The translation and validation of the Mini‐K scale in Japanese

The purpose of this study was to validate the 20‐item Mini‐K scale, which is the short form of the Arizona Life History Battery, as translated into Japanese. Two samples of Japanese adults (N = 2000; 50.0% men; Mage = 40.9 for the first survey; N = 400; 50.0% men; Mage = 42.2 for the second survey) completed a web‐based questionnaire, including the Japanese translation of the Mini‐K. The results showed that the psychometric properties of the Japanese Mini‐K scale were comparable to those of the original English version. The scale had good reliability based on Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω. Convergent validity was demonstrated by the correlation between the Mini‐K scores and life history indicators. In addition, the Mini‐K score was related to both personality and psychosomatic health. The translated scale provides a valid and reliable instrument in Japanese that measures human life‐history strategy.     

简式元认知问卷中文版的心理计量学特性

以大学生为被试,考察简式元认知问卷(BQM)在中国文化背景下的心理计量学特性。采用探索性和验证性因素分析方法对BQM的结构效度进行交叉检验,结果支持了元记忆和元注意的双因子结构;问卷及其因子的内部一致性和重测信度良好;项目分析的结果显示,问卷的条目具有良好的分数分布、区分度和内部一致性;BQM分数与负性情绪、执行功能和睡眠质量的关联性也为效标关联效度提供了支持性证据。上述结果表明BQM中文版具有良好的心理计量学特性,可作为青年群体元认知水平的测量工具。     

基于胜任特征的结构化面试初探

基于胜任特征的结构化面试是对传统结构化面试的优化,有很高的信度和效度。本文从基于胜任特征的结构化面试的内涵、特点、程序以及实施过程中需要注意的问题几个方面进行了深入探讨,对于改善结构化面试的测评功能和深化胜任特征的应用有一定价值。     

The measurement of participant-reported memory across diverse populations and settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire

ABSTRACT

The Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire (MMQ) is a participant-reported measure of memory satisfaction, ability, and strategy use. Initially validated with healthy older adults, it has since been used in many different populations and settings for a variety of purposes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the measurement properties of the MMQ across multiple, diverse studies. Methods: The study was designed using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. We calculated aggregate statistics and evaluated the methodological quality of 29 studies retrieved from PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Results: Analyses revealed high-quality evidence for internal consistency, stability, measurement error, convergent validity, and known-groups validity of the three MMQ scales. There was moderate-quality evidence for responsiveness and structural validity, with some studies identifying separate factors for internal and external memory strategy use. Measurement properties were similar across languages, participant samples, and study designs. Conclusions: The MMQ is a valid, reliable, and responsive measure across diverse settings and populations. Future research is needed to determine whether more detailed information can be obtained from the scales, specifically, internal versus external strategy use.     

Sampling Methods for Identifying Differences in Source Reliability

This study explored observer performance in using across-trial and within-trial variability information to weight sources based on reliability. Three trained observers performed a multi-element, visual signal-detection task under 3 block-type conditions: a fixed block condition and 2 random conditions. In the fixed block condition, the observers had both within- and across-trial variability information to identify differences in source reliability. The random conditions eliminated the across-trial information, leaving only within-trial variability information in 1 case and neither within- nor across-trial variability information in another case. There was a significant block-type effect. Observers could use differences in across-trial variability of individual sources to assign weights. Although there was a difference in the weights assigned to reliable and unreliable sources in the partial-random condition (in which within-trial variability information was available), only 1 participant showed a significant difference in the weight assignment relative to the full-random condition. Thus, altogether, observers were not very efficient at using within-trial variability to weight sources accordingly.     

Test-Retest Reliability of the Emotional Stroop Task: Examining the Paradox of Measurement Change

The Emotional Stroop (ES) task (I. H. Gotlib & C. D. McCann, 1984) has been proposed as an experimental measure to assess the processing of emotion or the bias in attention of emotion-laden information. However, study results have not been consistent. To further examine its reliability for empirical research, the authors of this study administered the ES task to 33 participants on 2 separate occasions separated by 1 week. Results indicated that retest reliabilities for reaction times (RTs) derived from the 3 separate emotion conditions (manic, neutral, and depressive) across the 1 week interval were very high. However, consistent with previous research, the reliabilities were very low for the interference indices (manic and depressive). These low reliabilities reflect the very high intercorrelation between the RTs derived from the 3 conditions. The authors concluded that a better indicator of the reliability for this task is the individual RTs from each emotion condition.     

True Overconfidence in Interval Estimates: Evidence Based on a New Measure of Miscalibration

Overconfidence is often regarded as one of the most prevalent judgment biases. Several studies show that overconfidence can lead to suboptimal decisions of investors, managers, or politicians. Recent research, however, questions whether overconfidence should be regarded as a bias and shows that standard “overconfidence” findings can easily be explained by different degrees of knowledge of agents plus a random error in predictions. We contribute to the current literature and ongoing research by extensively analyzing interval estimates for knowledge questions, for real financial time series, and for artificially generated charts. We thereby suggest a new method to measure overconfidence in interval estimates, which is based on the implied probability mass behind a stated prediction interval. We document overconfidence patterns, which are difficult to reconcile with rationality of agents and which cannot be explained by differences in knowledge as differences in knowledge do not exist in our task. Furthermore, we show that overconfidence measures are reliable in the sense that there exist stable individual differences in the degree of overconfidence in interval estimates, thereby testing an important assumption of behavioral economics and behavioral finance models: stable individual differences in the degree of overconfidence across people. We do this in a “field experiment,” for different levels of expertise of subjects (students on the one hand and professional traders and investment bankers on the other hand), over time, by using different miscalibration metrics, and for tasks that avoid common weaknesses such as a non‐representative selection of trick questions. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Psychometric evaluation and normative data for a Swedish version of the Patient Health Questionnaire 15‐Item Somatic Symptom Severity Scale

The lack of an available Swedish version of the Patient Health Questionnaire 15‐Item Somatic Symptom Severity Scale (PHQ‐15) motivated the present psychometric evaluation of such a version as well as providing normative data for the PHQ‐15. Data from 3,406 individuals who took part in the Västerbotten Environmental Health Study in Sweden were used. The respondents constitute a random sample, aged 18 to 79 years, stratified for age and sex. They responded to a Swedish translation of the PHQ‐15 as well as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Perceived Stress Scale, and the Shirom Melamed Burnout Questionnaire for assessment of convergent validity. The distribution of PHQ‐15 scores was positively skewed and mesokurtic in shape, and the internal consistency of the PHQ‐15 was satisfactory. Correlation coefficients between PHQ‐15 score and the measures of anxiety, depression, stress and mental/physical exhaustion indicate satisfactory validity. Normative data for PHQ‐15 scores as well as for categories of somatic symptom severity are provided. The favorable psychometric properties of the Swedish version of the PHQ‐15 suggest use of this instrument for quantification of somatization in Swedish and similar populations, and has the advantage of available normative data.     

The Mini-IPIP6: Tiny yet highly stable markers of Big Six personality

We assessed the stability of a short-form six-factor personality measure over a one-year period in a large national probability sample (N = 4289). Personality was assessed using the Mini-IPIP6—a short-form measure assessing Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness to Experience, and Honesty-Humility. Standardized estimates calculated using Bayesian Structural Equation Modelling (BSEM) indicated that all six personality dimensions were extremely stable. An alternative model using Maximum Likelihood estimation, in which residual item variances were associated over repeated assessments, yielded similar findings. These results highlight the stability of personality in the general population, even when assessed using short-form scales. The use of Bayesian models to examine the stability of personality and their application for study of change in specific developmental periods is discussed.