首页> 外文期刊>The American psychologist >Why Stop at Two Opinions? Reply to McCrae (2020)
【24h】

Why Stop at Two Opinions? Reply to McCrae (2020)

机译:为什么在两个意见中停下来? 回复麦克雷(2020)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

McCrae (2020) argues that it is premature to explore interventions focused on personality change. In his commentary, he suggests that interventions should be promoted only if their effects in self-report data are confirmed by the additional opinion of informants. We agree with the essence of his position and would go further by envisioning a new framework for rigorous collaborative research on personality change (Bleidorn et al., 2020). We nevertheless maintain that policymakers would benefit from considering the additional opinion of personality scientists.
机译:麦克雷(2020)辩称,探索介绍性能变化的干预措施为时过早。 在他的评论中,他建议只有在自我报告数据的影响被告密者的额外意见确认的情况下,才会促进干预措施。 我们同意他的立场的本质,并通过为人格变化的严格协作研究进行新的框架来进一步(Bleidorn等,2020)。 尽管如此,我们认为政策制定者将受益于考虑人格科学家的额外观点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号