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)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".