Lake Wobegon Effect
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
1. What is the Lake Wobegon Effect and how does it arise?
In Garrison Keillor’s fictional town of Lake Wobegon, “all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.” (Gregory, 2011). The Lake Wobegon effect is a natural tendency to overestimate one’s capabilities and see oneself as better than others. Research psychologists refer to this tendency as self-enhancement bias and have found evidence for its existence in many domains. Most of us think we’re funnier, smarter, warmer, more honest, or more conscientious than we really are.
Cross-cultural studies have found a link between the tendency to self-enhance and the degree of individualism …show more content…
in a society. In a review of 91 cross-national comparisons, Steven Heine and Takeshi Hamamura found that individualistic Westerners, as a group, consistently viewed themselves in a more positive light than did collectivistic East Asians. Indeed, the Westerners in these studies were much more likely than East Asians to see themselves as uniquely talented and possessing desirable personality traits.
An international team of researchers, however, recently discovered that individualism may not be the driving force behind cultural variations in the tendency to self-enhance. Instead, they found that income inequality was a better predictor of the Lake Wobegon effect. Steve Loughnan, a psychologist at the University of Kent in England, collaborated with colleagues in 12 other countries to test a novel hypothesis: The magnitude of self-enhancement bias, which varies across cultures, will be greater in societies that have high levels of income inequality.
To test their hypothesis, Loughnan and his team gathered data from more than 1,600 participants—most of them university students—in 15 nations on five continents. The participants rated a large set of personality traits (e.g., agreeableness) and values (e.g., achievement) on two dimensions: (1) how much do you possess this characteristic compared to the average person? and (2) How desirable is this characteristic?
As reported in the October 2011 issue of Psychological Science, people living in countries with high income inequality—Peru, South Africa, and the United States, for example—were more likely to see themselves as better than other people.
People living in countries with relatively low income inequality—Belgium, Japan, and Germany, for example—were less likely to self-enhance. When the researchers statistically controlled for the effects of income inequality, they found no relationship at all between individualism and self-enhancement.
So, in countries where there’s a large disparity between the haves and the have-nots, people are more likely to fall prey to the Lake Wobegon effect, to overestimate their abilities and achievements and believe they are better than most people.
The reasons for this surprising relationship are not yet clear. Professor Loughnan suspects it may have something to do with the competitiveness that can be triggered by economic inequality. If wealth is distributed very unevenly and you want one of the (relatively few) jobs that pays a high salary, it makes sense to eschew modesty and present yourself as superior to others. The meek may inherit the earth, but they won’t have fat wallets when it happens. …show more content…
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA.
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
1. Define content validity. Give an example of how the content validity of a spelling test might be guaranteed.
Content validity is defined in our textbook as “the type of validity that is determined by the degree to which the questions, tasks, or items on a test are representative of the universe of behavior the test was designed to sample.” (Gregory, 2011). In my own words, content validity is an important research methodology term that refers to how well a test measures the behavior for which it is intended. For example, let’s say your teacher gives you a psychology test on the psychological principles of sleep. The purpose of this test is to measure your knowledge or mastery of the psychological principles of sleep, right? If the test does indeed measure this, then it is said to have content validity – it measures what it is supposed to measure. “In theory, content validity is nothing more than a sampling issue.” (Gregory, 2011). Content validity is a useful concept when a great deal is known about the variable that the researcher wishes to measure. With achievement tests in particular, it is often possible to specify the relevant universe of behaviors in advance. For example, when developing an achievement test of spelling, a researcher could identify nearly all possible words that a third grader should know. The content validity of a third grade spelling achievement test would be assured, in part, if words of varying difficulty level were randomly sampled from this preexisting list.
So, how is content validity measured? How do researchers know if an assessment has content validity? Content validity is most often measured by relying on the knowledge of people who are familiar with the construct being measured. These subject-matter experts are usually provided with access to the measurement tool and are asked to provide feedback on how well each question measure the construct in question. Their feedback is then analyzed and informed decisions can be made about the effectiveness of each question.
In reference to a spelling achievement, it cannot be assumed that a multiple-choice test will measure the same spelling skills as an oral test or a frequency count of misspellings in written compositions. Thus, when evaluating content validity, response specification s also an integral part of defining the relevant universe of behaviors.
Psychological assessment is an important part of both experimental research and clinical treatment. One of the greatest concerns when creating a psychological test is whether or not it actually measures what we think it is measuring. For example, a test might be designed to measure a stable personality trait, but instead measure transitory emotions generated by situational or environmental conditions. A valid test ensures that the results are an accurate reflection of the dimension undergoing assessment.
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA.
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
1. Describe the nature and purpose of the Pleasant Events Schedule.
In studying chapter 8 of our textbook, self-monitoring techniques became a very interesting subject to me. Partly because it showed that the responsibility of therapy can be given to the patient, but also because it shows a different type of result that would not have been achieved through therapist-client sessions. Self-monitoring therapy is defined as “the client chooses the goals and actively participates in the supervising, charting, and recording progress toward the end point(s) of therapy. According to this model, the therapist is relegated to the status of expert consultant. (Gregory, 2011). In speaking about self-monitoring procedures, one particular test is discussed – the Pleasant Events Schedule.
Self-monitoring procedures are especially useful in the treatment of depression, a prevalent behavior disorder consisting of sad mood, low activity level, feelings of worthlessness, concentration problems and physical symptoms such as sleep loss, appetite disturbance and reduced interest in sex. Several self-monitoring programs for depression have been reported. In order to illustrate the self-monitoring approach to the control of depression, I will summarize one small corner of the program advocated by Lewinsohn and his colleagues. (Gregory, 2011).
The purpose of the Pleasant Events Schedule (PES) is two-fold. First, in baseline assessment phase, the PES is used to self-monitor frequency and pleasantness of 320 largely ordinary, everyday events. Examples of the kinds of events listed on the PES include the following: reading magazines, going for a walk, being with pets, playing a musical instrument, making food for charity, listening to the radio, reading poetry, watching a sports event, attending church and catching up with a friend. In the PES, the frequency and pleasant ness of these events are both rated 0 to 2.The scores are then calculated using a formula and a treatment plan is determined using the score. Participants in the Lewinsohn program also monitor their daily mood on a simple 1 (worst) to 9 (best) basis.
The second use of the PES is to self-monitor therapeutic progress.
Based on the initial PES results, clients identify 100 or so potential pleasant events and strive to increase the frequency of these events, monitoring daily mood along the way. Clients who increase the frequency of pleasant events usually show an improvement in mood and other depressive symptoms as evident in their scoring. The Pleasant Events Schedule is a highly useful tool for clinicians who wish to implement a self-monitoring approach to the assessment and treatment of depression. “MachPhillamy and Lewinsohn report favorably on the technical qualities of the PES and discuss a variety of rational, factorial, and empirical subscales.” (Gregory, 2011).
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston,
MA.
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
2. Describe the nature and purpose of the Pleasant Events Schedule.
You may have heard people describe themselves as strictly "right-brained" or "left-brained," with the left-brainers bragging about their math skills and the right-brainers touting their creativity. That 's because the brain is divided down the middle into two hemispheres, with each half performing a fairly distinct set of operations. “Much of what is known about brain function is owed to Roger Sperry, whose experiments examined the way the human brain 's hemispheres operate both independently and in concert with each other.” (Gregory, 2011). The two hemispheres communicate information, such as sensory observations, to each other through the thick corpus callosum that connects them.
The brain 's right hemisphere controls the muscles on the left side of the body, while the left hemisphere controls the muscles on the right side of the human body. When you wink your right eye, that 's the left side of your brain at work. Because of this criss-cross wiring, damage to one side of the brain affects the opposite side of the body. In general, the left hemisphere is dominant in language: processing what you hear and handling most of the duties of speaking. It 's also in charge of carrying out logic and exact mathematical computations. When you need to retrieve a fact, your left brain pulls it from your memory.
The right hemisphere is mainly in charge of spatial abilities, face recognition and processing music. It performs some math, but only rough estimations and comparisons. The brain 's right side also helps us to comprehend visual imagery and make sense of what we see. It plays a role in language, particularly in interpreting context and a person 's tone. As for whether a person is right-brained or left-brained or even right-handed or left-handed the uses and preferences of the brain 's two sections are far more complex than just a simple left vs. right equation. For example, some people throw a ball with their right hand but write with their left. (Gregory, 2011).
The brain carefully balances and assigns control of certain functions to each side its all nature 's way of ensuring that the brain ultimately splits up tasks to maximize efficiency. Most people are right-hand dominant which is actually controlled by the left side of the brain.
"Brain asymmetry is essential for proper brain function," Professor Stephen Wilson of University College London told Live Science, a sister site of Life 's Little Mysteries. "It allows the two sides of the brain to become specialized, increasing its processing capacity and avoiding situations of conflict where both sides of the brain try to take charge." (Gregory, 2011).
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA.
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
1. What is the Lake Wobegon Effect and how does it arise?
In Garrison Keillor’s fictional town of Lake Wobegon, “all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.” (Gregory, 2011). The Lake Wobegon effect is a natural tendency to overestimate one’s capabilities and see oneself as better than others. Research psychologists refer to this tendency as self-enhancement bias and have found evidence for its existence in many domains. Most of us think we’re funnier, smarter, warmer, more honest, or more conscientious than we really are.
Cross-cultural studies have found a link between the tendency to self-enhance and the degree of individualism …show more content…
in a society. In a review of 91 cross-national comparisons, Steven Heine and Takeshi Hamamura found that individualistic Westerners, as a group, consistently viewed themselves in a more positive light than did collectivistic East Asians. Indeed, the Westerners in these studies were much more likely than East Asians to see themselves as uniquely talented and possessing desirable personality traits.
An international team of researchers, however, recently discovered that individualism may not be the driving force behind cultural variations in the tendency to self-enhance. Instead, they found that income inequality was a better predictor of the Lake Wobegon effect. Steve Loughnan, a psychologist at the University of Kent in England, collaborated with colleagues in 12 other countries to test a novel hypothesis: The magnitude of self-enhancement bias, which varies across cultures, will be greater in societies that have high levels of income inequality.
To test their hypothesis, Loughnan and his team gathered data from more than 1,600 participants—most of them university students—in 15 nations on five continents. The participants rated a large set of personality traits (e.g., agreeableness) and values (e.g., achievement) on two dimensions: (1) how much do you possess this characteristic compared to the average person? and (2) How desirable is this characteristic?
As reported in the October 2011 issue of Psychological Science, people living in countries with high income inequality—Peru, South Africa, and the United States, for example—were more likely to see themselves as better than other people.
People living in countries with relatively low income inequality—Belgium, Japan, and Germany, for example—were less likely to self-enhance. When the researchers statistically controlled for the effects of income inequality, they found no relationship at all between individualism and self-enhancement.
So, in countries where there’s a large disparity between the haves and the have-nots, people are more likely to fall prey to the Lake Wobegon effect, to overestimate their abilities and achievements and believe they are better than most people.
The reasons for this surprising relationship are not yet clear. Professor Loughnan suspects it may have something to do with the competitiveness that can be triggered by economic inequality. If wealth is distributed very unevenly and you want one of the (relatively few) jobs that pays a high salary, it makes sense to eschew modesty and present yourself as superior to others. The meek may inherit the earth, but they won’t have fat wallets when it happens. …show more content…
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA.
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
1. Define content validity. Give an example of how the content validity of a spelling test might be guaranteed.
Content validity is defined in our textbook as “the type of validity that is determined by the degree to which the questions, tasks, or items on a test are representative of the universe of behavior the test was designed to sample.” (Gregory, 2011). In my own words, content validity is an important research methodology term that refers to how well a test measures the behavior for which it is intended. For example, let’s say your teacher gives you a psychology test on the psychological principles of sleep. The purpose of this test is to measure your knowledge or mastery of the psychological principles of sleep, right? If the test does indeed measure this, then it is said to have content validity – it measures what it is supposed to measure. “In theory, content validity is nothing more than a sampling issue.” (Gregory, 2011). Content validity is a useful concept when a great deal is known about the variable that the researcher wishes to measure. With achievement tests in particular, it is often possible to specify the relevant universe of behaviors in advance. For example, when developing an achievement test of spelling, a researcher could identify nearly all possible words that a third grader should know. The content validity of a third grade spelling achievement test would be assured, in part, if words of varying difficulty level were randomly sampled from this preexisting list.
So, how is content validity measured? How do researchers know if an assessment has content validity? Content validity is most often measured by relying on the knowledge of people who are familiar with the construct being measured. These subject-matter experts are usually provided with access to the measurement tool and are asked to provide feedback on how well each question measure the construct in question. Their feedback is then analyzed and informed decisions can be made about the effectiveness of each question.
In reference to a spelling achievement, it cannot be assumed that a multiple-choice test will measure the same spelling skills as an oral test or a frequency count of misspellings in written compositions. Thus, when evaluating content validity, response specification s also an integral part of defining the relevant universe of behaviors.
Psychological assessment is an important part of both experimental research and clinical treatment. One of the greatest concerns when creating a psychological test is whether or not it actually measures what we think it is measuring. For example, a test might be designed to measure a stable personality trait, but instead measure transitory emotions generated by situational or environmental conditions. A valid test ensures that the results are an accurate reflection of the dimension undergoing assessment.
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA.
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
1. Describe the nature and purpose of the Pleasant Events Schedule.
In studying chapter 8 of our textbook, self-monitoring techniques became a very interesting subject to me. Partly because it showed that the responsibility of therapy can be given to the patient, but also because it shows a different type of result that would not have been achieved through therapist-client sessions. Self-monitoring therapy is defined as “the client chooses the goals and actively participates in the supervising, charting, and recording progress toward the end point(s) of therapy. According to this model, the therapist is relegated to the status of expert consultant. (Gregory, 2011). In speaking about self-monitoring procedures, one particular test is discussed – the Pleasant Events Schedule.
Self-monitoring procedures are especially useful in the treatment of depression, a prevalent behavior disorder consisting of sad mood, low activity level, feelings of worthlessness, concentration problems and physical symptoms such as sleep loss, appetite disturbance and reduced interest in sex. Several self-monitoring programs for depression have been reported. In order to illustrate the self-monitoring approach to the control of depression, I will summarize one small corner of the program advocated by Lewinsohn and his colleagues. (Gregory, 2011).
The purpose of the Pleasant Events Schedule (PES) is two-fold. First, in baseline assessment phase, the PES is used to self-monitor frequency and pleasantness of 320 largely ordinary, everyday events. Examples of the kinds of events listed on the PES include the following: reading magazines, going for a walk, being with pets, playing a musical instrument, making food for charity, listening to the radio, reading poetry, watching a sports event, attending church and catching up with a friend. In the PES, the frequency and pleasant ness of these events are both rated 0 to 2.The scores are then calculated using a formula and a treatment plan is determined using the score. Participants in the Lewinsohn program also monitor their daily mood on a simple 1 (worst) to 9 (best) basis.
The second use of the PES is to self-monitor therapeutic progress.
Based on the initial PES results, clients identify 100 or so potential pleasant events and strive to increase the frequency of these events, monitoring daily mood along the way. Clients who increase the frequency of pleasant events usually show an improvement in mood and other depressive symptoms as evident in their scoring. The Pleasant Events Schedule is a highly useful tool for clinicians who wish to implement a self-monitoring approach to the assessment and treatment of depression. “MachPhillamy and Lewinsohn report favorably on the technical qualities of the PES and discuss a variety of rational, factorial, and empirical subscales.” (Gregory, 2011).
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston,
MA.
Alicia Tucker – 55362
PSY 312 – Tests and Measurements in Psychology
2. Describe the nature and purpose of the Pleasant Events Schedule.
You may have heard people describe themselves as strictly "right-brained" or "left-brained," with the left-brainers bragging about their math skills and the right-brainers touting their creativity. That 's because the brain is divided down the middle into two hemispheres, with each half performing a fairly distinct set of operations. “Much of what is known about brain function is owed to Roger Sperry, whose experiments examined the way the human brain 's hemispheres operate both independently and in concert with each other.” (Gregory, 2011). The two hemispheres communicate information, such as sensory observations, to each other through the thick corpus callosum that connects them.
The brain 's right hemisphere controls the muscles on the left side of the body, while the left hemisphere controls the muscles on the right side of the human body. When you wink your right eye, that 's the left side of your brain at work. Because of this criss-cross wiring, damage to one side of the brain affects the opposite side of the body. In general, the left hemisphere is dominant in language: processing what you hear and handling most of the duties of speaking. It 's also in charge of carrying out logic and exact mathematical computations. When you need to retrieve a fact, your left brain pulls it from your memory.
The right hemisphere is mainly in charge of spatial abilities, face recognition and processing music. It performs some math, but only rough estimations and comparisons. The brain 's right side also helps us to comprehend visual imagery and make sense of what we see. It plays a role in language, particularly in interpreting context and a person 's tone. As for whether a person is right-brained or left-brained or even right-handed or left-handed the uses and preferences of the brain 's two sections are far more complex than just a simple left vs. right equation. For example, some people throw a ball with their right hand but write with their left. (Gregory, 2011).
The brain carefully balances and assigns control of certain functions to each side its all nature 's way of ensuring that the brain ultimately splits up tasks to maximize efficiency. Most people are right-hand dominant which is actually controlled by the left side of the brain.
"Brain asymmetry is essential for proper brain function," Professor Stephen Wilson of University College London told Live Science, a sister site of Life 's Little Mysteries. "It allows the two sides of the brain to become specialized, increasing its processing capacity and avoiding situations of conflict where both sides of the brain try to take charge." (Gregory, 2011).
REFERENCES:
Gregory, J. R., Psychological Testing. History, Principles and Applications. 6th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA.