名字里有什么?探索自我信念构念之间的重叠

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Lindsay S. Ackerman, Richard E. Lucas
{"title":"名字里有什么?探索自我信念构念之间的重叠","authors":"Lindsay S. Ackerman,&nbsp;Richard E. Lucas","doi":"10.1016/j.jrp.2025.104631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Jingle-jangle fallacies, which are pervasive in psychology, complicate measurement, propagate confusion among scholars, and weaken the conclusions researchers can draw from their studies. In the present study (<em>N</em> = 1,258), we investigated these issues in the domain of self-belief constructs (self-efficacy, self-competence, self-confidence, self-esteem, self-worth, self-value, self-regard, self-liking, and self-respect). Exploratory factor analyses at the scale- and item-levels provided evidence of significant overlap among constructs. A two-factor solution may be best supported by the data, where self-efficacy constitutes one factor and all other constructs the second (though where self-competence falls is less clear). Ultimately, these findings draw attention to the need for clear and concise construct definitions, precise and well-validated measurement instruments, and careful consideration when researchers propose new constructs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Personality","volume":"117 ","pages":"Article 104631"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What’s in a name? Exploring overlap among self-belief constructs\",\"authors\":\"Lindsay S. Ackerman,&nbsp;Richard E. Lucas\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jrp.2025.104631\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Jingle-jangle fallacies, which are pervasive in psychology, complicate measurement, propagate confusion among scholars, and weaken the conclusions researchers can draw from their studies. In the present study (<em>N</em> = 1,258), we investigated these issues in the domain of self-belief constructs (self-efficacy, self-competence, self-confidence, self-esteem, self-worth, self-value, self-regard, self-liking, and self-respect). Exploratory factor analyses at the scale- and item-levels provided evidence of significant overlap among constructs. A two-factor solution may be best supported by the data, where self-efficacy constitutes one factor and all other constructs the second (though where self-competence falls is less clear). Ultimately, these findings draw attention to the need for clear and concise construct definitions, precise and well-validated measurement instruments, and careful consideration when researchers propose new constructs.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Personality\",\"volume\":\"117 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104631\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Personality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656625000637\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Personality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656625000637","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

叮当声谬误在心理学中普遍存在,它使测量复杂化,使学者之间产生混乱,削弱了研究者从研究中得出的结论。在本研究中(N = 1,258),我们在自我信念构念(自我效能、自我能力、自信、自尊、自我价值、自我价值、自我关注、自我喜欢和自尊)领域调查了这些问题。在量表和项目水平上的探索性因素分析提供了结构之间显著重叠的证据。数据可能最能支持双因素解决方案,其中自我效能感构成一个因素,所有其他因素构成第二个因素(尽管自我能力落在哪里不太清楚)。最终,这些发现引起了人们对清晰和简洁的结构定义、精确和有效的测量工具以及研究人员提出新结构时仔细考虑的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What’s in a name? Exploring overlap among self-belief constructs
Jingle-jangle fallacies, which are pervasive in psychology, complicate measurement, propagate confusion among scholars, and weaken the conclusions researchers can draw from their studies. In the present study (N = 1,258), we investigated these issues in the domain of self-belief constructs (self-efficacy, self-competence, self-confidence, self-esteem, self-worth, self-value, self-regard, self-liking, and self-respect). Exploratory factor analyses at the scale- and item-levels provided evidence of significant overlap among constructs. A two-factor solution may be best supported by the data, where self-efficacy constitutes one factor and all other constructs the second (though where self-competence falls is less clear). Ultimately, these findings draw attention to the need for clear and concise construct definitions, precise and well-validated measurement instruments, and careful consideration when researchers propose new constructs.
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
5.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
102
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Emphasizing experimental and descriptive research, the Journal of Research in Personality presents articles that examine important issues in the field of personality and in related fields basic to the understanding of personality. The subject matter includes treatments of genetic, physiological, motivational, learning, perceptual, cognitive, and social processes of both normal and abnormal kinds in human and animal subjects. Features: • Papers that present integrated sets of studies that address significant theoretical issues relating to personality. • Theoretical papers and critical reviews of current experimental and methodological interest. • Single, well-designed studies of an innovative nature. • Brief reports, including replication or null result studies of previously reported findings, or a well-designed studies addressing questions of limited scope.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信