Кто продолжает участвовать во втором этапе исследования? Роль личностных характеристик
Ключевые слова:
истощение выборки, черты личности, Большая Пятерка, характерные адаптации
Аннотация
Целью исследования было изучение того, являются ли черты личности предиктором истощения выборки, происходящего в исследовании с двумя волнами сбора данных как частном случае лонгитюда. Методологически проблема решалась в терминах пятифакторной теории личности (McCrae, Costa, 2013). Исследование проводилось в два этапа. На этапе 1 студентов приглашали принять участие в психологическом исследовании, проводившемся в учебной аудитории, где они выполняли основной набор тестов. На этапе 2 участники дистанционно заполняли вопросник и 277 из 1030 участников выслали файл с выполненным тестом исследователю по электронной почте. Доброжелательность, добросовестность и интроверсия предсказывали, что участник продолжит исследование на втором этапе. Посредством логистического регрессионного анализа оценивался вклад в эти эффекты рефлексивных характерных адаптаций – мета-черт и установок на черты. Мета-черты представляют собой суждения индивида о том, как его черты личности воспринимаются значимыми другими, в данном случае ― родителями. Установки на черты представляют собой валентные (положительные/отрицательные) оценки данной черты индивидом без прямого отнесения к своей личности. Рефлексивные характерные адаптации вносили инкрементный вклад в вероятность участия в этапе 2, в то время как вклад собственно черт личности был элиминирован. Истощение выборки предсказывалось несколькими мета-чертами, а также установками на несколько черт личности. Амбивалентная роль мета-черт и установок на черты обсуждается в терминах рефлексивно-импульсивной модели Ф. Штрака и Р. Дойча. Была эмпирически поддержана модель, при которой черты личности (экстраверсия, доброжелательность, добросовестность) производят непрямые эффекты на истощение выборки, опосредованные рефлексивными характерными адаптациями. В целом небольшие размеры коэффициентов детерминации означают, что вклад личностных характеристик в истощение выборки следует отнести к разряду малых, но существенных.
Скачивания
Данные скачивания пока не доступны.
Литература
1. Admiral’skaya, I. S. (2009). The search and recruiting of respondents as a stage of an experimental study of marriage. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 6(2), 153-160. (in Russian)
2. American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf
3. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294907
4. Balabina, A. D. (2015). Reflexive characteristic adaptations and sociometric status. Perm University Herald. Series “Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology”, 2(22), 55-64. (in Russian)
5. Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1984.tb00789.x
6. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
7. Cheprakova, V. A., Voronina, L. A., & Tsygan, V. N. (2011). Bioethics. History, juridical regulation of the human-involving research. Vestnik Rossiiskoi Voenno-Meditsinskoi Akademii, 1, 222-227. (in Russian)
8. Church, A. H. (1993). Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: A meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 62-79. https://doi.org/10.1086/269355
9. Davydov, A. A. (1990). The sample representativeness Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, 1, 115-121. (in Russian)
10. Dollinger, S. J., & Leong, F. T. L. (1993). Volunteer bias and the five-factor model. The Journal of Psychology, 127, 29-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1993.9915540
11. Druzhinin, V. N. (2000). Experimental psychology. Saint Petersburg: Piter. (in Russian)
12. Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
13. Freud, S. (1990). The psychology of unconscious: A collection of works. Moscow: Prosveshchenie. (in Russian)
14. Gallego, A., & Oberski, D. (2012). Personality and political participation: The mediation hypothesis. Political Behavior, 34, 425-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9168-7
15. Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.26
16. Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2003). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the function of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17. Groves, R. M., Singer, E., & Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: Description and an illustration. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 299-308. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3078721
18. Hilbig, B. E., Zettler, I., Moshagen, M., & Heydasch, T. (2013). Tracing the path from personality - via cooperativeness - to conservation. European Journal of Personality, 27, 319-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1856
19. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory - Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley/Institute of Personality and Social Research.
20. John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research(pp. 114-158). New York: Guilford Press.
21. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science, 306(5702), 1776-1780. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103572
22. Kornilov, S. A. (2011). Longitudinal studies: theory and methods. Eksperimental’naya psihologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 4(4), 101-116. (in Russian)
23. Kosarev, V. V., & Babanov, S. A. (2009). The ethics of biomedical research: Problems and solutions. Meditsinskii Al’manakh, 4, 41-45. (in Russian)
24. Lubin, B., Levitt, E. E., & Zuckerman, M. (1962). Some personality differences between responders and nonresponders to a survey questionnaire. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 26, 192. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048697
25. Lugtig, P. (2014). Panel attrition: Separating stayers, fast attriters, gradual attriters, and lurkers. Sociological Methods and Research, 43, 699-723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113520305
26. Malloy, T. E., Albright, L., Kenny, D. A., Agatstein, F., & Winquist, L. (1997). Interpersonal perception and metaperception in nonoverlapping social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 390-398. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.390
27. McCrae, R. R., & Costa Jr., P. T. (2013). Introduction to the empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. In T. A. Widiger & P. T. Costa Jr. (Eds.), Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (3rd ed., pp. 15-27). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
28. Menard, S. (2002). Longitudinal research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Omoto, A. M., Snyder, M., & Hackett, J. D. (2010). Personality and motivational antecedents of activism and civic engagement. Journal of Personality, 78, 1703-1734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00667.x
30. Ployhart, R. E., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36, 94-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352110
31. Richter, D., Körtner, J. L., & Saßenroth, D. (2014). Personality has minor effects on panel attrition. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.08.001
32. Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1- 25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.1
33. Rogelberg, S. G., Conway, J. M., Sederburg, M. E., Spitzmüller, C., Aziz, S., & Knight, W. E. (2003). Profiling active and passive nonrespondents to an organizational survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1104-1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1104
34. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1975). The volunteer subject (Vol. 14). Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
35. Saliba, A., & Ostojic, P. (2014). Personality and participation: Who volunteers to participate in studies. Psychology, 5, 230-243. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2014.53034
36. Salthouse, T. A. (2014). Selectivity of attrition in longitudinal studies of cognitive functioning. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69, 567-574. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbt046
37. Saßenroth, D. (2013). The impact of personality on participation decisions in surveys: A contribution to the discussion on unit nonresponse. Berlin: Springer.
38. Satherley, N., Milojev, P., Greaves, L. M., Huang, Y., Osborne, D., Bulbulia, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2015). Demographic and psychological predictors of panel attrition: Evidence from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study. PLoS ONE, 10, e0121950. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121950
39. Schräpler, J.-P., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2010). Individual and neighborhood determinants of survey nonresponse: An analysis based on a new subsample of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), microgeographic characteristics and survey-based interviewer characteristics (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1588730). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1588730
40. Shchebetenko, S. (2014). “The best man in the world”: Attitudes toward personality traits. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 11(3), 129-148.
41. Shchebetenko, S. (2016). Reflexive characteristic adaptations within the five-factor theory: Between basic tendencies and external outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.055
42. Shchebetenko, S. A. (2015a). Reflected attitudes to personality features as a predictor of students’ academic success. Psychology and Psychotechnics, 1(76), 70-82. https://doi.org/10.7256/2070-8955.2015.1.13526 (in Russian)
43. Shchebetenko, S. A. (2015b). Reflexive characteristic adaptations within the five-factor theory of personality framework. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 36(6), 55-65. (in Russian)
44. Shchebetenko, S., & Tutikova, E. (2015). “The picture is good because openness to experience is good”: The mediating role of attitudes toward personality traits in individual differences in painting preferences. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 12(4), 122-141. (in Russian)
45. Singer, E., & Bossarte, R. M. (2006). Incentives for survey participation: When are they “coercive”? American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 31, 411-418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.07.013
46. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01
47. Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220-247. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1
48. Treneva, M. S., Munblit, D. B., & Pampura, A. N. (2014). Parents’ voluntary consent to participate in research: Biased sampling in relation to the population? Rossiyskii Vestnik Perinatologii i Pediatrii [Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics], 59(1), 82-87. (in Russian)
49. Vlasov, V. V. (2007). Systematic errors and interfering factors. Mezhdunarodnyi Zhurnal Meditsinskoi Praktiki, 3, 18-29. (in Russian)
2. American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf
3. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294907
4. Balabina, A. D. (2015). Reflexive characteristic adaptations and sociometric status. Perm University Herald. Series “Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology”, 2(22), 55-64. (in Russian)
5. Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1984.tb00789.x
6. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
7. Cheprakova, V. A., Voronina, L. A., & Tsygan, V. N. (2011). Bioethics. History, juridical regulation of the human-involving research. Vestnik Rossiiskoi Voenno-Meditsinskoi Akademii, 1, 222-227. (in Russian)
8. Church, A. H. (1993). Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: A meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 62-79. https://doi.org/10.1086/269355
9. Davydov, A. A. (1990). The sample representativeness Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, 1, 115-121. (in Russian)
10. Dollinger, S. J., & Leong, F. T. L. (1993). Volunteer bias and the five-factor model. The Journal of Psychology, 127, 29-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1993.9915540
11. Druzhinin, V. N. (2000). Experimental psychology. Saint Petersburg: Piter. (in Russian)
12. Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
13. Freud, S. (1990). The psychology of unconscious: A collection of works. Moscow: Prosveshchenie. (in Russian)
14. Gallego, A., & Oberski, D. (2012). Personality and political participation: The mediation hypothesis. Political Behavior, 34, 425-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9168-7
15. Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.26
16. Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2003). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the function of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17. Groves, R. M., Singer, E., & Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: Description and an illustration. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 299-308. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3078721
18. Hilbig, B. E., Zettler, I., Moshagen, M., & Heydasch, T. (2013). Tracing the path from personality - via cooperativeness - to conservation. European Journal of Personality, 27, 319-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1856
19. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory - Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley/Institute of Personality and Social Research.
20. John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research(pp. 114-158). New York: Guilford Press.
21. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science, 306(5702), 1776-1780. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103572
22. Kornilov, S. A. (2011). Longitudinal studies: theory and methods. Eksperimental’naya psihologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 4(4), 101-116. (in Russian)
23. Kosarev, V. V., & Babanov, S. A. (2009). The ethics of biomedical research: Problems and solutions. Meditsinskii Al’manakh, 4, 41-45. (in Russian)
24. Lubin, B., Levitt, E. E., & Zuckerman, M. (1962). Some personality differences between responders and nonresponders to a survey questionnaire. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 26, 192. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048697
25. Lugtig, P. (2014). Panel attrition: Separating stayers, fast attriters, gradual attriters, and lurkers. Sociological Methods and Research, 43, 699-723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113520305
26. Malloy, T. E., Albright, L., Kenny, D. A., Agatstein, F., & Winquist, L. (1997). Interpersonal perception and metaperception in nonoverlapping social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 390-398. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.390
27. McCrae, R. R., & Costa Jr., P. T. (2013). Introduction to the empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. In T. A. Widiger & P. T. Costa Jr. (Eds.), Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (3rd ed., pp. 15-27). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
28. Menard, S. (2002). Longitudinal research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Omoto, A. M., Snyder, M., & Hackett, J. D. (2010). Personality and motivational antecedents of activism and civic engagement. Journal of Personality, 78, 1703-1734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00667.x
30. Ployhart, R. E., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36, 94-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352110
31. Richter, D., Körtner, J. L., & Saßenroth, D. (2014). Personality has minor effects on panel attrition. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.08.001
32. Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1- 25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.1
33. Rogelberg, S. G., Conway, J. M., Sederburg, M. E., Spitzmüller, C., Aziz, S., & Knight, W. E. (2003). Profiling active and passive nonrespondents to an organizational survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1104-1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1104
34. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1975). The volunteer subject (Vol. 14). Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
35. Saliba, A., & Ostojic, P. (2014). Personality and participation: Who volunteers to participate in studies. Psychology, 5, 230-243. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2014.53034
36. Salthouse, T. A. (2014). Selectivity of attrition in longitudinal studies of cognitive functioning. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69, 567-574. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbt046
37. Saßenroth, D. (2013). The impact of personality on participation decisions in surveys: A contribution to the discussion on unit nonresponse. Berlin: Springer.
38. Satherley, N., Milojev, P., Greaves, L. M., Huang, Y., Osborne, D., Bulbulia, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2015). Demographic and psychological predictors of panel attrition: Evidence from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study. PLoS ONE, 10, e0121950. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121950
39. Schräpler, J.-P., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2010). Individual and neighborhood determinants of survey nonresponse: An analysis based on a new subsample of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), microgeographic characteristics and survey-based interviewer characteristics (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1588730). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1588730
40. Shchebetenko, S. (2014). “The best man in the world”: Attitudes toward personality traits. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 11(3), 129-148.
41. Shchebetenko, S. (2016). Reflexive characteristic adaptations within the five-factor theory: Between basic tendencies and external outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.055
42. Shchebetenko, S. A. (2015a). Reflected attitudes to personality features as a predictor of students’ academic success. Psychology and Psychotechnics, 1(76), 70-82. https://doi.org/10.7256/2070-8955.2015.1.13526 (in Russian)
43. Shchebetenko, S. A. (2015b). Reflexive characteristic adaptations within the five-factor theory of personality framework. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 36(6), 55-65. (in Russian)
44. Shchebetenko, S., & Tutikova, E. (2015). “The picture is good because openness to experience is good”: The mediating role of attitudes toward personality traits in individual differences in painting preferences. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 12(4), 122-141. (in Russian)
45. Singer, E., & Bossarte, R. M. (2006). Incentives for survey participation: When are they “coercive”? American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 31, 411-418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.07.013
46. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01
47. Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220-247. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1
48. Treneva, M. S., Munblit, D. B., & Pampura, A. N. (2014). Parents’ voluntary consent to participate in research: Biased sampling in relation to the population? Rossiyskii Vestnik Perinatologii i Pediatrii [Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics], 59(1), 82-87. (in Russian)
49. Vlasov, V. V. (2007). Systematic errors and interfering factors. Mezhdunarodnyi Zhurnal Meditsinskoi Praktiki, 3, 18-29. (in Russian)
Опубликован
2018-11-04
Как цитировать
ЩебетенкоС. А. (2018). Кто продолжает участвовать во втором этапе исследования? Роль личностных характеристик. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики, 14(4), 698-716. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2017-4-698-716
Выпуск
Раздел
Статьи выпуска
