Comparing Chinese youth with American youth on adjustment: An illustration of measurement issues in cross-cultural research

In this article, we used results from two studies to show the need to go beyond linguistic equivalence to establish construct validity and measurement invariance in cross-cultural research. Study 1 examined Rosenberg Self-Esteem (RSE; 10 items) data from 156 Mainland Chinese youth (M = 13.8 years, SD = .53) and 213 Chinese-American youth (M = 13.6 years, SD = 2.1) from high socioeconomic status (SES) families. The Chinese translation of the RSE has been widely used. Study 2 included 1060 Mainland Chinese youth (M = 15.6 years, SD = 2.3) and 412 racially diverse American youth (M = 16.0, SD = 2.9) from all SES backgrounds. Data were collected with the third and newest edition of the Behavioural Assessment System for Children-Self Report of Personality (BASC-3-SRP; 189 items). We translated and back-translated the BASC-3-SRP between English and Chinese to establish linguistic equivalence. All participants were females. Study 1 showed that the RSE had acceptable internal consistency but lacked construct validity. Study 2 showed that the original and the translated BASC-3-SRP had good internal consistency and construct validity, but nine of its 16 subscales lacked measurement invariance. These results highlight measurement issues facing international and cross-cultural research.     

大学生主观童年创伤症状对抑郁的影响:抗挫折能力和外向性的多重中介效应

本研究将"童年创伤"定义为"个体14岁以前所经历的,站在主体的角度主观感受到的创伤性事件"。采用问卷调查法对302名大学生进行调查,通过定量加定性的方式探索了童年创伤与抑郁之间的关系。相关分析表明：主观童年创伤症状、外向性、抗挫折能力、抑郁之间两两显著相关;结构方程模型表明：主观童年创伤症状通过外向性、抗挫折能力完全、多重中介作用间接预测抑郁。本研究结果在理论和实践层面对大学生抑郁问题的预防和干预工作提供重要的借鉴依据。     

Choosing what to choose from: Preference for inclusion over exclusion when constructing consideration sets from large choice sets

Decision making is a two‐stage process, consisting of, first, consideration set construction and then final choice. Decision makers can form a consideration set from a choice set using one of two strategies: including the options they wish to further consider or excluding those they do not wish to further consider. The authors propose that decision makers have a relative preference for an inclusion (vs. exclusion) strategy when choosing from large choice sets and that this preference is driven primarily by a lay belief that inclusion requires less effort than exclusion, particularly in large choice sets. Study 1 demonstrates that decision makers prefer using an inclusion (vs. exclusion) strategy when faced with large choice sets. Study 2 replicates the effect of choice set size on preference for consideration set construction strategy and demonstrates that the belief that exclusion is more effortful mediates the relative preference for inclusion in large choice sets. Studies 3 and 4 further support the importance of perceived effort, demonstrating a greater preference for inclusion in large choice sets when decision makers are primed to think about effort (vs. accuracy; Study 3) and when the choice set is perceived as requiring more effort because of more information being presented about each alternative (vs. more alternatives in the choice set; Study 4). Finally, Study 5 manipulates consideration set construction strategy, showing that using inclusion (vs. exclusion) in large choice sets leads to smaller consideration sets, greater confidence in the decision process, and a higher quality consideration set.     

Correction to: Office Housework,Burnout, and Promotion: Does Gender Matter?

Journal of Business and Psychology - In the final version of the publication, the acknowledgement was missing. The data were supported by an ERC pilot grant, and they should be acknowledged.     

中国人社会善念的心理结构

为探究中国人社会善念的心理结构, 研究采用人格词汇法, 在开放调查收集的词汇中选取代表社会善念的心理词语, 确立了社会善念词库。通过两次探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析, 得到包含18个人格特质词的社会善念词汇评定量表和包含17项描述的社会善念自陈量表。研究表明, 中国人的社会善念是一种具有二阶四因素结构的人际特质, 二阶是指宜人特质和外倾特质, 四因素分别是善良尊重、谦和恭逊、包容理解和积极开放。     

Pre‐registration is a Game Changer. But,Like Random Assignment,it is Neither Necessary Nor Sufficient for Credible Science

We identify 15 claims Pham and Oh (2020) make to argue against pre‐registration. We agree with 7 of the claims, but think that none of them justify delaying the encouragement and adoption of pre‐registration. Moreover, while the claim they make in their title is correct—pre‐registration is neither necessary nor sufficient for a credible science—this is also true of many our science’s most valuable tools, such as random assignment. Indeed, both random assignment and pre‐registration lead to more credible research. Pre‐registration is a game changer.     

Pre‐registration: Why and How

In this article, we (1) discuss the reasons why pre‐registration is a good idea, both for the field and individual researchers, (2) respond to arguments against pre‐registration, (3) describe how to best write and review a pre‐registration, and (4) comment on pre‐registration’s rapidly accelerating popularity. Along the way, we describe the (big) problem that pre‐registration can solve (i.e., false positives caused by p‐hacking), while also offering viable solutions to the problems that pre‐registration cannot solve (e.g., hidden confounds or fraud). Pre‐registration does not guarantee that every published finding will be true, but without it you can safely bet that many more will be false. It is time for our field to embrace pre‐registration, while taking steps to ensure that it is done right.     

Using the teaching interaction procedure to train interventionists to implement the Cool versus Not CoolTM procedure

The teaching interaction procedure is a behavior analytic procedure that has been used to target the development of social skills. The teaching interaction procedure consists of labeling the target skill, providing a meaningful rationale, describing the steps of the target skill, modeling the skill, role‐play, and providing feedback throughout the interaction. Although the teaching interaction procedure has been used to teach a variety of social skills for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), it has only been used to train staff in two studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of the teaching interaction procedure to teach three interventionists to implement the Cool versus Not Cool? procedure to target the development of social skills for children diagnosed with ASD. The results of a multiple baseline design demonstrated that the teaching interaction procedure was effective for all three interventionists. Results of the child participants' skill acquisition are also provided.     

自动观点采择：内隐心智化与潜心智化的争议

自动观点采择现象已有很多研究证实, 但其产生机制还存在争议。目前存在内隐心智化与潜心智化两种观点：前者认为自动观点采择是自发采择他人视角的领域特殊加工; 而后者提出自动观点采择实质为反射性注意定向、位置的空间编码等领域一般加工, 模拟了心智化在社会环境中的作用。在内隐心智化和潜心智化可独立或共同运行的基础上, 提出了内隐心智化和潜心智化协同作用模型。未来研究应借助先进的技术手段研究多样的被试群体, 探索自动观点采择的作用机制。     

技术信任和领导信任对企业员工新技术接受的影响

在当今知识经济时代, 新技术的采用对于企业提高核心竞争力至关重要。如何使员工面对新技术带来的风险和不确定性, 信任并接受新技术是企业新技术推广的重要问题。现今学界虽已关注到信任在新技术采用这一过程中的积极作用, 但仍缺乏相关的理论和实证研究, 特别是对于其内在心理机制的解释。为弥补这一研究的不足, 本研究通过分析企业新技术推广情境下, 技术信任和领导信任对员工新技术接受的影响, 并引入了感知风险性与技术自我效能感作为中介变量, 探寻信任影响的内在机制。此外, 还进一步探讨企业文化的调节作用, 从而建构信任与企业员工新技术接受的理论模型, 为企业新技术的推广提出合理建议。