Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11452/29248
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-27T12:50:23Z-
dc.date.available2022-10-27T12:50:23Z-
dc.date.issued2016-12-
dc.identifier.citationSmith, P. B. vd. (2016). "Individual and culture-level components of survey response styles: A multi-level analysis using cultural models of selfhood". International Journal of Psychology, 51(6), 453-463.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0020-7594-
dc.identifier.issn1464-066X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12293-
dc.identifier.urihttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijop.12293-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11452/29248-
dc.descriptionÇalışmada 60 yazar bulunmaktadır. Bu yazarlardan sadece Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi mensubu yazarların girişleri yapılmıştır.tr_TR
dc.description.abstractVariations in acquiescence and extremity pose substantial threats to the validity of cross-cultural research that relies on survey methods. Individual and cultural correlates of response styles when using 2 contrasting types of response mode were investigated, drawing on data from 55 cultural groups across 33 nations. Using 7 dimensions of self-other relatedness that have often been confounded within the broader distinction between independence and interdependence, our analysis yields more specific understandings of both individual- and culture-level variations in response style. When using a Likert-scale response format, acquiescence is strongest among individuals seeing themselves as similar to others, and where cultural models of selfhood favour harmony, similarity with others and receptiveness to influence. However, when using Schwartz's (2007) portrait-comparison response procedure, acquiescence is strongest among individuals seeing themselves as self-reliant but also connected to others, and where cultural models of selfhood favour self-reliance and self-consistency. Extreme responding varies less between the two types of response modes, and is most prevalent among individuals seeing themselves as self-reliant, and in cultures favouring self-reliance. As both types of response mode elicit distinctive styles of response, it remains important to estimate and control for style effects to ensure valid comparisons.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipStudies - 15110006en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipCenter for Social Conflict and Cohesion Studies - FONDAP - 15130009en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipUK Research & Innovation (UKRI) - ES/F04223X/1en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipEconomic & Social Research Council (ESRC) - ES/F04223X/1en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sonsen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.rightsAtıf Gayri Ticari Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararasıtr_TR
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectPsychologyen_US
dc.subjectResponse styleen_US
dc.subjectCultureen_US
dc.subjectSelf-construalen_US
dc.subjectCommunication stylesen_US
dc.subjectAcquiescenten_US
dc.subjectCollectivismen_US
dc.subjectValuesen_US
dc.subject.meshCultureen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshSelf-assessmenten_US
dc.subject.meshSurveys and questionnairesen_US
dc.titleIndividual and culture-level components of survey response styles: A multi-level analysis using cultural models of selfhooden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.wos000389217900007tr_TR
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84997525153tr_TR
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergitr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentUludağ Üniversitesi/Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi/Psikoloji Bölümü.tr_TR
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-3005-9009tr_TR
dc.identifier.startpage453tr_TR
dc.identifier.endpage463tr_TR
dc.identifier.volume51tr_TR
dc.identifier.issue6tr_TR
dc.relation.journalInternational Journal of Psychologyen_US
dc.contributor.buuauthorKuşdil, Ersin-
dc.contributor.researcheridM-2330-2017tr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationYurt içitr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationYurt dışıtr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationSanayitr_TR
dc.identifier.pubmed27374874tr_TR
dc.subject.wosPsychology, multidisciplinaryen_US
dc.indexed.wosSSCIen_US
dc.indexed.scopusScopusen_US
dc.indexed.pubmedPubMeden_US
dc.wos.quartileQ2en_US
dc.contributor.scopusid55521831700tr_TR
dc.subject.scopusResponse Styles; Rating Scales; Web Surveyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeArten_US
dc.subject.emtreeIntermethod comparisonen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLikert scaleen_US
dc.subject.emtreeMultilevel analysisen_US
dc.subject.emtreeCultural anthropologyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHumanen_US
dc.subject.emtreeQuestionnaireen_US
dc.subject.emtreeSelf evaluationen_US
Appears in Collections:Scopus
Web of Science

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Kuşdil_vd_2016.pdf500.58 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons