当前位置: X-MOL 学术Intelligence › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Testing competing claims about overclaiming
Intelligence ( IF 3.613 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-01 , DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2020.101470
B. Goecke , S. Weiss , D. Steger , U. Schroeders , O. Wilhelm

Abstract Overclaiming has been described as people's tendency to overestimate their cognitive abilities in general and their knowledge in particular. We discuss four different perspectives on the phenomenon of overclaiming that have been proposed in the research literature: Overclaiming as a result of a) self-enhancement tendencies, b) as a cognitive bias (e.g., hindsight bias, memory bias), c) as proxy for cognitive abilities, and d) as sign of creative engagement. Moreover, we discuss two different scoring methods for an OCQ (signal detection theory vs. familiarity ratings). To distinguish between the different viewpoints of what overclaiming is, we juxtaposed overclaiming, as indicated by claiming familiarity with non-existent terms, with fluid and crystallized intelligence, self-reported knowledge, creativity, faking ability, and personality. Overclaiming was measured with a newly comprised overclaiming questionnaire. Results of several latent variable analyses based upon a multivariate study with 298 participants were: First, overclaiming is neither predicted by honesty-humility nor faking ability and therefore reflects something different than mere self-enhancement tendencies. Second, overclaiming is not predicted by crystallized intelligence, but is highly predictive of self-reported knowledge and, thus, not suitable as an index or a proxy for cognitive abilities. Finally, overclaiming is neither related to divergent thinking and originality, and only moderately predicted by self-reported openness creativity from the HEXACO which means that overclaiming does not reflect creative ability. In sum, our results favor an interpretation of overclaiming as a phenomenon that requires more than self-enhancement motivation, in contrast to the claim that was initially proposed in the literature.

中文翻译:

测试关于过度声明的竞争声明

摘要 过度主张被描述为人们倾向于高估他们的一般认知能力,尤其是他们的知识。我们讨论了研究文献中提出的关于过度声明现象的四种不同观点:过度声明是由于 a) 自我提升倾向,b) 作为认知偏见(例如,事后偏见,记忆偏见),c) 作为代表认知能力,以及 d) 作为创造性参与的标志。此外,我们讨论了 OCQ 的两种不同评分方法(信号检测理论与熟悉度评分)。为了区分过度声明是什么的不同观点,我们将过度声明并列在一起,如声称熟悉不存在的术语,具有流动和结晶的智力,自我报告的知识,创造力,伪造能力,和个性。过度声明是用一个新组成的过度声明问卷来衡量的。基于对 298 名参与者进行的多变量研究的几个潜在变量分析的结果是:首先,过度主张既不是诚实谦逊也不是伪装能力预测的,因此反映了与单纯的自我提升倾向不同的东西。其次,过度主张不是由结晶智力预测的,而是高度预测自我报告的知识,因此不适合作为认知能力的指标或代理。最后,过度声明既与发散思维和原创性无关,也只是由 HEXACO 自我报告的开放性创造力适度预测,这意味着过度声明并不反映创造能力。总共,
更新日期:2020-07-01
down
wechat
bug