时间视角的最佳层次是什么?偏离平衡时间视角-重访(DBTP-r)。

IF 2.7 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychologica Belgica Pub Date : 2020-06-25 DOI:10.5334/pb.487
Konrad S Jankowski, Marcin Zajenkowski, Maciej Stolarski
{"title":"时间视角的最佳层次是什么?偏离平衡时间视角-重访(DBTP-r)。","authors":"Konrad S Jankowski,&nbsp;Marcin Zajenkowski,&nbsp;Maciej Stolarski","doi":"10.5334/pb.487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Balanced time perspective (BTP) describes a tendency to focus on past, present and future time horizons that fosters well-being and positive life outcomes. Deviation from the balanced time perspective is a widespread method to measure the balance, but it makes assumptions regarding levels of time perspectives constituting BTP. In the present research we aimed to test the assumptions regarding levels of time perspectives constituting BTP by testing associations between time perspectives and domains of well-being in four independent samples (<i>N</i> = 1150). The results showed that higher well-being was fostered by greater past positive (PP) and future (F) and lower past negative (PN) and present fatalistic (PF) time perspectives in a linear manner. As for the present hedonistic (PH) perspective, the results were inconsistent indicating that this time orientation can be unrelated to well-being or related in an inverse U-shape manner. In the light of our results the optimal values for the deviation from the balanced time perspective, as measured with the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory, should be revisited and changed into PN 1, PP 5, PF 1, PH 3.4, F 5, with careful consideration whether or not to incorporate PH into the formula for the deviation from the balanced time perspective at all. We also showed that the deviation from the balanced time perspective using the above values better predicts well-being than the one using previously assumed levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":46662,"journal":{"name":"Psychologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7319069/pdf/","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Are the Optimal Levels of Time Perspectives? Deviation from the Balanced Time Perspective-Revisited (DBTP-r).\",\"authors\":\"Konrad S Jankowski,&nbsp;Marcin Zajenkowski,&nbsp;Maciej Stolarski\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/pb.487\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Balanced time perspective (BTP) describes a tendency to focus on past, present and future time horizons that fosters well-being and positive life outcomes. Deviation from the balanced time perspective is a widespread method to measure the balance, but it makes assumptions regarding levels of time perspectives constituting BTP. In the present research we aimed to test the assumptions regarding levels of time perspectives constituting BTP by testing associations between time perspectives and domains of well-being in four independent samples (<i>N</i> = 1150). The results showed that higher well-being was fostered by greater past positive (PP) and future (F) and lower past negative (PN) and present fatalistic (PF) time perspectives in a linear manner. As for the present hedonistic (PH) perspective, the results were inconsistent indicating that this time orientation can be unrelated to well-being or related in an inverse U-shape manner. In the light of our results the optimal values for the deviation from the balanced time perspective, as measured with the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory, should be revisited and changed into PN 1, PP 5, PF 1, PH 3.4, F 5, with careful consideration whether or not to incorporate PH into the formula for the deviation from the balanced time perspective at all. We also showed that the deviation from the balanced time perspective using the above values better predicts well-being than the one using previously assumed levels.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46662,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychologica Belgica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7319069/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychologica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.487\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.487","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

平衡时间观(BTP)描述了一种关注过去、现在和未来的时间视野的趋势,这种趋势可以促进幸福和积极的生活结果。偏离平衡时间视角是衡量平衡的一种普遍方法,但它对构成BTP的时间视角的水平做出了假设。在本研究中,我们旨在通过在四个独立样本(N = 1150)中测试时间视角与幸福感领域之间的关联来检验关于构成BTP的时间视角水平的假设。结果表明,较高的过去积极(PP)和未来(F)以及较低的过去消极(PN)和现在宿命论(PF)时间观线性地促进了较高的幸福感。至于目前的享乐主义(PH)观点,结果不一致,表明这种时间取向可能与幸福感无关,或者以反u形方式相关。根据我们的研究结果,用津巴多时间视角量表测量的平衡时间视角偏差的最佳值应该被重新审视,并改为PN 1, PP 5, PF 1, PH 3.4, f5,并仔细考虑是否将PH纳入平衡时间视角偏差的公式中。我们还表明,使用上述值从平衡时间角度的偏差比使用先前假设的水平更好地预测幸福。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
What Are the Optimal Levels of Time Perspectives? Deviation from the Balanced Time Perspective-Revisited (DBTP-r).

Balanced time perspective (BTP) describes a tendency to focus on past, present and future time horizons that fosters well-being and positive life outcomes. Deviation from the balanced time perspective is a widespread method to measure the balance, but it makes assumptions regarding levels of time perspectives constituting BTP. In the present research we aimed to test the assumptions regarding levels of time perspectives constituting BTP by testing associations between time perspectives and domains of well-being in four independent samples (N = 1150). The results showed that higher well-being was fostered by greater past positive (PP) and future (F) and lower past negative (PN) and present fatalistic (PF) time perspectives in a linear manner. As for the present hedonistic (PH) perspective, the results were inconsistent indicating that this time orientation can be unrelated to well-being or related in an inverse U-shape manner. In the light of our results the optimal values for the deviation from the balanced time perspective, as measured with the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory, should be revisited and changed into PN 1, PP 5, PF 1, PH 3.4, F 5, with careful consideration whether or not to incorporate PH into the formula for the deviation from the balanced time perspective at all. We also showed that the deviation from the balanced time perspective using the above values better predicts well-being than the one using previously assumed levels.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychologica Belgica
Psychologica Belgica PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊最新文献
Harnessing Available Evidence in Single-Case Experimental Studies: The Use of Multilevel Meta-Analysis. The Brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire: Validation of the French Version in Non-clinical Adults. Exploration of the Links Between Psychosocial Well-being and Face Recognition Skills in a French-Speaking Sample. Relationship Between Neurodevelopmental Areas and Difficulties in Emotional-Behavioural Variables in Children With Typical Development Under 2 Years of Age: Sex Differences. Body Aware: Adolescents' and Young Adults' Lived Experiences of Body Awareness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1