The relationship of intrinsic, extrinsic, and quest religious orientations to Jungian psychological type among churchgoers in England and Wales

Employing the New Indices of Religious Orientation (NIRO), this study examines the theory that different religious orientations are related to individual differences in psychological type as developed by Carl Jung and operationalized by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Data provided by 481 weekly churchgoing Christians who completed the MBTI and the NIRO demonstrated that quest religious orientation scores were higher among intuitives than among sensers, but were unrelated to introversion and extraversion, thinking and feeling, or judging and perceiving; that intrinsic religious orientation scores were higher among extraverts than introverts, higher among sensers than intuitives and higher among feelers than thinkers, but unrelated to judging and perceiving; and that extrinsic religious orientation scores were unrelated to any of the four components of psychological type. The findings relating to Jungian psychological type differences are applied in order to elucidate the psychological significance of extrinsic, intrinsic, and quest orientations to religion

Hierarchical factor structure of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale short form (IUS-12) in the Italian version

Despite widespread use, few translations are available for the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale short form (IUS-12) as well as limited research on its psychometric properties in Italy. Moreover, recent evidence has suggested a multifaceted hierarchical structure for this scale. We compared the two-factor model to second-order and bi-factor models, in which a General IU factor was posited with two more narrow factors: Prospective IU and Inhibitory IU. Models were tested on a pooled dataset of students (N = 609) taking the IUS-12 alone or with other IUS-27 items. The bi-factor model fitted the sample data better than alternative models. The general factor accounted for 80% of the item variance. Presentation mode did not impact scalar invariance. Convergent validity with neuroticism, need for closure, and the uncertainty response scale was high for the total score. As such, scoring the IUS-12 total score is recommended in clinical research and assessmen

The risk-taking and self-harm inventory for adolescents: Development and psychometric evaluation

In this study, we report on the development and psychometric evaluation of the Risk-Taking (RT) and Self-Harm (SH) Inventory for Adolescents (RTSHIA), a self-report measure designed to assess adolescent RT and SH in community and clinical settings. 651 young people from secondary schools in England ranging in age from 11.6 years to 18.7 years and 71 young people referred to mental health services for SH behavior in London between the ages of 11.9 years and 17.5 years completed the RTSHIA along with standardized measures of adolescent psychopathology. Two factors emerged from the principal axis factoring, and RT and SH were further validated by a confirmatory factor analysis as related, but different, constructs, rather than elements of a single continuum. Inter-item and test–retest reliabilities were high for both components (Cronbach's α = .85, rtt = .90; Cronbach's α .93, rtt = .87), and considerable evidence emerged in support of the measure's convergent, concurrent, and divergent validity. The findings are discussed with regard to potential usefulness of the RTSHIA for research and clinical purposes with adolescents

Response biases

Response biases comprise a variety of systematic tendencies of responding to questionnaire items. Response biases exert an influence on item responses in addition to any constructs that the questionnaire is designed to measure and can therefore potentially bias the corresponding trait level estimates. This chapter addresses general response biases that are independent of item content, including response styles (e.g., extreme response style, acquiescence) and rater biases (halo effect, leniency/severity bias), as well as response biases that are related to item content and depend strongly on the context (socially desirable responding). The chapter summarizes research on correlates of response biases and research on inter-individual and cross-cultural differences in engaging in response styles and rater biases. It describes different methods that can be applied at the test construction stage to prevent or minimize the occurrence of response biases. Finally, it depicts methods developed for correcting for the effects of response biases.</p

Same traits, different variance : Item-Level Variation Within Personality Measures

© 2014 the Author(s). This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. Without requesting permission from the Author or SAGE, you may further copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the article, with the condition that the Author and SAGE Open are in each case credited as the source of the article. The version of record, Jamie S. Churcyard, Karen J. Pine, Shivani Sharma, Ben (C) Fletcher, ' Same Traits, Difference Variance: Item-Level Variation Within Personality Measures', SAGE Open, 2014, is available online via doi: 10.1177/2158244014522634Personality trait questionnaires are regularly used in individual differences research to examine personality scores between participants, although trait researchers tend to place little value on intra-individual variation in item ratings within a measured trait. The few studies that examine variability indices have not considered how they are related to a selection of psychological outcomes, so we recruited 160 participants (age M = 24.16, SD = 9.54) who completed the IPIP-HEXACO personality questionnaire and several outcome measures. Heterogenous within-subject differences in item ratings were found for every trait/facet measured, with measurement error that remained stable across the questionnaire. Within-subject standard deviations, calculated as measures of individual variation in specific item ratings within a trait/facet, were related to outcomes including life satisfaction and depression. This suggests these indices represent valid constructs of variability, and that researchers administering behavior statement trait questionnaires with outcome measures should also apply item-level variability indices.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Measuring is more than assigning numbers

'Measurement is fundamental to research-related activities in social science (hence this Handbook). In my own field of education research, perhaps the most discussed element of education lies in test scores. Examination results are measurements, the number of students attaining a particular standard in a test is a measurement; indeed the standard of a test is a measurement. The allocation of places at school, college or university, student:teacher ratios, funding plans, school timetables, staff workloads, adult participation rates, and the stratification of educational outcomes by sex, social class, ethnicity or geography for example, are all based on measurements. Good and careful work has been done in all of these areas (Nuttall 1987). However, the concept of measurement itself remains under-examined, and is often treated in an uncritical way. In saying this I mean more than the usual lament about qualitative:quantitative schism or the supposed reluctance of social scientists to engage with numeric analysis (Gorard et al. 2004a). I mean that even where numeric analysis is being conducted, the emphasis is on collecting, collating, analysing, and reporting the kinds of data generated by measurement, with the process of measurement and the rigor of the measurement instrument being somewhat taken for granted by many commentators. Issues that are traditionally considered by social scientists include levels of measurement, reliability, validity, and the creation of complex indices (as illustrated in some of the chapters contained in this volume). But these matters are too often dealt with primarily as technical matters – such as how to assess reliability or which statistical test to use with which combination of levels of measurement. The process of quantification itself is just assumed'

Can the evolution of music be analyzed in a quantitative manner?

We propose a methodology to study music development by applying multivariate statistics on composers characteristics. Seven representative composers were considered in terms of eight main musical features. Grades were assigned to each characteristic and their correlations were analyzed. A bootstrap method was applied to simulate hundreds of artificial composers influenced by the seven representatives chosen. Afterwards we quantify non-numeric relations like dialectics, opposition and innovation. Composers differences on style and technique were represented as geometrical distances in the feature space, making it possible to quantify, for example, how much Bach and Stockhausen differ from other composers or how much Beethoven influenced Brahms. In addition, we compared the results with a prior investigation on philosophy. Opposition, strong on philosophy, was not remarkable on music. Supporting an observation already considered by music theorists, strong influences were identified between composers by the quantification of dialectics, implying inheritance and suggesting a stronger master-disciple evolution when compared to the philosophy analysis.Comment: 8 pages, 6 figures, added references for sections 1 and 4.C, better mathematical description on section 2. New values and interpretation, now considering a bootstrap metho

Interviewer Effects on Nonresponse

In face-to-face surveys interviewers play a crucial role in making contact with and gaining cooperation from sample units. While some analyses investigate the influence of interviewers on nonresponse, they are typically restricted to single-country studies. However, interviewer training, contacting and cooperation strategies as well as survey climates may differ across countries. Combining call-record data from the European Social Survey (ESS) with data from a detailed interviewer questionnaire on attitudes and doorstep behavior we find systematic country differences in nonresponse processes, which can in part be explained by differences in interviewer characteristics, such as contacting strategies and avowed doorstep behavior.