数字数据与人格:人类感知与计算机预测的系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 17.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY
Psychological bulletin Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-16 DOI:10.1037/bul0000430
Joanne Hinds, Adam N Joinson
{"title":"数字数据与人格:人类感知与计算机预测的系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Joanne Hinds, Adam N Joinson","doi":"10.1037/bul0000430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years, our increasing use of technology has resulted in the production of vast amounts of data. Consequently, many researchers have analyzed digital data in attempt to understand its relationship with individuals' personalities. Such endeavors have inspired efforts from divergent fields, resulting in widely dispersed findings that are seldom synthesized. In this two-part study, we draw from two distinct areas of personality prediction across psychology and computer science to explore the convergent validity of self-reports with human perception and machine learning algorithms, the identifiability of the Big Five traits, and the predictability of different types of data. In Study 1, five meta-analyses of human perception studies integrating findings from 24,124 individuals rated across 30 independent samples demonstrated moderate convergent validity across all traits (ranging from ρ = 0.38 for Neuroticism, to ρ = 0.57 for Openness). In Study 2, a multilevel meta-analysis of computer prediction studies reporting 534 effect sizes across 42 studies also demonstrated moderate convergent validity (ρ = 0.30). Multivariate analyses of the significant moderators highlighted that X, Facebook, Sina Weibo, videos, and smartphones had a negative impact on the variance identified. Finally, in synthesizing the extant literature, we discuss the measures used to assess personality and the analytical approaches adopted. We identify the strengths and limitations across each field and explain how interdisciplinary methodologies could advance the testing and development of psychological theory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"727-766"},"PeriodicalIF":17.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital data and personality: A systematic review and meta-analysis of human perception and computer prediction.\",\"authors\":\"Joanne Hinds, Adam N Joinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/bul0000430\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In recent years, our increasing use of technology has resulted in the production of vast amounts of data. Consequently, many researchers have analyzed digital data in attempt to understand its relationship with individuals' personalities. Such endeavors have inspired efforts from divergent fields, resulting in widely dispersed findings that are seldom synthesized. In this two-part study, we draw from two distinct areas of personality prediction across psychology and computer science to explore the convergent validity of self-reports with human perception and machine learning algorithms, the identifiability of the Big Five traits, and the predictability of different types of data. In Study 1, five meta-analyses of human perception studies integrating findings from 24,124 individuals rated across 30 independent samples demonstrated moderate convergent validity across all traits (ranging from ρ = 0.38 for Neuroticism, to ρ = 0.57 for Openness). In Study 2, a multilevel meta-analysis of computer prediction studies reporting 534 effect sizes across 42 studies also demonstrated moderate convergent validity (ρ = 0.30). Multivariate analyses of the significant moderators highlighted that X, Facebook, Sina Weibo, videos, and smartphones had a negative impact on the variance identified. Finally, in synthesizing the extant literature, we discuss the measures used to assess personality and the analytical approaches adopted. We identify the strengths and limitations across each field and explain how interdisciplinary methodologies could advance the testing and development of psychological theory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20854,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological bulletin\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"727-766\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":17.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000430\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000430","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,我们越来越多地使用科技,从而产生了大量数据。因此,许多研究人员对数字数据进行了分析,试图了解这些数据与个人性格之间的关系。这些努力激发了来自不同领域的研究人员的积极性,但研究结果却非常分散,很少得到综合。在这项由两部分组成的研究中,我们从心理学和计算机科学两个不同的人格预测领域出发,探讨了自我报告与人类感知和机器学习算法的趋同有效性、五大特质的可识别性以及不同类型数据的可预测性。在研究 1 中,对人类感知研究进行了五项元分析,整合了 30 个独立样本中 24124 人的评价结果,结果表明所有特质都具有适度的趋同有效性(神经质的趋同有效性为 ρ = 0.38,开放性的趋同有效性为 ρ = 0.57)。在研究 2 中,对 42 项研究中 534 个效应大小的计算机预测研究进行的多层次荟萃分析也证明了中度的趋同有效性(ρ = 0.30)。对重要调节因素的多变量分析表明,X、Facebook、新浪微博、视频和智能手机对所发现的变异具有负面影响。最后,在总结现有文献时,我们讨论了用于评估人格的测量方法和采用的分析方法。我们指出了每个领域的优势和局限性,并解释了跨学科方法如何推动心理学理论的检验和发展。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Digital data and personality: A systematic review and meta-analysis of human perception and computer prediction.

In recent years, our increasing use of technology has resulted in the production of vast amounts of data. Consequently, many researchers have analyzed digital data in attempt to understand its relationship with individuals' personalities. Such endeavors have inspired efforts from divergent fields, resulting in widely dispersed findings that are seldom synthesized. In this two-part study, we draw from two distinct areas of personality prediction across psychology and computer science to explore the convergent validity of self-reports with human perception and machine learning algorithms, the identifiability of the Big Five traits, and the predictability of different types of data. In Study 1, five meta-analyses of human perception studies integrating findings from 24,124 individuals rated across 30 independent samples demonstrated moderate convergent validity across all traits (ranging from ρ = 0.38 for Neuroticism, to ρ = 0.57 for Openness). In Study 2, a multilevel meta-analysis of computer prediction studies reporting 534 effect sizes across 42 studies also demonstrated moderate convergent validity (ρ = 0.30). Multivariate analyses of the significant moderators highlighted that X, Facebook, Sina Weibo, videos, and smartphones had a negative impact on the variance identified. Finally, in synthesizing the extant literature, we discuss the measures used to assess personality and the analytical approaches adopted. We identify the strengths and limitations across each field and explain how interdisciplinary methodologies could advance the testing and development of psychological theory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

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
Psychological bulletin
Psychological bulletin 医学-心理学
CiteScore
33.60
自引率
0.90%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Psychological Bulletin publishes syntheses of research in scientific psychology. Research syntheses seek to summarize past research by drawing overall conclusions from many separate investigations that address related or identical hypotheses. A research synthesis typically presents the authors' assessments: -of the state of knowledge concerning the relations of interest; -of critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in past research; -of important issues that research has left unresolved, thereby directing future research so it can yield a maximum amount of new information.
×
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