揭示黑暗三合会自我评价中的隐藏框架:人们在回答一般的 "黑暗三元组 "项目时会使用什么参照框架?

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-29 DOI:10.1177/10731911231220357
Julian Schulze, Manuel Heinrich, Jan-Philipp Freudenstein, Philipp Schäpers, Stefan Krumm
{"title":"揭示黑暗三合会自我评价中的隐藏框架:人们在回答一般的 \"黑暗三元组 \"项目时会使用什么参照框架?","authors":"Julian Schulze, Manuel Heinrich, Jan-Philipp Freudenstein, Philipp Schäpers, Stefan Krumm","doi":"10.1177/10731911231220357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In typical Dark Triad (DT) questionnaires, generic items oftentimes refer to \"others\" or \"people\" in general. Hence, respondents have to mentally aggregate their behavior across several kinds of \"others\" (e.g., work colleagues, family members, and friends). It remains unknown if individuals consider different kinds of interaction partners equally or if their self-reports contain \"hidden\" interaction partner-specific tendencies. To shed light on this issue, we assessed generic and contextualized DT items (referring to family, friends, work, and strangers; <i>N</i> = 814 from the general population). The correlated trait-correlated (method - 1) model was used to investigate preregistered research questions. On average, generic DT items showed the strongest association with work-contextualized DT items and the weakest association with family-contextualized DT items. However, the associations varied considerably across DT items and traits. In sum, our results suggest that hidden framings exist in some DT items, which may impact their ability to predict relevant criteria due to contextual (a)symmetries. The generalizability of the findings to other DT instruments, items, and participant groups should be examined in future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11411850/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uncovering Hidden Framings in Dark Triad Self-Ratings: What Frames-of-Reference Do People Use When Responding to Generic Dark Triad Items?\",\"authors\":\"Julian Schulze, Manuel Heinrich, Jan-Philipp Freudenstein, Philipp Schäpers, Stefan Krumm\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10731911231220357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In typical Dark Triad (DT) questionnaires, generic items oftentimes refer to \\\"others\\\" or \\\"people\\\" in general. Hence, respondents have to mentally aggregate their behavior across several kinds of \\\"others\\\" (e.g., work colleagues, family members, and friends). It remains unknown if individuals consider different kinds of interaction partners equally or if their self-reports contain \\\"hidden\\\" interaction partner-specific tendencies. To shed light on this issue, we assessed generic and contextualized DT items (referring to family, friends, work, and strangers; <i>N</i> = 814 from the general population). The correlated trait-correlated (method - 1) model was used to investigate preregistered research questions. On average, generic DT items showed the strongest association with work-contextualized DT items and the weakest association with family-contextualized DT items. However, the associations varied considerably across DT items and traits. In sum, our results suggest that hidden framings exist in some DT items, which may impact their ability to predict relevant criteria due to contextual (a)symmetries. The generalizability of the findings to other DT instruments, items, and participant groups should be examined in future research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11411850/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911231220357\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911231220357","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在典型的 "黑暗三联征"(DT)问卷中,通用项目往往泛指 "他人 "或 "人"。因此,受访者不得不在心理上将他们的行为与几种 "他人"(如工作同事、家庭成员和朋友)进行综合。个人对不同类型的互动伙伴是否一视同仁,或者他们的自我报告是否包含了 "隐藏的 "互动伙伴特定倾向,这一点仍然不得而知。为了揭示这个问题,我们评估了通用的和情境化的 DT 项目(指家人、朋友、同事和陌生人;N = 814,来自普通人群)。相关特质相关(方法 - 1)模型用于调查预先登记的研究问题。平均而言,一般 DT 项目与工作情境化 DT 项目的相关性最强,而与家庭情境化 DT 项目的相关性最弱。然而,不同 DT 项目和特质之间的关联差异很大。总之,我们的研究结果表明,某些 DT 项目中存在隐藏的框架,这可能会由于情境(a)对称性而影响其预测相关标准的能力。在未来的研究中,我们将研究这些发现对其他 DT 工具、项目和参与者群体的普遍适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Uncovering Hidden Framings in Dark Triad Self-Ratings: What Frames-of-Reference Do People Use When Responding to Generic Dark Triad Items?

In typical Dark Triad (DT) questionnaires, generic items oftentimes refer to "others" or "people" in general. Hence, respondents have to mentally aggregate their behavior across several kinds of "others" (e.g., work colleagues, family members, and friends). It remains unknown if individuals consider different kinds of interaction partners equally or if their self-reports contain "hidden" interaction partner-specific tendencies. To shed light on this issue, we assessed generic and contextualized DT items (referring to family, friends, work, and strangers; N = 814 from the general population). The correlated trait-correlated (method - 1) model was used to investigate preregistered research questions. On average, generic DT items showed the strongest association with work-contextualized DT items and the weakest association with family-contextualized DT items. However, the associations varied considerably across DT items and traits. In sum, our results suggest that hidden framings exist in some DT items, which may impact their ability to predict relevant criteria due to contextual (a)symmetries. The generalizability of the findings to other DT instruments, items, and participant groups should be examined in future research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信