• 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

《真实与傲慢的骄傲量表的可行性和有效性:对狄更斯和墨菲(2023)的回应》。

The viability and validity of the Authentic and Hubristic Pride scales: Reply to Dickens and Murphy (2023).

机构信息

University of British Columbia.

University of California-Davis.

出版信息

Emotion. 2023 Apr;23(3):894-898. doi: 10.1037/emo0001183.

DOI:10.1037/emo0001183
PMID:37079835
Abstract

Dickens and Murphy (see record 2023-63008-001) claim that the Authentic and Hubristic Pride (i.e., AP/HP) scales (see record 2007-02840-009), which we developed and validated over 15 years ago, do not validly assess the theoretical constructs of authentic and hubristic pride (e.g., Tracy & Robins, 2004a, 2007). These authors further call for the development of new measures based on a top-down approach, which would incorporate the theory into scale items. Although we appreciate Dickens and Murphy's emphasis on the need for valid assessment tools in this important research domain, we disagree with their conclusion that the extant scales are "fundamentally invalid." Here, we explain why a top-down approach would not be preferable to the bottom-up one we used and review the relatively large body of evidence supporting the validity of the extant AP/HP scales. Dickens and Murphy also raised several concerns regarding the HP scale specifically; most of these, as we explain, are either incorrect, exaggerated, or valid concerns but not ones that invalidate the HP scale. Nonetheless, we agree with Dickens and Murphy's suggestion that the AP/HP scales could be improved, and we echo their call for future research in this vein. Finally, we recommend that scholars seeking to advance the field in this way adopt the "living document" approach advocated by Gerasimova (2022). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

狄更斯和墨菲(见记录 2023-63008-001)声称,我们在 15 年前开发和验证的真实和狂妄的骄傲(即 AP/HP)量表(见记录 2007-02840-009),不能有效地评估真实和狂妄的骄傲的理论结构(例如,特雷西和罗宾斯,2004a,2007)。这些作者进一步呼吁根据自上而下的方法开发新的措施,将理论纳入量表项目中。尽管我们赞赏狄更斯和墨菲在这个重要研究领域强调需要有效的评估工具,但我们不同意他们的结论,即现有的量表“从根本上是无效的”。在这里,我们解释了为什么自上而下的方法不会优于我们使用的自下而上的方法,并回顾了大量支持现有的 AP/HP 量表有效性的证据。狄更斯和墨菲还特别提出了一些关于 HP 量表的担忧;正如我们所解释的,其中大多数要么是不正确的,要么是夸大的,要么是合理的担忧,但不是使 HP 量表无效的担忧。尽管如此,我们同意狄更斯和墨菲的建议,即 AP/HP 量表可以改进,我们也赞同他们在这方面呼吁未来的研究。最后,我们建议那些希望以这种方式推动该领域发展的学者采用格拉西莫娃(2022)倡导的“活文档”方法。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。

相似文献

1
The viability and validity of the Authentic and Hubristic Pride scales: Reply to Dickens and Murphy (2023).《真实与傲慢的骄傲量表的可行性和有效性:对狄更斯和墨菲(2023)的回应》。
Emotion. 2023 Apr;23(3):894-898. doi: 10.1037/emo0001183.
2
The Authentic and Hubristic Pride scales do not validly assess the two-facet model of pride: Time to rewind and reboot with new measures.《真实与傲慢的骄傲量表》无法有效评估骄傲的两面模型:是时候用新的衡量标准来倒带和重新启动了。
Emotion. 2023 Apr;23(3):886-893. doi: 10.1037/emo0001142.
3
Authentic/hubristic pride controversies as a window on broader emotion measurement issues: Reply to Tracy et al. (2023).真实/狂妄自大的骄傲争议作为更广泛情感测量问题的窗口:回复 Tracy 等人(2023 年)。
Emotion. 2023 Apr;23(3):899-902. doi: 10.1037/emo0001197.
4
Pride: A meta-analytic project.自豪:一项元分析研究。
Emotion. 2022 Aug;22(5):1071-1087. doi: 10.1037/emo0000905. Epub 2020 Nov 12.
5
Further challenges to the "Authentic"/"Hubristic" model of pride: conceptual clarifications and new evidence.进一步挑战“自豪的真实/狂妄模型”:概念澄清和新证据。
Emotion. 2014 Feb;14(1):38-42. doi: 10.1037/a0035457.
6
Authentic and hubristic pride: Differential effects on delay of gratification.真诚与自大的骄傲:对延迟满足的差异化影响。
Emotion. 2016 Dec;16(8):1147-1156. doi: 10.1037/emo0000179. Epub 2016 Oct 10.
7
Successful emotion regulation cognitive reappraisal in authentic pride: Behavioral and event-related potential evidence.真实自豪中成功的情绪调节——认知重评:行为及事件相关电位证据
Front Hum Neurosci. 2022 Oct 13;16:983674. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.983674. eCollection 2022.
8
The psychological structure of pride: a tale of two facets.骄傲的心理结构:关于两个方面的故事。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Mar;92(3):506-25. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.506.
9
A paradox of pride: Hubristic pride predicts strategic dishonesty in response to status threats.骄傲的悖论:傲慢的骄傲预测了对地位威胁的策略性不诚实。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2022 Jul;151(7):1681-1706. doi: 10.1037/xge0001158. Epub 2021 Dec 23.
10
Implicit association between authentic pride and prestige compared to hubristic pride and dominance.与傲慢的骄傲和支配欲相比,真实的骄傲与声望之间的隐性关联。
Psychol Rep. 2012 Oct;111(2):424-42. doi: 10.2466/07.09.17.PR0.111.5.424-442.