Literature DB >> 30640492

What predicts within-person variance in applied psychology constructs? An empirical examination.

Nathan P Podsakoff1, Trevor M Spoelma2, Nitya Chawla1, Allison S Gabriel1.   

Abstract

The attention paid to intraindividual phenomena in applied psychology has rapidly increased during the last two decades. However, the design characteristics of studies using daily experience sampling methods and the proportion of within-person variance in the measures employed in these studies vary substantially. This raises a critical question yet to be addressed: are differences in the proportion of variance attributable to within- versus between-person factors dependent on construct-, measure-, design-, and/or sample-related characteristics? A multilevel analysis based on 1,051,808 within-person observations reported in 222 intraindividual empirical studies indicated that decisions about what to study (construct type), how to study it (measurement and design characteristics), and from whom to obtain the data (sample characteristics) predicted the proportion of variance attributable to within-person factors. We conclude with implications and recommendations for those conducting and reviewing applied intraindividual research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30640492     DOI: 10.1037/apl0000374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9010


  7 in total

1.  Relating Neuroticism to Emotional Exhaustion: A Dynamic Approach to Personality.

Authors:  Joanna Sosnowska; Filip De Fruyt; Joeri Hofmans
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-10-16

2.  Methods to Assess Social Comparison Processes Within Persons in Daily Life: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Danielle Arigo; Jacqueline A Mogle; Megan M Brown; Kristen Pasko; Laura Travers; Logan Sweeder; Joshua M Smyth
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-01-22

3.  Difficulties detaching psychologically from work among German teachers: prevalence, risk factors and health outcomes within a cross-sectional and national representative employee survey.

Authors:  Yasemin Z Varol; Gerald M Weiher; Johannes Wendsche; Andrea Lohmann-Haislah
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  Does it work? Using a Meta-Impact score to examine global effects in quasi-experimental intervention studies.

Authors:  Nancy Elizabeth Doyle; Almuth McDowall; Raymond Randall; Kate Knight
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The effects of assessment intensity on participant burden, compliance, within-person variance, and within-person relationships in ambulatory assessment.

Authors:  Kilian Hasselhorn; Charlotte Ottenstein; Tanja Lischetzke
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-09-10

6.  Hurting all the way: The emotional antecedent and consequence of social rejection.

Authors:  Xiaoying Wang; Miaomiao Li
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-09-02

7.  Daily Job Crafting Helps Those Who Help Themselves More: The Moderating Role of Job Autonomy and Leader Support.

Authors:  Sung Hyoun Hong; Nayoung Kwon; Min Soo Kim
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 3.390

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.