Search

Background: The initial preference task (IPT) is an implicit measure that has featured prominently in the literature and enjoys high popularity because it offers to provide an unobtrusive and objective assessment of self-esteem that is easy to administer. However, its use for self-esteem assessment may be limited because of weak associations with direct personality measures. Moreover, moderator effects of sample- and study-related variables need investigation to determine the value of IPT-based assessments of self-esteem. Methods: Conventional and grey-literature database searches, as well as screening of reference lists of obtained articles, yielded a total of 105 independent healthy adult samples (N = 17,777) originating from 60 studies. Summary effect estimates and subgroup analyses for potential effect moderators (e.g., administration order, algorithm, rating type) were calculated by means of meta-analytic random- and mixed-effects models. Moreover, we accounted for potential influences of publication year, publication status (published vs. not), and participant sex in a weighted stepwise hierarchical multiple meta-regression. We tested for dissemination bias through six methods. Results: There was no noteworthy correlation between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem (r = .102), indicating conceptual independence of these two constructs. Effects were stronger when the B-algorithm was used for calculation of IPT-scores and the IPT was administered only once, whilst all other moderators did not show significant influences. Regression analyses revealed a somewhat stronger (albeit non-significant) effect for men. Moreover, there was no evidence for dissemination bias or a decline effect, although effects from published studies were numerically somewhat stronger than unpublished effects. Discussion: We show that there is no noteworthy association between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem, which is broadly consistent with dual-process models of implicit and explicit evaluations on the one hand, but also casts doubt on the suitability of the IPT for the assessment of implicit self-esteem on the other hand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research suggests that search volumes of the most popular search engine worldwide, Google, provided via Google Trends, could be associated with national suicide rates in the USA, UK, and some Asian countries. However, search volumes have mostly been studied in an ad hoc fashion, without controls for spurious associations. This study evaluated the validity and utility of Google Trends search volumes for behavioral forecasting of suicide rates in the USA, Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Suicide-related search terms were systematically collected and respective Google Trends search volumes evaluated for availability. Time spans covered 2004 to 2010 (USA, Switzerland) and 2004 to 2012 (Germany, Austria). Temporal associations of search volumes and suicide rates were investigated with time-series analyses that rigorously controlled for spurious associations. The number and reliability of analyzable search volume data increased with country size. Search volumes showed various temporal associations with suicide rates. However, associations differed both across and within countries and mostly followed no discernable patterns. The total number of significant associations roughly matched the number of expected Type I errors. These results suggest that the validity of Google Trends search volumes for behavioral forecasting of national suicide rates is low. The utility and validity of search volumes for the forecasting of suicide rates depend on two key assumptions (“the population that conducts searches consists mostly of individuals with suicidal ideation”, “suicide-related search behavior is strongly linked with suicidal behavior”). We discuss strands of evidence that these two assumptions are likely not met. Implications for future research with Google Trends in the context of suicide research are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number scales have been developed to measure conspiracist ideation, but little attention has been paid to the factorial validity of these scales. We reassessed the psychometric properties of four widely-used scales, namely the Belief in Conspiracy Theories Inventory (BCTI), the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire (CMQ), the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS), and the One-Item Conspiracy Measure (OICM). Eight-hundred-and-three U.S. adults completed all measures, along with measures of endorsement of 9/11 and anti-vaccination conspiracy theories. Through both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, we found that only the BCTI had acceptable factorial validity. We failed to confirm the factor structures of the CMQ and the GBCS, suggesting these measures had poor factorial validity. Indices of convergent validity were acceptable for the BCTI, but weaker for the other measures. Based on these findings, we provide suggestions for the future refinement in the measurement of conspiracist ideation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research from various countries consistently reported an advantage of boys over girls in general knowledge and was also suggestive of some overall trends regarding specific domains of general knowledge that were speculated to stem from biologically differentiated interests. However, results were heterogeneous and, as of yet, had not been evaluated meta-analytically. Moreover, previous research drew on overly homogeneous high-school or undergraduate samples whose representativeness appears problematic; mostly, likely moderators, such as school type, student age or parental education, were also not directly investigated or controlled for. We provide a meta-analytical aggregation of available results regarding sex differences in general knowledge and present new data, investigating the psychometric properties of the General Knowledge Test (GKT), on which previous research primarily relied, and explored sex differences in a large and heterogeneous Austrian high-school student sample (N = 1088). The aggregated sex effect in general knowledge was of medium size in previous research, but differences in specific domains were heterogeneous across countries and only modest at best. Large sex differences in our data could be explained to a large part by school-related moderators (school type, school, student age, parental education) and selection processes. Boys had a remaining advantage over girls that was only small in size and that was consistent with the magnitude of sex differences in general intelligence. Analysis of the GKT yielded no evidence of biologically differentiated interests, but of a specific interest in the humanities among girls. In conclusion, previous research likely overestimated sex differences in general knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]