Rankings of countries on mean levels of self-reported Conscientiousness continue to puzzle researchers. Based on the hypothesis that cross-cultural differences in the tendency to prefer extreme response categories of ordinal rating scales over moderate categories can influence the comparability of self-reports, this study investigated possible effects of response style on the mean levels of self-reported Conscientiousness in 22 samples from 20 countries. Extreme and neutral responding were estimated based on respondents' ratings of 30 hypothetical people described in short vignettes. In the vignette ratings, clear cross-sample differences in extreme and neutral responding emerged. These responding style differences were correlated with mean self-reported Conscientiousness scores. Correcting self-reports for extreme and neutral responding changed sample rankings of Conscientiousness, as well as the predictive validities of these rankings for external criteria. The findings suggest that the puzzling country rankings of self-reported Conscientiousness may to some extent result from differences in response styles.
Despite existing research on the contribution of social context and religiosity to adolescent behavioral outcomes, few studies have attempted to explore this topic among Muslim adolescents in non-Western settings, looking at both positive and negative outcomes. In response to this gap, the current study explored the effects of three dimensions of developmental assets (positive parenting, community support, and religiosity) on risk, prosocial, and thriving behaviors among Muslim adolescents (N = 895) from Malaysia. Hierarchical regression results revealed positive parenting as the greatest protective factor against risk behavior, religiosity as the most significant promotive factor of prosocial behaviors, and community support as the greatest contributor to adolescent thriving. In the final model, unique effects varied by outcome. The findings support the importance and universality of multiple Article
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.