists from controls include the social discounting task and the honesty–humility scale of the HEXACO personality inventory, both of which capture differences in the subjective value of one's own versus other's outcomes. Extraordinary altruists are not distinguished by trait agreeableness or self-reported empathy. However, neuroimaging and behavioral studies find that extraordinary altruists display heightened empathic accuracy and heightened empathic neural responding to others' distress in brain regions implicated in prosocial decision-making. Improved understanding of the traits that distinguish highly altruistic people can offer new insights regarding how to cultivate altruism on a broader scale, for example, through interventions that foster stable increases in how much people value others' welfare.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 102055"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144237353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0