Pub Date : 2024-02-08DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000812
Yannik Wiechers, Christian Kandler
Abstract: Striving for more valid personality judgments is desirable as more sound decisions can be expected with increasing measurement accuracy. In this study, the psychometric qualities of the German HEXACO-60 personality inventory are evaluated. Extending previous studies, we examined the third-person observer-report form in addition to the first-person rating format, which allowed us to examine the psychometric quality beyond self-reports, such as cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, structural validity, and measurement invariance. Data from 3,046 self-raters (61% female; age range: 14–90) and ratings from 2,199 well-informed acquaintances (partners, friends, or relatives of the self-raters) were analyzed. Satisfying internal consistency, 2-year and 4-year rank-order stabilities, agreement among self- and informant-raters, and consensus among informant-raters were found. Moreover, the six-factor structure was confirmed in structural equation models that incorporated the perspectives of both self-raters and informant-raters. Finally, partial strict measurement invariance was demonstrated across rater perspectives. Previous validation of the German HEXACO-60 self-report form could thus be replicated and expanded by highlighting the psychometric soundness of the third-person observer-report form and the convergent as well as discriminant validity of HEXACO trait measures across rater perspectives. The informant perspective provides valid additional benefits for the assessment of personality traits within the HEXACO framework.
{"title":"Psychometric Quality of the German HEXACO-60 Personality Inventory-Revised","authors":"Yannik Wiechers, Christian Kandler","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000812","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Striving for more valid personality judgments is desirable as more sound decisions can be expected with increasing measurement accuracy. In this study, the psychometric qualities of the German HEXACO-60 personality inventory are evaluated. Extending previous studies, we examined the third-person observer-report form in addition to the first-person rating format, which allowed us to examine the psychometric quality beyond self-reports, such as cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, structural validity, and measurement invariance. Data from 3,046 self-raters (61% female; age range: 14–90) and ratings from 2,199 well-informed acquaintances (partners, friends, or relatives of the self-raters) were analyzed. Satisfying internal consistency, 2-year and 4-year rank-order stabilities, agreement among self- and informant-raters, and consensus among informant-raters were found. Moreover, the six-factor structure was confirmed in structural equation models that incorporated the perspectives of both self-raters and informant-raters. Finally, partial strict measurement invariance was demonstrated across rater perspectives. Previous validation of the German HEXACO-60 self-report form could thus be replicated and expanded by highlighting the psychometric soundness of the third-person observer-report form and the convergent as well as discriminant validity of HEXACO trait measures across rater perspectives. The informant perspective provides valid additional benefits for the assessment of personality traits within the HEXACO framework.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" 41","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139792685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-08DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000816
Cristiana C. Marques, A. Macedo, Paula Castilho, Kenneth Goss, Miguel Castelo-Branco, A. T. Pereira
Abstract: The Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES; Castonguay et al., 2014 ) measures the individual’s shame, guilt, authentic and hubristic pride related to their body and appearance. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the BASES in a sample of adult individuals and the measurement invariance across gender. A sample of 506 participants completed the BASES and additional measures related to perfectionism and negative/positive affect. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the originally proposed four-factor structure of the BASES, with the best-fitted model dropping one item from the guilt factor. BASES showed adequate internal consistency, composite reliability, convergent validity and expected associations with perfectionism and affect measures. Scalar invariance was obtained across gender, with women showing significantly higher shame and guilt related to body and appearance than men. Our results support the use of the Portuguese BASES as a valid and reliable instrument to assess self-conscious emotions related to body and appearance.
{"title":"Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of the Portuguese Version of the Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES)","authors":"Cristiana C. Marques, A. Macedo, Paula Castilho, Kenneth Goss, Miguel Castelo-Branco, A. T. Pereira","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000816","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000816","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES; Castonguay et al., 2014 ) measures the individual’s shame, guilt, authentic and hubristic pride related to their body and appearance. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the BASES in a sample of adult individuals and the measurement invariance across gender. A sample of 506 participants completed the BASES and additional measures related to perfectionism and negative/positive affect. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the originally proposed four-factor structure of the BASES, with the best-fitted model dropping one item from the guilt factor. BASES showed adequate internal consistency, composite reliability, convergent validity and expected associations with perfectionism and affect measures. Scalar invariance was obtained across gender, with women showing significantly higher shame and guilt related to body and appearance than men. Our results support the use of the Portuguese BASES as a valid and reliable instrument to assess self-conscious emotions related to body and appearance.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139791299","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-08DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000816
Cristiana C. Marques, A. Macedo, Paula Castilho, Kenneth Goss, Miguel Castelo-Branco, A. T. Pereira
Abstract: The Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES; Castonguay et al., 2014 ) measures the individual’s shame, guilt, authentic and hubristic pride related to their body and appearance. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the BASES in a sample of adult individuals and the measurement invariance across gender. A sample of 506 participants completed the BASES and additional measures related to perfectionism and negative/positive affect. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the originally proposed four-factor structure of the BASES, with the best-fitted model dropping one item from the guilt factor. BASES showed adequate internal consistency, composite reliability, convergent validity and expected associations with perfectionism and affect measures. Scalar invariance was obtained across gender, with women showing significantly higher shame and guilt related to body and appearance than men. Our results support the use of the Portuguese BASES as a valid and reliable instrument to assess self-conscious emotions related to body and appearance.
{"title":"Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of the Portuguese Version of the Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES)","authors":"Cristiana C. Marques, A. Macedo, Paula Castilho, Kenneth Goss, Miguel Castelo-Branco, A. T. Pereira","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000816","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000816","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES; Castonguay et al., 2014 ) measures the individual’s shame, guilt, authentic and hubristic pride related to their body and appearance. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the BASES in a sample of adult individuals and the measurement invariance across gender. A sample of 506 participants completed the BASES and additional measures related to perfectionism and negative/positive affect. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the originally proposed four-factor structure of the BASES, with the best-fitted model dropping one item from the guilt factor. BASES showed adequate internal consistency, composite reliability, convergent validity and expected associations with perfectionism and affect measures. Scalar invariance was obtained across gender, with women showing significantly higher shame and guilt related to body and appearance than men. Our results support the use of the Portuguese BASES as a valid and reliable instrument to assess self-conscious emotions related to body and appearance.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"77 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139851051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-08DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000812
Yannik Wiechers, Christian Kandler
Abstract: Striving for more valid personality judgments is desirable as more sound decisions can be expected with increasing measurement accuracy. In this study, the psychometric qualities of the German HEXACO-60 personality inventory are evaluated. Extending previous studies, we examined the third-person observer-report form in addition to the first-person rating format, which allowed us to examine the psychometric quality beyond self-reports, such as cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, structural validity, and measurement invariance. Data from 3,046 self-raters (61% female; age range: 14–90) and ratings from 2,199 well-informed acquaintances (partners, friends, or relatives of the self-raters) were analyzed. Satisfying internal consistency, 2-year and 4-year rank-order stabilities, agreement among self- and informant-raters, and consensus among informant-raters were found. Moreover, the six-factor structure was confirmed in structural equation models that incorporated the perspectives of both self-raters and informant-raters. Finally, partial strict measurement invariance was demonstrated across rater perspectives. Previous validation of the German HEXACO-60 self-report form could thus be replicated and expanded by highlighting the psychometric soundness of the third-person observer-report form and the convergent as well as discriminant validity of HEXACO trait measures across rater perspectives. The informant perspective provides valid additional benefits for the assessment of personality traits within the HEXACO framework.
{"title":"Psychometric Quality of the German HEXACO-60 Personality Inventory-Revised","authors":"Yannik Wiechers, Christian Kandler","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000812","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Striving for more valid personality judgments is desirable as more sound decisions can be expected with increasing measurement accuracy. In this study, the psychometric qualities of the German HEXACO-60 personality inventory are evaluated. Extending previous studies, we examined the third-person observer-report form in addition to the first-person rating format, which allowed us to examine the psychometric quality beyond self-reports, such as cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, structural validity, and measurement invariance. Data from 3,046 self-raters (61% female; age range: 14–90) and ratings from 2,199 well-informed acquaintances (partners, friends, or relatives of the self-raters) were analyzed. Satisfying internal consistency, 2-year and 4-year rank-order stabilities, agreement among self- and informant-raters, and consensus among informant-raters were found. Moreover, the six-factor structure was confirmed in structural equation models that incorporated the perspectives of both self-raters and informant-raters. Finally, partial strict measurement invariance was demonstrated across rater perspectives. Previous validation of the German HEXACO-60 self-report form could thus be replicated and expanded by highlighting the psychometric soundness of the third-person observer-report form and the convergent as well as discriminant validity of HEXACO trait measures across rater perspectives. The informant perspective provides valid additional benefits for the assessment of personality traits within the HEXACO framework.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"144 1-2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139852558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-05DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000797
L. D. de Beer, Leoni van der Vaart, Maximiliano Escaffi‐Schwarz, H. De Witte, W. Schaufeli
Abstract: This study sought to investigate the measurement properties of a “gold standard” instrument for measuring burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS), with a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies that had as the primary aim its psychometric validation. The search spanned from January 1996 to December 2022 using the following databases: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, APA PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Our search identified 35 eligible studies for inclusion in the systematic review. Of these, 17 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the original 16-item version studies supported a three-dimensional representation of burnout with modest internal consistencies. However, similar to the narrative findings, it also indicated the viability of a two-factor solution. Consequently, the structural validity of the MBI-GS remains unclear, and so does its cross-cultural validity. The criterion validity of the cynicism and personal efficacy scales also raised a few questions. Overall, the findings provided some support for the adequacy of the measurement properties of the MBI-GS as a research tool measuring exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy. However, we also identified challenges and practices of which researchers should be cognisant and that they should consider in future burnout projects.
{"title":"Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey","authors":"L. D. de Beer, Leoni van der Vaart, Maximiliano Escaffi‐Schwarz, H. De Witte, W. Schaufeli","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000797","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000797","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This study sought to investigate the measurement properties of a “gold standard” instrument for measuring burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS), with a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies that had as the primary aim its psychometric validation. The search spanned from January 1996 to December 2022 using the following databases: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, APA PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Our search identified 35 eligible studies for inclusion in the systematic review. Of these, 17 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the original 16-item version studies supported a three-dimensional representation of burnout with modest internal consistencies. However, similar to the narrative findings, it also indicated the viability of a two-factor solution. Consequently, the structural validity of the MBI-GS remains unclear, and so does its cross-cultural validity. The criterion validity of the cynicism and personal efficacy scales also raised a few questions. Overall, the findings provided some support for the adequacy of the measurement properties of the MBI-GS as a research tool measuring exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy. However, we also identified challenges and practices of which researchers should be cognisant and that they should consider in future burnout projects.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"27 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139864714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-05DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000783
Timo Gnambs, U. Schroeders
Abstract: The Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES) measures a broad personality trait reflecting individuals’ self-appraisals of their worth, capabilities, and control of their lives. Although the CSES was designed to capture a single trait, factor analytic studies often found more complex measurement structures. These either referred to different content facets or methodological artifacts due to the item wording. The present random-effects meta-analysis summarized correlation matrices from 53 samples including 31,843 respondents. After accounting for acquiescent responding, meta-analytic confirmatory factor analyses revealed a single common factor for all items. The factor was highly reliable (ω = .87) and demonstrated partial metric measurement invariance across English, German, and Spanish language versions as well as cultural tendencies of individualism and flexibility. However, Chinese and Romanian translations exhibited substantially lower factor loadings. These results corroborate the use of the CSES as a unidimensional measure, albeit systematic investigations of measurement invariance are recommended before its use in cross-cultural research.
{"title":"Reliability and Factorial Validity of the Core Self-Evaluations Scale","authors":"Timo Gnambs, U. Schroeders","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000783","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES) measures a broad personality trait reflecting individuals’ self-appraisals of their worth, capabilities, and control of their lives. Although the CSES was designed to capture a single trait, factor analytic studies often found more complex measurement structures. These either referred to different content facets or methodological artifacts due to the item wording. The present random-effects meta-analysis summarized correlation matrices from 53 samples including 31,843 respondents. After accounting for acquiescent responding, meta-analytic confirmatory factor analyses revealed a single common factor for all items. The factor was highly reliable (ω = .87) and demonstrated partial metric measurement invariance across English, German, and Spanish language versions as well as cultural tendencies of individualism and flexibility. However, Chinese and Romanian translations exhibited substantially lower factor loadings. These results corroborate the use of the CSES as a unidimensional measure, albeit systematic investigations of measurement invariance are recommended before its use in cross-cultural research.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139806133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-05DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000797
L. D. de Beer, Leoni van der Vaart, Maximiliano Escaffi‐Schwarz, H. De Witte, W. Schaufeli
Abstract: This study sought to investigate the measurement properties of a “gold standard” instrument for measuring burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS), with a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies that had as the primary aim its psychometric validation. The search spanned from January 1996 to December 2022 using the following databases: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, APA PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Our search identified 35 eligible studies for inclusion in the systematic review. Of these, 17 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the original 16-item version studies supported a three-dimensional representation of burnout with modest internal consistencies. However, similar to the narrative findings, it also indicated the viability of a two-factor solution. Consequently, the structural validity of the MBI-GS remains unclear, and so does its cross-cultural validity. The criterion validity of the cynicism and personal efficacy scales also raised a few questions. Overall, the findings provided some support for the adequacy of the measurement properties of the MBI-GS as a research tool measuring exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy. However, we also identified challenges and practices of which researchers should be cognisant and that they should consider in future burnout projects.
{"title":"Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey","authors":"L. D. de Beer, Leoni van der Vaart, Maximiliano Escaffi‐Schwarz, H. De Witte, W. Schaufeli","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000797","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000797","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This study sought to investigate the measurement properties of a “gold standard” instrument for measuring burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS), with a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies that had as the primary aim its psychometric validation. The search spanned from January 1996 to December 2022 using the following databases: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, APA PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Our search identified 35 eligible studies for inclusion in the systematic review. Of these, 17 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the original 16-item version studies supported a three-dimensional representation of burnout with modest internal consistencies. However, similar to the narrative findings, it also indicated the viability of a two-factor solution. Consequently, the structural validity of the MBI-GS remains unclear, and so does its cross-cultural validity. The criterion validity of the cynicism and personal efficacy scales also raised a few questions. Overall, the findings provided some support for the adequacy of the measurement properties of the MBI-GS as a research tool measuring exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy. However, we also identified challenges and practices of which researchers should be cognisant and that they should consider in future burnout projects.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"3 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139804851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-05DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000783
Timo Gnambs, U. Schroeders
Abstract: The Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES) measures a broad personality trait reflecting individuals’ self-appraisals of their worth, capabilities, and control of their lives. Although the CSES was designed to capture a single trait, factor analytic studies often found more complex measurement structures. These either referred to different content facets or methodological artifacts due to the item wording. The present random-effects meta-analysis summarized correlation matrices from 53 samples including 31,843 respondents. After accounting for acquiescent responding, meta-analytic confirmatory factor analyses revealed a single common factor for all items. The factor was highly reliable (ω = .87) and demonstrated partial metric measurement invariance across English, German, and Spanish language versions as well as cultural tendencies of individualism and flexibility. However, Chinese and Romanian translations exhibited substantially lower factor loadings. These results corroborate the use of the CSES as a unidimensional measure, albeit systematic investigations of measurement invariance are recommended before its use in cross-cultural research.
{"title":"Reliability and Factorial Validity of the Core Self-Evaluations Scale","authors":"Timo Gnambs, U. Schroeders","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000783","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES) measures a broad personality trait reflecting individuals’ self-appraisals of their worth, capabilities, and control of their lives. Although the CSES was designed to capture a single trait, factor analytic studies often found more complex measurement structures. These either referred to different content facets or methodological artifacts due to the item wording. The present random-effects meta-analysis summarized correlation matrices from 53 samples including 31,843 respondents. After accounting for acquiescent responding, meta-analytic confirmatory factor analyses revealed a single common factor for all items. The factor was highly reliable (ω = .87) and demonstrated partial metric measurement invariance across English, German, and Spanish language versions as well as cultural tendencies of individualism and flexibility. However, Chinese and Romanian translations exhibited substantially lower factor loadings. These results corroborate the use of the CSES as a unidimensional measure, albeit systematic investigations of measurement invariance are recommended before its use in cross-cultural research.","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139866044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-20DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000815
{"title":"Correction to Fokkema et al., 2022","authors":"","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000815","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"20 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139258202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000808
Anke M. Weber, Samuel Greiff, D. Iliescu
{"title":"Assessing Children in Developmental Research","authors":"Anke M. Weber, Samuel Greiff, D. Iliescu","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000808","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":508777,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"87 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139298111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：