• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

利用互联网进行心理学研究:万维网上的人格测试。

Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web.

作者信息

Buchanan T, Smith J L

机构信息

Division of Psychology, University of Sunderland, UK.

出版信息

Br J Psychol. 1999 Feb;90 ( Pt 1):125-44. doi: 10.1348/000712699161189.

DOI:10.1348/000712699161189
PMID:10085550
Abstract

The Internet is increasingly being used as a medium for psychological research. To assess the validity of such efforts, an electronic version of Gangestad & Snyder's (1985) revised self-monitoring questionnaire was placed at a site on the World Wide Web. In all, 963 responses were obtained through the Internet and these were compared with those from a group of 224 undergraduates who completed a paper-and-pencil version. Comparison of model fit indices obtained through confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the Internet-mediated version had similar psychometric properties to its conventional equivalent and compared favourably as a measure of self-monitoring. Reasons for possible superiority of Internet data are discussed. Results support the notion that Web-based personality assessment is possible, but stringent validation of test instruments is urged.

摘要

互联网正越来越多地被用作心理学研究的媒介。为评估此类研究的有效性,将冈斯特德和斯奈德(1985年)修订的自我监控问卷电子版放置在万维网的一个网站上。总共通过互联网获得了963份回复,并将其与一组224名完成纸笔版问卷的本科生的回复进行了比较。通过验证性因素分析获得的模型拟合指数比较表明,网络介导版问卷与传统纸质版问卷具有相似的心理测量特性,作为自我监控的一种测量方法,其表现良好。文中讨论了互联网数据可能具有优势的原因。结果支持了基于网络的人格评估是可行的这一观点,但同时也敦促对测试工具进行严格验证。

相似文献

1
Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web.利用互联网进行心理学研究:万维网上的人格测试。
Br J Psychol. 1999 Feb;90 ( Pt 1):125-44. doi: 10.1348/000712699161189.
2
Research on the Internet: validation of a World-Wide Web mediated personality scale.互联网研究:万维网介导的人格量表的验证
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1999 Nov;31(4):565-71. doi: 10.3758/bf03200736.
3
Assessing obsessive compulsive symptoms and cognitions on the internet: evidence for the comparability of paper and Internet administration.在互联网上评估强迫症状和认知:纸质版与网络版施测可比性的证据
Behav Res Ther. 2007 Sep;45(9):2232-40. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2006.12.009. Epub 2007 Jan 12.
4
Paper-and-pencil and web-based testing: the measurement invariance of the Big Five personality tests in applied settings.纸笔测试和基于网络的测试:应用情境中五大人格测试的测量不变性。
Assessment. 2012 Jun;19(2):243-6. doi: 10.1177/1073191111419091. Epub 2011 Aug 23.
5
Psychological assessment via the internet: a reliability and validity study of online (vs paper-and-pencil) versions of the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28) and the Symptoms Check-List-90-Revised (SCL-90-R).通过互联网进行心理评估:一般健康问卷-28(GHQ-28)和症状自评量表90修订版(SCL-90-R)在线(与纸笔)版本的信度和效度研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2007 Jan 31;9(1):e2. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9.1.e2.
6
The Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale-2 in a French sample: Psychometric evaluation of the theoretical model.法国样本中的广义问题性互联网使用量表-2:理论模型的心理测量学评估
Encephale. 2018 Jun;44(3):192-199. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2017.09.001. Epub 2017 Nov 20.
7
The internet administration version of the 20-item Toronto alexithymia scale.多伦多述情障碍量表 20 项中文版互联网版。
Psychol Assess. 2014 Mar;26(1):16-22. doi: 10.1037/a0034316. Epub 2013 Sep 9.
8
A comparison of validity rates between paper-and-pencil and computerized testing with the MMPI-2.MMPI-2 纸笔测试与计算机测试的效度比较。
Assessment. 2011 Mar;18(1):63-6. doi: 10.1177/1073191110381718. Epub 2010 Sep 9.
9
Web-based administration of a personality questionnaire: comparison with traditional methods.基于网络的人格问卷管理:与传统方法的比较。
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1999 Nov;31(4):572-7. doi: 10.3758/bf03200737.
10
Validation of the Arabic Version of the Internet Gaming Disorder-20 Test.验证阿拉伯语版的互联网游戏障碍 20 项测试。
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2017 Apr;20(4):268-272. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2016.0493. Epub 2017 Feb 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Differences in Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and Kessler Screening Scale for Psychological Distress Scores between Smartphone Version versus Paper Version Administration: Evidence of Equivalence.智能手机版与纸质版在流行病学研究抑郁量表、广泛性焦虑症-7 量表和凯斯勒心理困扰筛查量表评分方面的差异:等效性证据。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Mar 8;20(6):4773. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20064773.
2
Behavioral differences of individuals with different self-regulation levels in a real-life example of teamwork-DOTA 2.在团队合作的现实例子——《刀塔2》中,不同自我调节水平个体的行为差异。
Front Psychol. 2022 Nov 28;13:1054675. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1054675. eCollection 2022.
3
Prediction model of interaction anxiousness based on Weibo data.
基于微博数据的交互焦虑预测模型。
Front Public Health. 2022 Nov 8;10:1045605. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1045605. eCollection 2022.
4
Mental health knowledge and awareness among university students in Bangladesh.孟加拉国大学生的心理健康知识与意识
Heliyon. 2022 Oct 18;8(10):e11084. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11084. eCollection 2022 Oct.
5
Assessing COVID-19 Health Literacy (CoHL) and its relationships with sociodemographic features, locus of control and compliance with social distancing rules during the first lockdown in France.评估 COVID-19 健康素养(CoHL)及其与社会人口特征、控制源以及在法国首次封锁期间遵守社交距离规则之间的关系。
Health Educ Res. 2022 May 24;37(3):143-154. doi: 10.1093/her/cyac009.
6
Subjective Well-Being of Chinese Sina Weibo Users in Residential Lockdown During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Machine Learning Analysis.新冠肺炎疫情期间中国微博用户住宅隔离的主观幸福感:机器学习分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Dec 17;22(12):e24775. doi: 10.2196/24775.
7
Taking Risks With Cybersecurity: Using Knowledge and Personal Characteristics to Predict Self-Reported Cybersecurity Behaviors.网络安全中的冒险行为:利用知识和个人特征预测自我报告的网络安全行为。
Front Psychol. 2020 Nov 4;11:546546. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.546546. eCollection 2020.
8
Development and validation of a scale assessing achievement goals in driving.驾驶成就目标评估量表的编制与验证。
PLoS One. 2020 Mar 12;15(3):e0230349. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230349. eCollection 2020.
9
The Impact of Context on Affective Norms: A Case of Study With Suspense.情境对情感规范的影响:以悬疑为例的研究
Front Psychol. 2019 Aug 30;10:1988. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01988. eCollection 2019.
10
Online Self-Administered Cognitive Testing Using the Amsterdam Cognition Scan: Establishing Psychometric Properties and Normative Data.使用阿姆斯特丹认知扫描进行在线自我管理认知测试:建立心理测量学特性和常模数据。
J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 30;20(5):e192. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9298.