Why is support for Jamesian actual–ideal discrepancy model so elusive? A latent-variable approach |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Education, Psychology, Philosophy, University of Cagliari, Italy;2. Institute for Positive Psychology and Education, Australian Catholic University, Australia;3. Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK;4. King Saud University, Saudi Arabia;5. Center for Educational Science and Psychology, University of Tübingen, Germany;1. Academy of Psychology and Behavior, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300387, China;2. Center of Cooperative Innovation for Assessment and Promotion of National Mental Health, Tianjin 300387, China;1. University of Lleida, Spain;2. Institute of Biomedical Research of Lleida, Spain;1. Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Department of Otolaryngology, Saint Louis, MO, USA;2. University of Iowa, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Iowa City, IA, USA;1. Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA;2. Henry H. Wheeler, Jr. Brain Imaging Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA;3. High-Field Magnetic Resonance Center, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, 72076, Tübingen, Germany;4. Department of Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Eberhard Karl''s University of Tübingen and University Hospital, 72076, Tübingen, Germany;5. Department of Physics, Technical University of Denmark, 2800, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark |
| |
| Abstract: | We investigate the Actual–Ideal Discrepancy (AID) model of self-esteem determination dating back to James (1890/1963). Although intuitively appealing, this model received weak support from rigorous empirical research. We propose a multiple-item latent difference approach to AID as applied to a range of self-concept domains and sub-domains in young adolescents from two different countries (UK: N = 402; Italy: N = 250). The effects of the AID remained elusive for most domains and sub-domains; indeed, the effects of the specific AIDs were generally trivial and only appearance-AID became significant in the combined sample. Also AIDs did not substantially explain the more general self-concepts beyond what was explained by the actual domains. Even if they had been significant, AID effects would have been, at best, trivially small and detectable only using appropriate latent-variable methodologies coupled with large sample sizes; thus undermining the psychological meaning of the AID model. |
| |
| Keywords: | Actual–ideal discrepancy Self-esteem Latent difference Multiple-item latent approach Adolescence |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
