Roets Arne, Van Hiel Alain
Ghent University.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007 Feb;33(2):266-80. doi: 10.1177/0146167206294744.
The validity of the Need for Closure Scale (NFCS) has recently been debated in the research literature. In the present study, it is argued that the traditional Decisiveness scale primarily taps ability content instead of the hypothesized motivational need; therefore, new items that explicitly probe the need for quick and unambiguous answers were developed. It was shown that these need items form a reliable scale (Study 1); were predictive of the seizing process over and beyond ability, whereas the old Decisiveness scale was not (Study 2); and were sensitive to experimentally manipulated levels of task motivation (Study 3). Finally, a reassembled NFCS with the new items replacing the traditional Decisiveness items showed superior fit as a unidimensional model. In the Discussion, it is argued that the specific position of Decisiveness is due to its particular operationalization, not to its theoretical status.
近期，研究文献中对“认知闭合需求量表（NFCS）”的有效性展开了讨论。在本研究中，有人认为传统的“决断力量表”主要衡量的是能力方面的内容，而非所假设的动机需求；因此，开发了新的项目，这些项目明确探究对快速且明确答案的需求。结果表明，这些需求项目构成了一个可靠的量表（研究1）；在能力之外，能够预测把握时机的过程，而旧的“决断力量表”则不能（研究2）；并且对实验操纵的任务动机水平敏感（研究3）。最后，用新项目替换传统“决断力”项目后重新组合的NFCS作为单维模型显示出更好的拟合度。在讨论中，有人认为“决断力”的特殊地位是由于其特定的操作化方式，而非其理论地位。
