A cross-cultural study of trait self-enhancement, explanatory variables, and adjustment

Church, A. Timothy; Katigbak, Marcia S.; Prado, Alicia M. del; Valdez-Medina, José Luis; Miramontes, Lilia G.; Ortiz, Fernando A.

doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.01.004

Cited by 38 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One problem of this research was the failure to distinguish between general evaluative biases and unique biases in perceptions of the self (Church et al,, 2006;Kwan et al, 2004). Our study clarifies previous findings in two ways.…”

Section: Culture and Evaluative Biasessupporting

confidence: 75%

“…Previous studies suggested that self-enhancement is less pronounced in East Asian culture (Church et al, 2006;Diener, Suh, et al,, 1995;Mesquita & Karasawa, 2002;Tsai, Levenson, & McCoy, 2006;Veenhoven, 1991;Wirtz, Chiu, Diener, & Oishi, 2009;Zhang, Yang, & Wang, 2009). One problem of this research was the failure to distinguish between general evaluative biases and unique biases in perceptions of the self (Church et al,, 2006;Kwan et al, 2004).…”

Section: Culture and Evaluative Biasesmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…For example, McCrae et al (1998) found higher Agreeableness for Asian Canadians than European Canadians, BenetMartinez and Karakitapoglu-Aygiin (2003) found no differences in Agreeableness, and Church et al (2006) found higher Agreeableness for European Americans than Asian Americans. The most consistent finding has been that European North Americans report being more extraverted than Asians and Asian Americans or Asian Canadians (Benet-Martinez & Karakitapoglu-Aygün, 2003;Church et al, 2006;McCrae et al, 1998). However, the effect size of this difference is small to moderate, decreases with acculturation, and varies across facets of Extraversion.…”

Section: Validity Of Self-reported Life Satisfaction In Cross-nationamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cultural differences in self- and other-evaluations and well-being: A study of European and Asian Canadians.

Kim

Schimmack

Oishi

2012

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anusic, Schimmack, Pinkus, and Lockwood (2009) developed the halo-alpha-beta (HAB) model to separate halo variance from variance due to valid personality traits and other sources of measurement error in self-ratings of personality. The authors used a twin-HAB model of self-ratings and ratings of a partner (friend or dating partner) to test several hypotheses about culture, evaluative biases in self- and other-perceptions, and well-being. Participants were friends or dating partners who reported on their own and their partner's personality and well-being (N = 906 students). European Canadians had higher general evaluative biases (GEB) than Asian Canadians. There were no cultural differences in self-enhancement or other-enhancement. GEB significantly predicted self-ratings of life satisfaction, but not informant ratings of well-being. GEB fully mediated the effect of culture on self-ratings of life satisfaction. The results suggest that North American culture encourages positive biases in self- and other-perceptions. These biases also influence self-ratings of life satisfaction but have a much weaker effect on informant ratings of life satisfaction. The implications of these findings for cultural differences in well-being are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Culture and Evaluative Biasessupporting

confidence: 75%

Section: Culture and Evaluative Biasesmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Validity Of Self-reported Life Satisfaction In Cross-nationamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cultural differences in self- and other-evaluations and well-being: A study of European and Asian Canadians.

Kim

Schimmack

Oishi

2012

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The decision about which SE measure is appropriate for the specific research question at hand should be based on conceptual considerations. In addition, one should take into account the potential pitfalls of discrepancy measures, which were discussed in the long-standing debate on the use of difference scores for measuring change (e.g., the influences of regression toward the mean; for an overview, see Campbell & Kenny, 1999). Whereas individual researchers should identify an SE measure that accurately test of abs (OSF Material G) and, for example, the R code that demonstrates CRA.…”

Section: The Cra Approach For Testing Se Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The (mal)adaptive consequences of SE are one of the most hotly debated topics in social-personality psychology. Are people better (or worse) adjusted the more they overestimate (or the less they underestimate) their positive attributes (e.g., Bonanno, Field, Kovacevic, & Kaltman, 2002;Church et al, 2006;Colvin, Block, & Funder, 1995;Dufner, Gebauer, Sedikides, & Denissen, 2018;Gramzow, Willard, & Mendes, 2008;Paulhus, 1998;Robins & Beer, 2001;Sedikides & Gregg, 2008;Taylor & Brown, 1988;Taylor, Lerner, Sherman, Sage, & McDowell, 2003)?Previous empirical studies addressing such questions have typically applied an analytical approach involving two steps. A discrepancy score (e.g., an algebraic difference or residual) between individuals' self-view and their value on some criterion measure was computed in a first step, which was then correlated with an outcome variable in a second step.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Condition-Based Regression Analysis (CRA) is Indeed a Valid Test of Self-Enhancement Effects: A Response to Krueger et al. ()

Humberg¹,

Dufner²,

Schönbrodt

et al. 2018

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can the consequences of self-enhancement (SE) be tested empirically? Traditional two-step approaches for investigating SE effects have been criticized for providing systematically biased results. Recently, we suggested condition-based regression analysis (CRA) as an approach that enables users to test SE effects while overcoming the shortcomings of previous methods. Krueger et al. (2017) reiterated the problems of previous two-step approaches and criticized the extent to which CRA could solve these problems. However, their critique was based on a misrepresentation of our approach: Whereas a key element of CRA is the requirement that the coefficients of a multiple regression model must meet two conditions, Krueger et al.'s argumentation referred to the test of only a single condition. As a consequence, their reasoning does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the validity of our approach. In this paper, we clarify these misunderstandings and explain why CRA is a valid approach for investigating the consequences of SE.Keywords: self-view; self-enhancement; discrepancy model; algebraic difference; residual scores Self-enhancement (SE) is often defined as the degree to which the self-view (e.g., about one's ability) exceeds some kind of criterion (e.g., one's objectively measured ability). The (mal)adaptive consequences of SE are one of the most hotly debated topics in social-personality psychology. Are people better (or worse) adjusted the more they overestimate (or the less they underestimate) their positive attributes (e.g., Bonanno, Field, Kovacevic, & Kaltman, 2002;Church et al., 2006;Colvin, Block, & Funder, 1995;Dufner, Gebauer, Sedikides, & Denissen, 2018;Gramzow, Willard, & Mendes, 2008;Paulhus, 1998;Robins & Beer, 2001;Sedikides & Gregg, 2008;Taylor & Brown, 1988;Taylor, Lerner, Sherman, Sage, & McDowell, 2003)?Previous empirical studies addressing such questions have typically applied an analytical approach involving two steps. A discrepancy score (e.g., an algebraic difference or residual) between individuals' self-view and their value on some criterion measure was computed in a first step, which was then correlated with an outcome variable in a second step. Researchers have repeatedly emphasized that this two-step approach is not appropriate for testing SE effects because it is systematically biased toward mistaking main effects of the self-view for effects of SE (e.g., Asendorpf & Ostendorf, 1998;Edwards & Parry, 1993;Griffin, Murray, & Gonzalez, 1999;Humberg et al., 2018;Krueger & Wright, 2011;Ullrich, 2009;Zuckerman & Knee, 1996). Recently, Humberg et al. (2018) introduced condition-based regression analysis (CRA) as an approach that can be applied to overcome the problems of prior two-step approaches. Unlike previous approaches, CRA enables users to test SE effects without mistaking the main effects of the self-view for SE effects. In a recent article, Krueger, Heck, and Asendorpf (2017) reviewed discrepancy scores that have typically been used in the first step of the analysis of SE effe...

show abstract

Prospects for an integrated trait and cultural psychology

Church

2009

Eur J Pers

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Church (2000) discussed a possible integration of trait and cultural psychology perspectives, two dominant theoretical approaches in the study of culture and personality. In this article, I summarise the results of cross-cultural studies we have conducted to test elements of this integrated perspective, discuss prospects for an integrated approach, and note future research needs. The studies address the measurement of implicit theories regarding the traitedness versus contextuality of behaviour; culture, method, and the content of selfconcepts; culture and explanations of everyday behaviours; accuracy and self-enhancement in trait assessments; cross-role consistency and its relation to adjustment; and crosssituational consistency and trait prediction of daily behaviour. Our results, and those of other researchers, indicate that an integration of trait and cultural psychology perspectives has potential. However, some findings suggest that cultural psychology hypotheses may be more consistently supported in comparisons of Americans with selected Asian cultures than in comparisons of individualistic and collectivistic cultures more generally. Thus, an integrated perspective may need to be recast using theoretical perspectives that go beyond individualism-collectivism.

show abstract

A cross-cultural study of trait self-enhancement, explanatory variables, and adjustment

Cited by 38 publications

References 76 publications

Cultural differences in self- and other-evaluations and well-being: A study of European and Asian Canadians.

Cultural differences in self- and other-evaluations and well-being: A study of European and Asian Canadians.

Why Condition-Based Regression Analysis (CRA) is Indeed a Valid Test of Self-Enhancement Effects: A Response to Krueger et al. ()

Prospects for an integrated trait and cultural psychology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About