Faking by actual applicants on personality tests: A meta‐analysis of within‐subjects studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Hu ◽  
Brian S. Connelly
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Personality Tests ◽  
Within Subjects

scholarly journals Experience as a Safety Factor in Driving; Methodological Considerations in a Sample of Bus Drivers

Safety ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders af Wåhlberg ◽  
Lisa Dorn
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bus Drivers ◽  
Safe Driving ◽  
Driving Experience ◽  
Method Effects ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Exact Size ◽  
Methodological Considerations

Experience is generally seen as an important factor for safe driving, but the exact size and details of this effect has never been meta-analytically described, despite a fair number of published results. However, the available data is heterogeneous concerning the methods used, which could lead to very different results. Such method effects can be difficult to identify in meta-analysis, and a within-study comparison might yield more reliable results. To test for the difference in effects between some different analytical methods, analyses of data on bus driver experience and crash involvement from a British company were conducted. Effects of within- and between-subjects analysis, non-linearity of effects, and direct and induced exposure methods were compared. Furthermore, changes in the environmental risk were investigated. Between-subject designs yielded smaller effects as compared to within-subjects designs, while non-linearity was not found. The type of exposure control applied had a strong influence on effects, as did differences in overall environmental risk between years. Apparently, “the effect of driving experience” means different things depending upon how calculations have been undertaken, at least for bus drivers. A full meta-analysis, taking several effects of methodology into account, is needed before it can be said that the effect of driving experience on crash involvement is well understood.

scholarly journals A disfluent font does not help people to solve math and non-math problems regardless of their numeracy [Preprint]

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miroslav Sirota ◽  
Andriana Theodoropoulou ◽  
Marie Juanchich
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Solution Rate ◽  
Cognitive Reflection Test ◽  
Numerical Ability ◽  
Mathematical Problems ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
Zero Effect ◽  
Decisive Evidence ◽  
Math Problems

Prior research has suggested that perceptual disfluency activates analytical processing and increases the solution rate of mathematical problems with appealing but incorrect answers (i.e., the Cognitive Reflection Test, hereafter CRT). However, a recent meta-analysis does not support such a conclusion. We tested here whether insufficient numerical ability can account for this discrepancy. In a 2(font: fluent vs. disfluent; between-subjects factor) × 2 (CRT: Numerical vs Verbal; within-subjects factor) design, 310 participants solved numerical and verbal CRT problems, followed by a measure of numerical ability. We found strong support against the disfluent font effect on the problem-solving rate for math as well as non-math problems regardless of participants’ numeracy. The updated meta-analysis (k = 18) yielded close-to-zero effect, Hedge’s g = -0.01, 95% CI[-0.05, 0.03] and decisive evidence against the disfluency effect on math problems, BF0+ = 151.6. Thus, perceptual disfluency does not help people solve math and non-math problems.

scholarly journals Common default mode network dysfunction across psychopathologies: A neuroimaging meta-analysis of the n-back working memory paradigm

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C Farruggia ◽  
Angela R Laird ◽  
Aaron T Mattfeld
Keyword(s):  
Bipolar Disorder ◽  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Healthy Individuals ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Default Mode ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Research Domain

ABSTRACTThe National Institute of Mental Health’s (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) classifies disorders based on shared aspects of behavioral and neurobiological dysfunction. One common behavioral deficit observed in various psychopathologies, namely ADHD, addiction, bipolar disorder, depression, and schizophrenia, is a deficit in working memory performance. However, it is not known to what extent, if any, these disorders share common neurobiological abnormalities that contribute to decrements in performance. The goal of the present study was to examine convergence and divergence of working memory networks across psychopathologies. We used the Activation Likelihood Estimate (ALE) meta-analytic technique to collapse prior data obtained from published studies using the n-back working memory paradigm in individuals with a DSM-criteria diagnosis of the aforementioned disorders. These studies examined areas in the brain that showed increases in activity as a function of working memory-related load compared to a baseline condition, both within subjects and between healthy individuals and those with psychiatric disorder. A meta-analysis of 281 foci covering 81 experiments and 2,629 participants found significant convergence of hyperactivity in medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) for DSM-diagnosed individuals compared to healthy controls. Foci from ADHD, addiction, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and major depression studies contributed to the formation of this cluster. These results provide evidence that default-mode intrusion may constitute a shared seed of dysregulation across multiple psychopathologies, ultimately resulting in poorer working memory performance.

scholarly journals A Meta-analysis of the Survival Processing Advantage in Memory

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John E. Scofield ◽  
Erin Michelle Buchanan ◽  
Bogdan Kostic
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Review Literature ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Selective Reporting ◽  
Survival Processing ◽  
Average Effect ◽  
Eta Squared ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
Processing Effects ◽  
Trim And Fill

The survival processing advantage occurs when processing words for their survival value improves later performance on a memory test. Due to the interest in this topic, we conducted a meta-analysis to review literature regarding the survival processing advantage to estimate a bias-corrected effect size. Traditional meta-analytic methods were used, as well as the test for excessive success, p-curve, p-uniform, trim and fill, PET-PEESE, and selection models to re-evaluate effect sizes while controlling for forms of small-study effects. Average effect sizes for survival processing ranged between partial eta squared = .06 and .09 for between-subjects experiments, and between .15 and .18 for within-subjects experiments after correcting for potential bias and selective reporting. Overall, researchers can expect to find medium to large survival processing effects, with selective reporting and bias correcting techniques typically estimating lower effects than traditional meta-analytic techniques.

scholarly journals Recency negativity: Newer food crops are evaluated less favorably

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoel Inbar ◽  
Jordan Phelps ◽  
Paul Rozin
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Artificial Selection ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Food Crops ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Conventional Breeding ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Within Subjects

Food crops produced by new technologies such as genetic engineering are widely opposed (Gaskell, Bauer, Durant & Allum, 1999; Scott, Inbar, Wirz, Brossard & Rozin, 2018). Here, we examine one reason for this opposition: recency. More recently-developed crops are evaluated less favorably, whether they are produced by artificial selection (i.e., conventional breeding), natural or man-made irradiation, or genetic engineering. Negative effects of recency persist in a within-subjects design where people are able to explicitly compare crops developed at different times, and an internal meta-analysis shows that the negative effect of recency is robust across measures and stimuli. These results have implications for the evaluation of crops produced using new modification techniques, including the widespread opposition to genetic engineering.

scholarly journals Defending one’s worldviews under mortality salience – Testing the validity of an established idea

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Schindler ◽  
Nina Reinhardt ◽  
Marc-André Reinhard
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Terror Management Theory ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Mortality Salience ◽  
Terror Management ◽  
Dependent Measure ◽  
Bayesian Analyses ◽  
Worldview Defense ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
Negative Perceptions

Terror management theory (TMT) posits that mortality salience (MS) leads to more negative perceptions of persons who oppose one’s worldview and to more positive perceptions of persons who confirm one’s worldview. Recent failed replications of classic findings have thrown into question empirical validity for this established idea. We believe, that there are crucial methodological and theoretical aspects that have been neglected in these studies which limit their explanatory power; thus, the studies of this registered report aimed to address these issues and to directly test the worldview defense hypothesis. First, we conducted two preregistered lab studies applying the classic worldview defense paradigm. The stimulus material (worldview-confirming and -opposing essays) was previously validated for students at a German university. In both studies, the MS manipulation (between-subjects) was followed by a distraction phase. Then, in Study 1 (N = 131), each participant read both essays (within-subjects). In Study 2 (N = 276), the essays were manipulated between-subjects. Credibility attribution towards the author was assessed as the dependent variable. In both studies, the expected interaction effects were not significant. In a third highly powered (registered) study (N = 1356), we used a previously validated worldview-opposing essay. The five classic worldview defense items served as the main dependent measure. The MS effect was not significant. Bayesian analyses favored the null hypothesis. An internal meta-analysis revealed a very small (Hedges’ g = .09) but nonsignificant (p = .058) effect of MS. Altogether, the presented studies reveal challenges in providing strong evidence for this established idea.

scholarly journals Disrupted reward processing in Parkinson’s disease and its relationship with dopamine state and neuropsychiatric syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. jnnp-2021-327762
Author(s):  
Harry Costello ◽  
Alex J Berry ◽  
Suzanne Reeves ◽  
Rimona S Weil ◽  
Eileen M Joyce ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Reinforcement Learning ◽  
Psychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neuropsychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Reward Processing ◽  
Option Valuation ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Within Subjects

BackgroundNeuropsychiatric symptoms are common in Parkinson’s disease (PD) and predict poorer outcomes. Reward processing dysfunction is a candidate mechanism for the development of psychiatric symptoms including depression and impulse control disorders (ICDs). We aimed to determine whether reward processing is impaired in PD and its relationship with neuropsychiatric syndromes and dopamine replacement therapy.MethodsThe Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and PsycInfo databases were searched for articles published up to 5 November 2020. Studies reporting reward processing task performance by patients with PD and healthy controls were included. Summary statistics comparing reward processing between groups were converted to standardised mean difference (SMD) scores and meta-analysed using a random effects model.ResultsWe identified 55 studies containing 2578 participants (1638 PD and 940 healthy controls). Studies assessing three subcomponent categories of reward processing tasks were included: option valuation (n=12), reinforcement learning (n=37) and reward response vigour (n=6). Across all studies, patients with PD on medication exhibited a small-to-medium impairment versus healthy controls (SMD=0.34; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.53), with greater impairments observed off dopaminergic medication in within-subjects designs (SMD=0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.57). Within-subjects subcomponent analysis revealed impaired processing off medication on option valuation (SMD=0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75) and reward response vigour (SMD=0.36, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.59) tasks. However, the opposite applied for reinforcement learning, which relative to healthy controls was impaired on-medication (SMD=0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.65) but not off-medication (SMD=0.28, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.59). ICD was the only neuropsychiatric syndrome with sufficient studies (n=13) for meta-analysis, but no significant impairment was identified compared tonon-ICD patients (SMD=−0.02, 95% CI −0.43 to 0.39).ConclusionReward processing disruption in PD differs according to subcomponent and dopamine medication state, and warrants further study as a potential treatment target and mechanism underlying associated neuropsychiatric syndromes.

scholarly journals Disrupted reward processing in Parkinson's Disease and its relationship with dopamine state and neuropsychiatric syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry Costello ◽  
Alex Berry ◽  
Suzanne Reeves ◽  
Rimona S. Weil ◽  
Eileen Joyce ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Learning ◽  
Psychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neuropsychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Reward Processing ◽  
Option Valuation ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Significant Impairment ◽  
Within Subjects

Background: Neuropsychiatric symptoms are common in Parkinsons disease (PD) and predict poorer outcomes. Reward processing dysfunction is a candidate mechanism for the development of psychiatric symptoms including depression and impulse control disorders (ICD). We aimed to determine whether reward processing is impaired in PD and its relationship with neuropsychiatric syndromes and dopamine replacement therapy. Methods: The Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and PsycInfo databases were searched for articles published up to November 5th, 2020. Studies reporting reward processing task performance by PD patients and healthy controls were included. Summary statistics comparing reward processing between groups were converted to standardized mean difference (SMD) scores and meta-analysed using a random effects model. Results: We identified 55 studies containing 2578 participants (1,638 PD and 940 healthy controls). Studies assessing three subcomponent categories of reward processing tasks were included: Option Valuation (n=12), Reinforcement Learning (n=37) and Reward Response Vigour (n=6). Across all studies, PD patients on medication exhibited a small-to-medium impairment versus healthy controls (SMD=0.34; 95%CI 0.14-0.53), with greater impairments observed off dopaminergic medication in within-subjects designs (SMD=0.43, 95%CI 0.29-0.57). Within-subjects subcomponent analysis revealed impaired processing off medication on Option Valuation (SMD=0.57, 95%CI 0.39-0.75) and Reward Response Vigour (SMD=0.36, 95%CI 0.13-0.59) tasks. However, the opposite applied for Reinforcement Learning, which relative to healthy controls was impaired on-medication (SMD=0.45, 95%CI 0.25-0.65) but not off-medication (SMD=0.28, 95%CI -0.03-0.59). ICD was the only neuropsychiatric syndrome with sufficient studies (n=13) for meta-analysis, but no significant impairment was identified compared to non-ICD patients (SMD=-0.02, 95%CI -0.43-0.39). Conclusion: Reward processing disruption in PD differs according to subcomponent and dopamine medication state and warrants further study as a potential treatment target and mechanism underlying associated neuropsychiatric syndromes.

scholarly journals The contribution of metamemory beliefs to the font size effect on judgments of learning: Is word frequency a moderating factor?

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0257547
Author(s):  
Tian Fan ◽  
Jun Zheng ◽  
Xiao Hu ◽  
Ningxin Su ◽  
Yue Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Size Effect ◽  
Word Frequency ◽  
Dominant Role ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Judgments Of Learning ◽  
Font Size ◽  
Multiple Cues ◽  
Pure List ◽  
Within Subjects

Previous studies found that metamemory beliefs dominate the font size effect on judgments of learning (JOLs). However, few studies have investigated whether beliefs about font size contribute to the font size effect in circumstances of multiple cues. The current study aims to fill this gap. Experiment 1 adopted a 2 (font size: 70 pt vs. 9 pt) * 2 (word frequency (WF): high vs. low) within-subjects design. The results showed that beliefs about font size did not mediate the font size effect on JOLs when multiple cues (font size and WF) were simultaneously provided. Experiment 2 further explored whether WF moderates the contribution of beliefs about font size to the font size effect, in which a 2 (font size: 70 pt vs. 9 pt, as a within-subjects factor) * 2 (WF: high vs. low, as a between-subjects factor) mixed design was used. The results showed that the contribution of beliefs about font size to the font size effect was present in a pure list of low-frequency words, but absent in a pure list of high-frequency words. Lastly, a meta-analysis showed evidence supporting the proposal that the contribution of beliefs about font size to the font size effect on JOLs is moderated by WF. Even though numerous studies suggested beliefs about font size play a dominant role in the font size effect on JOLs, the current study provides new evidence suggesting that such contribution is conditional. Theoretical implications are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document