4.2 Article

Correlation Database of 60 Cross-Disciplinary Surveys and Cognitive Tasks Assessing Self-Regulation

Journal

JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT
Volume 103, Issue 2, Pages 238-245

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2020.1732994

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health Science of Behavior Change Common Fund [UH2DA041713]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-regulation is studied across various disciplines, and the integration of cross-disciplinary measures of self-regulation reveals substantial variability and challenges the notion that different measures assess the same construct.
Self-regulation is studied across various disciplines, including personality, social, cognitive, health, developmental, and clinical psychology; psychiatry; neuroscience; medicine; pharmacology; and economics. Widespread interest in self-regulation has led to confusion regarding both the constructs within the nomological network of self-regulation and the measures used to assess these constructs. To facilitate the integration of cross-disciplinary measures of self-regulation, we estimated product-moment and distance correlations among 60 cross-disciplinary measures of self-regulation (23 self-report surveys, 37 cognitive tasks) and measures of health and substance use based on 522 participants. The correlations showed substantial variability, though the surveys demonstrated greater convergent validity than did the cognitive tasks. Variables derived from the surveys only weakly correlated with variables derived from the cognitive tasks (M = .049, range = .000 to .271 for the absolute value of the product-moment correlation; M = .085, range = .028 to .241 for the distance correlation), thus challenging the notion that these surveys and cognitive tasks measure the same construct. We conclude by outlining several potential uses for this publicly available database of correlations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available