MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990532141 · doi:10.1080/0361073x.2011.554508

Comparing the Psychometric Properties of Two Measures of Wisdom: Predicting Forgiveness and Psychological Well-Being with the Self-Assessed Wisdom Scale (SAWS) and the Three-Dimensional Wisdom Scale (3D-WS)

2011· article· en· W1990532141 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Aging Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsLangara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForgivenessPsychologyScale (ratio)PersonalitySocial psychologyLife satisfaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two recently developed scales of wisdom were compared on their abilities to have their dimensional structure replicated and to predict relevant personality (i.e., forgiveness) and life satisfaction (i.e., psychological well-being) variables. One hundred and seventy-six primarily (71%) Australian participants ranging in age from 18 to 68 years (M = 36.60, SD = 12.07) completed an online survey of the Self-Assessed Wisdom Scale (SAWS; Webster, 2003 Webster , J. D. (2003). An exploratory analysis of a self-assessed wisdom scale. Journal of Adult Development , 10, 13–22.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], Journal of Adult Development, 10, 13–22; 2007 Webster , J. D. ( 2007 ). Measuring the character strength of wisdom . International Journal of Aging and Human Development , 65 , 163 – 183 .[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 65, 163–183), the Three-Dimensional Wisdom Scale (3D-WS; Ardelt, 2003 Ardelt , M. ( 2003 ). Empirical assessment of a three-dimensional wisdom scale . Research on Aging , 25 , 275 – 324 .[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 52B, 15–27), the Heartland Forgiveness Scale (Thompson et al., 2005 Thompson , L. Y. , Snyder , C. R. , Hoffman , L. , Michael , S. T. , Rasmussen , H. N. , Billings , L. S. , Heinze , L. , Neufeld , J. E. , Shorey , H. S. , Roberts , J. C. , & Roberts , D. E. ( 2005 ). Dispositional forgiveness of self, others, and situations . Journal of Personality , 73 , 313 – 360 .[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], Journal of Personality, 73, 313–360), Ryff's (1989 Ryff , C. D. ( 1989 ). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57 , 1069 – 1081 .[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081) measure of psychological well-being (PWB), and a measure of social desirability (BIDR; Paulhus, 1984 Paulhus , D. L. ( 1984 ). Two-component models of socially desirable responding . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 46 , 598 – 609 .[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609). Results indicated that the dimensional structure of the SAWS, but not the 3D-WS, replicated, and the 3D-WS, but not the SAWS, was contaminated by a social desirability response bias. Both scales predicted equally well PWB and forgiveness in predicted directions. Implications for future use of both scales are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it