Indirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated : A meta-analysis of the initial preference task

dc.contributor.authorPietschnig, Jakob
dc.contributor.authorGittler, Georg
dc.contributor.authorStieger, Stefan
dc.contributor.authorForster, Michael
dc.contributor.authorGadek, Natalia
dc.contributor.authorGartus, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorKocsis-Bogar, Krisztina
dc.contributor.authorKubicek, Bettina
dc.contributor.authorLüftenegger, Marko
dc.contributor.authorOlsen, Jerome
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-26T10:41:33Z
dc.date.available2019-02-26T10:41:33Z
dc.date.issued2018eng
dc.description.abstractBackground
The initial preference task (IPT) is an implicit measure that has featured prominently in the literature and enjoys high popularity because it offers to provide an unobtrusive and objective assessment of self-esteem that is easy to administer. However, its use for self-esteem assessment may be limited because of weak associations with direct personality measures. Moreover, moderator effects of sample- and study-related variables need investigation to determine the value of IPT-based assessments of self-esteem.

Methods
Conventional and grey-literature database searches, as well as screening of reference lists of obtained articles, yielded a total of 105 independent healthy adult samples (N = 17,777) originating from 60 studies. Summary effect estimates and subgroup analyses for potential effect moderators (e.g., administration order, algorithm, rating type) were calculated by means of meta-analytic random- and mixed-effects models. Moreover, we accounted for potential influences of publication year, publication status (published vs. not), and participant sex in a weighted stepwise hierarchical multiple meta-regression. We tested for dissemination bias through six methods.

Results
There was no noteworthy correlation between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem (r = .102), indicating conceptual independence of these two constructs. Effects were stronger when the B-algorithm was used for calculation of IPT-scores and the IPT was administered only once, whilst all other moderators did not show significant influences. Regression analyses revealed a somewhat stronger (albeit non-significant) effect for men. Moreover, there was no evidence for dissemination bias or a decline effect, although effects from published studies were numerically somewhat stronger than unpublished effects.

Discussion
We show that there is no noteworthy association between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem, which is broadly consistent with dual-process models of implicit and explicit evaluations on the one hand, but also casts doubt on the suitability of the IPT for the assessment of implicit self-esteem on the other hand.
eng
dc.description.versionpublishedeng
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0202873eng
dc.identifier.pmid30188907eng
dc.identifier.ppn518123618
dc.identifier.urihttps://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/45218
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.ddc150eng
dc.titleIndirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated : A meta-analysis of the initial preference taskeng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLEeng
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Pietschnig2018Indir-45218,
  year={2018},
  doi={10.1371/journal.pone.0202873},
  title={Indirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated : A meta-analysis of the initial preference task},
  number={9},
  volume={13},
  journal={PLoS one},
  author={Pietschnig, Jakob and Gittler, Georg and Stieger, Stefan and Forster, Michael and Gadek, Natalia and Gartus, Andreas and Kocsis-Bogar, Krisztina and Kubicek, Bettina and Lüftenegger, Marko and Olsen, Jerome},
  note={Article Number: e0202873}
}
kops.citation.iso690PIETSCHNIG, Jakob, Georg GITTLER, Stefan STIEGER, Michael FORSTER, Natalia GADEK, Andreas GARTUS, Krisztina KOCSIS-BOGAR, Bettina KUBICEK, Marko LÜFTENEGGER, Jerome OLSEN, 2018. Indirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated : A meta-analysis of the initial preference task. In: PLoS one. 2018, 13(9), e0202873. eISSN 1932-6203. Available under: doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202873deu
kops.citation.iso690PIETSCHNIG, Jakob, Georg GITTLER, Stefan STIEGER, Michael FORSTER, Natalia GADEK, Andreas GARTUS, Krisztina KOCSIS-BOGAR, Bettina KUBICEK, Marko LÜFTENEGGER, Jerome OLSEN, 2018. Indirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated : A meta-analysis of the initial preference task. In: PLoS one. 2018, 13(9), e0202873. eISSN 1932-6203. Available under: doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202873eng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45218">
    <dc:contributor>Gittler, Georg</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Kocsis-Bogar, Krisztina</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Lüftenegger, Marko</dc:creator>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2019-02-26T10:41:33Z</dc:date>
    <dc:contributor>Olsen, Jerome</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2019-02-26T10:41:33Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:contributor>Forster, Michael</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Gartus, Andreas</dc:creator>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:creator>Kubicek, Bettina</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Olsen, Jerome</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Gartus, Andreas</dc:contributor>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/45218"/>
    <dc:creator>Forster, Michael</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Gadek, Natalia</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:issued>2018</dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:title>Indirect (implicit) and direct (explicit) self-esteem measures are virtually unrelated : A meta-analysis of the initial preference task</dcterms:title>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/45218/1/Pietschnig_2-1lhxkwueag8sf4.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Lüftenegger, Marko</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Gadek, Natalia</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Stieger, Stefan</dc:creator>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:contributor>Pietschnig, Jakob</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/45218/1/Pietschnig_2-1lhxkwueag8sf4.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Kubicek, Bettina</dc:contributor>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dc:creator>Gittler, Georg</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Stieger, Stefan</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Kocsis-Bogar, Krisztina</dc:contributor>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:creator>Pietschnig, Jakob</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Background&lt;br /&gt;The initial preference task (IPT) is an implicit measure that has featured prominently in the literature and enjoys high popularity because it offers to provide an unobtrusive and objective assessment of self-esteem that is easy to administer. However, its use for self-esteem assessment may be limited because of weak associations with direct personality measures. Moreover, moderator effects of sample- and study-related variables need investigation to determine the value of IPT-based assessments of self-esteem.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Methods&lt;br /&gt;Conventional and grey-literature database searches, as well as screening of reference lists of obtained articles, yielded a total of 105 independent healthy adult samples (N = 17,777) originating from 60 studies. Summary effect estimates and subgroup analyses for potential effect moderators (e.g., administration order, algorithm, rating type) were calculated by means of meta-analytic random- and mixed-effects models. Moreover, we accounted for potential influences of publication year, publication status (published vs. not), and participant sex in a weighted stepwise hierarchical multiple meta-regression. We tested for dissemination bias through six methods.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Results&lt;br /&gt;There was no noteworthy correlation between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem (r = .102), indicating conceptual independence of these two constructs. Effects were stronger when the B-algorithm was used for calculation of IPT-scores and the IPT was administered only once, whilst all other moderators did not show significant influences. Regression analyses revealed a somewhat stronger (albeit non-significant) effect for men. Moreover, there was no evidence for dissemination bias or a decline effect, although effects from published studies were numerically somewhat stronger than unpublished effects.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Discussion&lt;br /&gt;We show that there is no noteworthy association between IPT-based implicit and explicit self-esteem, which is broadly consistent with dual-process models of implicit and explicit evaluations on the one hand, but also casts doubt on the suitability of the IPT for the assessment of implicit self-esteem on the other hand.</dcterms:abstract>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.description.openAccessopenaccessgoldeng
kops.flag.etalAuthortrueeng
kops.flag.isPeerReviewedtrueeng
kops.flag.knbibliographytrue
kops.identifier.nbnurn:nbn:de:bsz:352-2-1lhxkwueag8sf4
kops.sourcefieldPLoS one. 2018, <b>13</b>(9), e0202873. eISSN 1932-6203. Available under: doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202873deu
kops.sourcefield.plainPLoS one. 2018, 13(9), e0202873. eISSN 1932-6203. Available under: doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202873deu
kops.sourcefield.plainPLoS one. 2018, 13(9), e0202873. eISSN 1932-6203. Available under: doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202873eng
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationc92c9f71-6816-4b39-bcb7-2adf04639044
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryc92c9f71-6816-4b39-bcb7-2adf04639044
source.bibliographicInfo.articleNumbere0202873eng
source.bibliographicInfo.issue9eng
source.bibliographicInfo.volume13eng
source.identifier.eissn1932-6203eng
source.periodicalTitlePLoS oneeng

Dateien

Originalbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
Pietschnig_2-1lhxkwueag8sf4.pdf
Größe:
4.15 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Beschreibung:
Pietschnig_2-1lhxkwueag8sf4.pdf
Pietschnig_2-1lhxkwueag8sf4.pdfGröße: 4.15 MBDownloads: 289

Lizenzbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
license.txt
Größe:
3.88 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Beschreibung:
license.txt
license.txtGröße: 3.88 KBDownloads: 0