38978 research outputs found
Sort by
Words without Power: Reduced Agency as a Linguistic Signature of Low Mood and Self-Esteem
No full textSituations Meet Mobile Sensing Methods: Prospects for Research on Person-Situation Relations
No full textUnderstanding the dynamic interplay of persons and situations is central to explaining human behavior and experience. Although personality psychology has made substantial progress in
conceptualizing and studying situations over the past decade, current approaches remain limited by their reliance on self-reports, which constrains the assessment of objective and temporally fine-grained situational information in everyday life. New technologies, such as mobile sensing methods, have been proposed to overcome these limitations by providing continuously collected data. Yet despite this potential, mobile sensing has not been fully integrated into situational assessment. To address this gap from a conceptual point of view, we identify three key challenges in situation research that hinder the investigation of person-situation relations and where mobile sensing can have great impact: (1) the neglect of objective situation cues and situation classes, (2) insufficient differentiation between person and situation measures, and (3) limited attention to within-situation dynamics. For each challenge, we outline next steps for integrating mobile sensing, discuss potential hurdles, and suggest possible solutions. We conclude by highlighting how aligning current challenges in situation research with mobile sensing methods can advance the study of person-situation relations with unprecedented ecological validity and temporal resolution
Gender Stereotypes and Employees' Job Satisfaction
No full textThis working paper examines the relationship between gender stereotype endorsement and job satisfaction among 71 urban employees in India. It was hypothesized that stronger stereotype perceptions would be associated with lower job satisfaction. However, results revealed a statistically significant positive correlation (r = .32, p = .01), suggesting that alignment between internalized gender-role expectations and organizational norms may contribute to professional satisfaction. The study employs a newly developed Gender Stereotype Scale currently undergoing psychometric validation. As an exploratory preprint, these findings provide a preliminary foundation for future research on gender-role internalization and workplace well-being in the Indian context
A multi-method approach to measuring intellectual humility
No full textIntellectual Humility (IH) refers to a person’s disposition to recognize, acknowledge and handle one’s intellectual fallibilities and limitations. In philosophical accounts, IH has been considered an intellectual virtue – a character trait or behavioral disposition that serves the pursuit of truth and acquisition of knowledge and thus should be fostered and cultivated in individuals and society (e.g., Zagzebski & Zagzebski, 1996; Whitecomb et al., 2017; Barrett & Church, 2016). First empirical investigations indicate positive associations between indicators of IH and personal and societal well-being and success (see Leary, 2018; Porter et al., 2022 for reviews). Based on such findings, interest in measuring and studying the psychological basis auf IH has recently grown across psychological subfields including social, personality, cognitive, developmental, educational and organizational research (Porter et al., 2021, 2022).
In psychology various conceptualizations of IH have been suggested and operationalizations in empirical studies still vary widely (Porter et al., 2021). However, in most psychological accounts IH is considered a cognitive or metacognitive phenomenon that describes how people process information or think about their thoughts and mental states (Leary, 2018). A core component of IH identified across definitions is the disposition to recognize that one’s beliefs or attitudes may be incorrect or limited (Porter et al., 2022; Leary, 2018; Barrett & Church, 2017; Hopkin et al, 2014; Krumrei-Mascuso & Rouse, 2016; Leary et al., 2017; Porter & Schumann, 2017; Whitcomb et al., 2017).
Some philosophical accounts have stressed that at its core, IH is fundamentally an interpersonal phenomenon and involves an appreciation of and respect for others as epistemic partners in the search for knowledge (Roberts & Wood, 2003; Priest, 2017; Dalmiya, 2016). Correspondingly, some psychological constructs of IH additionally include social-behavioral or socio-emotional components such as openness to and appreciation of people’s views or the expression of IH in interpersonal disagreements (e.g., Krumrei-Mancuso & Rouse, 2016; Haggard et al., 2018; McElroy et al., 2014). Although the inclusion of social-behavioral dimensions has the advantage of linking the metacognitive core features of IH with motivations and observable behaviors, concerns have been raised that the inclusion of multiple components in its definition may lead to conceptual unclarity and methodological problems when empirically investigating IH in relation to other traits (see Leary, 2018; Porter et al., 2022 for a discussion). In the present research we therefore focus on the metacognitive core as defining feature of IH (the recognition that one’s beliefs or attitudes may be false or biased). However, we agree that the developmental origins or the primordial context of IH in which it typically unfolds may be fundamentally social and thus that IH may be particularly evident in people’s motivations, emotions and behaviors in interpersonal contexts. We therefore include social dimensions of appreciating other people’s perspectives and of expressing IH in context of interpersonal disagreements as important correlates of IH in our investigation.
In most empirical studies, IH is considered a trait, that is, an individual difference characteristic that demonstrates moderate to high stability over time (e.g., weeks, months, and years and across different situational contexts; see Buss, 1989). Consistent with this idea, multiple self-report questionnaires have been developed to assess this trait by asking participants about their global tendency to be intellectually humble. For example, the one-dimensional Intellectual Humility Scale by Leary and colleagues includes items assessing people’s general willingness to recognize the fallibility or limitations of own beliefs and attitudes as well as motivations to seek out new information in the face of conflicting evidence (Leary et al., 2017). Others have developed multi-dimensional instruments to distinguish IH more clearly from other traits that do not meet the theoretical criteria of IH. For example, the Limitation-Owning Intellectual Humility Scale by Haggard and colleagues (based on a philosophical account by Whitcomb et al., 2017) stresses the importance of distinguishing IH from intellectual servility or insecurity and includes three subscales: owning of one’s intellectual limitations, love of learning and appropriate discomfort with one’s limitations, the latter separating appropriate discomfort that inspires further inquiry from general insecurity about one’s intellectual shortcomings (Haggard et al., 2018).
Questionnaires were found to provide valid measures of IH and research with trait questionnaires has been very fruitful in producing insights in the cognitive, emotional and behavioral underpins as well as the influencing factors and associated outcomes of IH (for a review, see Leary, 2018). However, global trait measures also involve important limitations that might be particularly relevant and critical when investigating positive or even virtuous traits and thus may constraint future research questions regarding IH.
First of all, self-report questionnaires heavily rely on people’s capacity and motivation to adequately assess and report on their character traits and abilities. This means that if the trait under investigation demands a high degree of personal insight or self-assessment skills, self-reports may be particularly prone to noise or errors (e.g., Kunzmann, 2019). Metacognitive abilities and adequate self-assessment are in fact core aspects of IH, meaning that people with a high degree of IH may also assess their degree of IH more realistically or critically than people with a lower degree of IH. Furthermore, self-reports of traits that are considered as a positive or desirable characteristic within a society are particularly prone to self-presentation biases. People may want to be regarded as intellectually humble and thus (consciously or unconsciously) try to present themselves overly positive in this matter. Again, it could be that people who are actually intellectually humble may be more likely to overcome such biases and thus, in the worst case, end up scoring lower than people who are less humble in self-report measures of IH.
Second, in trait questionnaires people are asked to provide an estimate of their global tendency to engage in IH, independently of any particular context or situation. On the one hand, it could be argued that such judgments might be particularly demanding in terms of the required self-assessment skills since people have to provide an integrated judgement of how they experience themselves across many different instances. On the other hand, global measures neglect important aspects of traits that are only observable within particular contexts or across many different instances. Following seminal work conducted by Nesselroade and others, we assume that all traits have stable trait-like components and variable state-like components, the latter varying over different situations (Hamaker, Nesselroade, & Molenaar, 2007, Fleeson, 2001). Thus, the question arises how much intellectual humility varies in daily life and whether individuals differ not only in the average levels of IH, but also in the extent to which their level of IH varies from situation to situation.
Some studies have investigated IH as a state within a particular context, for example, by asking people about their level of IH with respect to specific issues, topics or instances of disagreement (e.g., Hoyle et al., 2016). Research on wise-reasoning has also begun to assess aspects of IH (as one of several components of wisdom) across different interpersonal contexts. For example, Brienza and colleagues asked people to recall specific life events involving interpersonal conflict and to provide ratings on how much attention they paid to their intellectual limitations in these contexts (Brienza et al., 2017, 2018). These studies have indicated that contextualized self-reports may indeed be less demanding for participants and less vulnerable to response biases than global self-reports of IH. However, systematic investigations of different aspects of IH across multiple situations are still rare, in particular, systematic analyses of the relationship between global trait and situation-specific measures (Porter et al., 2022).
Furthermore, there are even fewer attempts of establishing measures of IH that go beyond self-reports. A few studies have used peer reports to complement self-report measures and found small to moderate correlations (e.g., Meagher et al., 2015; McElroy et al., 2014). Peer reports may be particularly useful for measuring characteristics of IH that are easily observable by other people in interpersonal contexts or relationships, e.g., how people react to disagreement. Arguably, however, peer reports may have limitations in assessing the cognitive or metacognitive core aspects of IH, e.g., how people think or evaluate their thoughts and mental states, independently of the social behaviors that they may display in front of specific others (Leary, 2018). An alternative for assessing aspects of IH from an “outside perspective”, including indirect measures of its cognitive or metacognitive components, would be the operationalization of indicators of IH in context of behavioral tasks. Such methods are more cost- and time-intensive than questionnaires but may be particularly useful for complementing self-reports of IH since they have the advantage of keeping the effects of self-representation biases low (since people may not even be aware of the criteria based on which they are assessed in a given task) and at the same time allow for independent observations and a systematic comparison of different aspects of IH across multiple contexts and situations. So far there are only very few attempts of operationalizing IH in behavioral tasks, with the few exceptions mainly coming from studies with children where information seeking strategies and question delegation have been used as possible behavioral markers of IH (e.g., Danovitch et al., 2019).
Given the focus of past research on global trait questionnaires and the lag of alternative measures to complement self-reports (in particular when studying IH within and across specific contexts), the main goal of the present research is to develop and test new situation-based measures of IH and to investigate associations between global and situation-based measures as well as self-reports and potential indicators of IH in a behavioral task.
For doing so, we developed two situation-based measures of IH to complement global self-reports of IH:
1) A questionnaire consisting of five vignettes depicting different hypothetical scenarios involving confrontation with one’s intellectual limitations. For each vignette, participants are asked to complete seven items (adapted from established trait questionnaires) assessing their level of IH in the specific situation described.
2) A behavioral task consisting of 32 short vignettes each depicting an emotionally challenging life event. For each vignette, participants are asked to reflect and think aloud about their inner states, thoughts and emotions. The transcripts of the think-aloud protocols will be coded according to the metacognitive and socio-behavioral aspects of IH, based on a coding system that we developed in accordance with core components of IH that have been identified by past research (e.g., Porter et al., 2022).
In the study we collect data with adults and assess situation-based IH with these two new measures as well as global trait IH with two established global trait questionnaires (the Intellectual Humility Scale by Leary et al., 2017 and the Limitation-Owning Intellectual Humility by Haggard et al., 2018).
First, we aim at replicating previous findings showing that at trait-level, the two different self-report questionnaires are well correlated with regard to the meta-cognitive core component of IH and associated with interpersonal and socio-emotional traits that have been theoretically and empirically established as important correlates of IH (e.g., empathy, perspective-taking, prosociality, personality traits of agreeableness and openness to experience).
Second, we will extend previous research by testing IH with the two new situation-based measures and by showing associations between global trait self-reports, situation-based self-reports (averaged across five situations) and indicators of IH in people’s reflections on their inner states in the think-aloud protocols (averaged across 32 different emotional contexts).
Third, we aim at extending previous research by providing a first analysis of the extent of variability of self-report measures of IH across five specific situations and of indicators of IH in think-aloud protocols across 32 different emotional contexts
Code for "Computational signatures of exertion and rest underlie moment-to-moment dynamics of subjective perceptions of effort and fatigue"
No full textCode for manuscript "Computational signatures of exertion and rest underlie moment‑to‑moment dynamics of subjective perceptions of effort and fatigue" published in Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience in 202
Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Interprofessional Practice and Education: A Scoping Review Protocol
No full textThis scoping review will map existing evidence on artificial intelligence applications that support interprofessional education and interprofessional practice in healthcare. The review will follow Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and will be reported per the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Databases will include Medline (Ovid), Education Research Complete (Ebsco), Emcare (Ovid), CINAHL Complete (Ebsco), PsycINFO (Ebsco), Scopus, and IEEE Xplore, along with grey literature sources. Two independent reviewers will conduct screening and data extraction. Results will be synthesized using descriptive mapping, IPEC competency alignment, and thematic analysis. Findings will inform development of a conceptual framework for integrating artificial intelligence into interprofessional education and collaborative care environment
Evaluating Unmeasured Confounding Factors in Claims Data Using Linked Electronic Health Records: A Proof-of-Principle Analysis
No full textClaims-based analyses can suffer from residual and unmeasured confounding due to factors that are poorly captured in claims. Some of these factors may be measured in other data sources, such as in structured fields of electronic health records (EHR), e.g., laboratory test results, or in free-text physician notes. We conducted a proof-of-principle study to demonstrate a process for evaluating the potential threat of confounding from factors poorly captured in claims data but measurable in the EHR as part of drug safety surveillance activities. In future practical applications, this approach could be used along with other sensitivity analyses to evaluate potential residual confounding (e.g., E-values, negative controls). We used claims-EHR linked data from the Mass General Brigham site of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Sentinel Real World Evidence Data Enterprise. We extracted a cohort that was previously used in a prototypical Sentinel claims-based query that compared initiators of sacubitril-valsartan versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) on the risk of angioedema. In this cohort, we used EHR data to characterize angioedema risk factors poorly captured in claims and observed that claims-based proxies balanced most risk factors that were measurable only in EHR data. While quantitative bias analysis (QBA) methods can be used to adjust for residual confounding using external information on magnitude and direction of bias, this was deemed unnecessary for this example due to the observed balance achieved on risk factors for angioedema measured in the EHR. A robust linked EHR-claims data infrastructure is crucial for routine application of these methods to evaluate and mitigate residual confounding in drug safety surveillance studies
Misdiagnosis of mental health patients in emergency settings: a scoping review
No full textMap existing literature investigating the misdiagnosis of mental health patients in emergency settings when they present with medical symptoms
A demographic theory of similarity-biased social learning
No full textWe develop a demographic theory of similarity-biased social learning that formalizes our understanding of when and why individuals should preferentially copy others that look or act like them. We build an evolutionary model in which individuals can either learn on their own or copy others from a demonstrator pool that contains varying proportions of in-group and out-group members, and where group tags can be more or less informative about local knowledge. We find that where social learning becomes common, selection favors copying biases that track the direction of informational advantage---toward the group that tends to be better adapted to local conditions, including an anti-similarity bias when tags are negatively associated with local correctness (as may be the case for some immigrant communities). We also find conditions in which a similarity bias can stabilize social learning when such learners are already common, but not when they are rare, with implications for the role of group identities in cultural evolution. We discuss implications for understanding parochialism as risk aversion, majority-minority dynamics, the sociology of immigration, and the lasting impacts of colonialism