Geänderte Inhalte

Salivary steroid immunoassays are widely used in psychoneuroendocrinology to investigate the psychological effects of menstrual cycle phase. Though manufacturers advertise their assays as suitable, they have not been rigorously validated for this purpose. We collated data from eight studies across more than 1,200 women and more than 9,500 time points. All studies measured estradiol and progesterone and had at least one independent indicator of cycle phase (day in cycle relative to the luteinising hormone surge or a menstrual onset). Seven studies collected saliva; one study collected serum. In serum, all non-steroid cycle phase measures strongly predicted steroids in the expected manner. By contrast, salivary immunoassays of estradiol were only weakly predictable from cycle phase and showed an upward bias compared to expectations from serum. For salivary immunoassays of progesterone, predictability from cycle phase was more mixed, but two widely used assays performed poorly. Imputing average serum steroid levels from cycle phase may yield more valid values than several widely used salivary immunoassays. Tandem mass spectrometry may provide a valid alternative to widely used immunoassays and could be combined with imputation.

One of Jüri Allik’s major, pioneering contributions to psychology is the assessment of personality across numerous cultures. His contributions have inspired many other large collaborations of international researchers to move beyond early work confirming the Five Factor Model cross-culturally to assessing the reliability and validity of a broad range of personality traits. Cross-cultural comparisons of personality traits may be problematic if measures have unique meanings in different cultural contexts that influence how individuals respond to items. In this chapter we present a new and relatively simple method for assessing the comparability of measures in large-scale cross-cultural studies, and illustrate the method using responses to the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2) from 15,368 participants in 63 countries participating in the International Situations Project.

Recent research conducted largely in the US suggests that most people would like to change one or more of their personality traits. Yet almost no research has investigated the degree to which and in what ways volitional personality change (VPC), or individuals’ active efforts towards personality change, might be common around the world. Through a custom-built website, 13,278 college student participants from 56 countries using 42 different languages reported whether they were currently trying to change their personality and, if so, what they were trying to change. Around the world, 60.40% of participants reported that they are currently trying to change their personalities, with the highest percentage in Thailand (81.91%) and the lowest in Kenya (21.41%). Among those who provide open-ended responses to the aspect of personality they are trying to change, the most common goals were to increase emotional stability (29.73%), conscientiousness (19.71%), extraversion (15.94%), and agreeableness (13.53%). In line with previous research, students who are trying to change any personality trait tend to have relatively low levels of emotional stability and happiness. Moreover, those with relatively low levels of socially desirable traits reported attempting to increase what they lacked. These principal findings were generalizable around the world.

Objective The current study seeks to replicate and extend principal findings reported in The World at 7:00 (Guillaume et al., 2016), a project that examined the psychological experience of situations in 20 countries. Method Data were collected from participants in 62 countries (N= 15,318), recruited from universities by local collaborators to complete the study via a custom-built website using 42 languages. Results Several findings of the previous study were replicated. The average reported situational experience around the world was mildly positive. The same countries tended to be most alike in reported situational experience (r = .60) across the two studies, among the countries included in both. As in the previous study, the homogeneity of reported situational experience was significantly greater within than between countries, although the difference was small. The previously reported exploratory finding that negative aspects of situations varied more across countries than positive aspects did not replicate. Correlations between aspects of reported situational experience and country-level average value scores, personality, and demographic variables were largely similar between the two studies. Conclusion The findings underscore the importance of cross-cultural situational research and the need to replicate its results, and highlight the complex interplay of culture and situational experience.