期刊
ASIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
卷 10, 期 3, 页码 198-200出版社
WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-839X.2007.00226.x
关键词
culture; meta-analysis; self-enhancement
What types of studies test the question of pancultural self-enhancement? Sedikides, Gaertner, and Vevea ( 2007) have identified inclusion criteria that largely limit the question to studies of the better-than-average effect (i. e. 27 out of 29 effects that they include as` validated' and `relevant'). In contrast, other effects which they labelled as `unvalidated' or `irrelevant' used methods other than the better-than-average effect ( i. e. 24 out of 24 effects). Because Sedikides et al. are drawing conclusions about pancultural self-enhancement and not the pancultural better-than-average effect, these excluded studies are relevant to the hypothesis under question. Ignoring the findings from other methods is highly problematic, in particular because these other methods yield results that conflict with those from the better-than-average effect. An analysis of effects from all studies reveals no support for pancultural self-enhancement.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据