خودفریبی و طبقه بندی اختلال ناهنجاری
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|70804||2002||14 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 33, Issue 2, 19 July 2002, Pages 327–340
One hundred and forty community volunteers were prescreened for upper and lower quartile scores using the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding [BIDR; Paulhus, D.L. (1988). Assessing self-deception and impression management in self-reports: The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding. Unpublished manual. Vancouver, British Columbia; University of British Columbia, Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social-psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1991], and classified into stable High (n=14) and Low (n=15) self-deception groups using the Self-Deceptive Enhancement subscale of the BIDR. Participants identified normal and anomalous computer-displayed playing cards [following Bruner, J. & Postman, L. (1949). Journal of Personality, 18, 206–223], presented for short (∼16 ms), then increasingly longer durations. High and low self-deceivers identified the normal cards equally rapidly. Highs, however, took twice as many trials as lows (M=11.21, S.D.=9.65, vs. M=5.00, S.D.=3.87) to identify the anomalous card correctly twice (t [16.85] corrected for unequal variances = −2.25, P=0.019, one-tailed). Self-deception thus appears associated with impaired categorization of anomaly.