Can Happiness Apps Generate Nationally Representative Datasets? - a Case Study Collecting Data on People’s Happiness Using the German Socio-Economic Panel

In the last few years, apps have become an important tool to collect data. Especially in the case of data on people’s happiness, two projects have received substantial attention from both the media and the scientific world: “Track your happiness” from Killingsworth and Gilbert (Science, 330, 932-932, 2010), and “Mappiness,” from MacKerron (2012). Both happiness apps used the experience sampling method to ask people a few times per day how they feel, what they do, with whom, and where. The collected data are then displayed for the participants in simple graphs to help them understand what makes them happy and what does not. Both studies have collected considerable data without giving participants any financial rewards. But quantity is not everything that matters with respect to data collection, and thus, understanding whether nationally representative datasets can be collected using such happiness apps is crucial. To address this question, we built a new happiness app and ran a case-study with over 4000 participants of the innovation sample of the German Socio-Economic Panel (Richter and Schupp in Schmollers Jahrbuch, 135(3), 389–399, 2015). Participants were informed that the app collects data on everyday happiness after a household interview and asked whether they would like to use the app. In the first year (2015), participants did not receive any reward, and in the second year (2016), a different group of participants received a 50 Euro Amazon voucher for their participation. The results showed that our happiness app cannot generate nationally representative datasets if it is not controlled that all demographic sub-groups have access to a smartphone, are highly motivated with a sufficient reward and data is collected with quota sampling.

     

The criterion-related validity of conscientiousness in personnel selection: A meta-analytic reality check

A key finding in personnel selection is the positive correlation between conscientiousness and job performance. Evidence predominantly stems from concurrent validation studies with incumbent samples but is readily generalized to predictive settings with job applicants. This is problematic because the extent to which faking and changes in personality affect the measurement likely vary across samples and study designs. Therefore, we meta-analytically investigated the relation between conscientiousness and job performance, examining the moderating effects of sample type (incumbent vs. applicant) and validation design (concurrent vs. predictive). The overall correlation of conscientiousness and job performance was in line with previous meta-analyses ($\overline{r}=.17,k=102,n=23,305$). In our analyses, the correlation did not differ across validation designs (concurrent: $\overline{r}=.18,k=78,n=19,132$; predictive: $\overline{r}=.15,k=24,n=4173$), sample types (incumbents: $\overline{r}=.18,k=92,n=20,808$; applicants: $\overline{r}=.14,k=10,n=2497$), or their interaction. Critically, however, our review revealed that only a small minority of studies (~12%) were conducted with real applicants in predictive designs. Thus, barely a fraction of research is conducted under realistic conditions. Therefore, it remains an open question if self-report measures of conscientiousness retain their predictive validity in applied settings that entail faked responses. We conclude with a call for more multivariate research on the validity of selection procedures in predictive settings with actual applicants.     

Young children use pedagogical cues to modulate the strength of normative inferences

Young children understand pedagogical demonstrations as conveying generic, kind‐relevant information. But, in some contexts, they also see almost any confident, intentional action on a novel artefact as normative and thus generic, regardless of whether this action was pedagogically demonstrated for them. Thus, although pedagogy may not be necessary for inferences to the generic, it may nevertheless be sufficient to produce inductive inferences on which the child relies more strongly. This study addresses this tension by bridging the literature on normative reasoning with that on social learning and inductive inference. Three‐year‐old children learned about a novel artefact from either a pedagogical or non‐pedagogical demonstration, and then, a series of new actors acted on that artefact in novel ways. Although children protested normatively in both conditions (e.g., ‘No, not like that’), they persisted longer in enforcing the learned norms in the face of repeated non‐conformity by the new actors. This finding suggests that not all generic, normative inferences are created equal, but rather they depend – at least for their strength – on the nature of the acquisition process.     

Early language outcomes in Argentinean toddlers: Associations with home literacy,screen exposure and joint media engagement

This study aimed to analyse the contribution of mothers' home literacy beliefs and practices and the quantity and quality of screen media exposure on Argentinean toddler's language. In addition, we considered parent–child joint engagement, as well as adult scaffolding behaviours during the use of electronic devices. A total of 465 mothers of 18–36 months old children completed an online survey including: the MacArthur Bates CDI, home literacy, screen exposure, joint engagement and scaffolding questionnaires. We observed positive effects of literacy beliefs, PC times and verbal scaffolding on language outcomes. TV exposure contributed negatively to vocabulary and, along with educational content, to sentence use. Shared reading and screen media experiences can be an opportunity for language stimulation, provided there is dialogue and joint engagement. Passive screen exposure and inadequate content may be detrimental for toddlers' language outcomes, probably by displacement of socially significant interactions.