Conceptual ambiguities and measurement issues in sensory processing sensitivity

Hellwig, Susan; Roth, Marcus

doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104130

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although better than alternative models, the fit of the three-dimensional model was barely acceptable in Study 1; however, the fit was better in Study 2. The problematic factor structure of SPS measures is widely discussed (e.g., Greven et al, 2019 ; Vander Elst et al, 2019 ; Hellwig and Roth, 2021 ). Efforts should be made to revise and improve SPS measures further so that psychometrically sound measures are available to test hypotheses derived from theory.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Testing these three-way interactions of demands, personality traits, and other contextual and personal factors might provide a more comprehensive perspective on this issue. Finally, because SPS is highly correlated with well-established personality characteristics, such as neuroticism, introversion, and openness to experience ( Greven et al, 2019 ; Lionetti et al, 2019 ; Hellwig and Roth, 2021 ), future research on relationships between SPS and employee work behavior should explore its incremental validity by investigating whether the SPS dimensions predict employee outcomes above and beyond the Big Five traits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studying individual differences in employees’ sensitivity to the environment and the self that can explain when or for whom complex jobs can stimulate proactive work behavior is critical for both research and practice ( Sung et al, 2017 ). Finally, by investigating the factor structure of SPS across two studies, the present research contributes to the ongoing discussion in the SPS literature on its multidimensional conceptualization and measurement ( Greven et al, 2019 ; Hellwig and Roth, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Accordingly, meta-analytic evidence suggests that neuroticism is negatively correlated with different proactivity concepts, although the relationships are small ( Tornau and Frese, 2013 ; Wu and Li, 2017 ). Neuroticism is positively associated with SPS ( Bröhl et al, 2022 ), particularly with the dimensions of EOE and LST ( Lionetti et al, 2019 ; Hellwig and Roth, 2021 ), and it is consistently found to relate to BIS activity ( Carver and White, 1994 ).…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BAS activation was found to predict activating behaviors, such as entrepreneurial action ( Lerner et al, 2018 ), and students’ study engagement and academic performance ( van Beek et al, 2013 ). AES further shares some aspects with and is moderately to strongly related to the Big Five trait openness to experiences ( Listou Grimen and Diseth, 2016 ; Lionetti et al, 2019 ; Hellwig and Roth, 2021 ; Bröhl et al, 2022 ). Both AES and openness to experiences are characterized by people’s tendency to seek out positive and stimulating environments.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Sensory Processing Sensitivity as a Predictor of Proactive Work Behavior and a Moderator of the Job Complexity–Proactive Work Behavior Relationship

Schmitt

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the role of sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) as a predictor of employees’ proactive work behavior. SPS is a multidimensional concept that depicts differences in people’s sensory awareness, processing, and reactivity to internal and external influences. Based on research on SPS as grounded in a heightened sensitivity of the behavioral inhibition and activation systems, it was argued that the relationships with task proactivity and personal initiative as indicators of proactive work behavior differ for the three SPS dimensions. Furthermore, based on the person–environment fit perspective, SPS was assumed to moderate the relationship between employees’ job complexity and proactivity. The hypotheses were tested in two two-wave studies (N = 215 and N = 126). Across both studies, ease of excitation (EOE; i.e., the tendency to be easily overwhelmed by changes) was unrelated to proactivity. Low sensory threshold (LST; i.e., unpleasant arousal from external stimuli) was negatively related to personal initiative, only in Study 2, but it did not predict task proactivity. Meanwhile, aesthetic sensitivity (i.e., AES; awareness of and openness to positive stimuli) was positively related to proactivity, but in Study 2, this relationship could only be established for personal initiative. Moreover, job complexity was positively related to proactivity for those employees high but not for those low in AES. EOE and LST did not act as moderators. This study offers evidence of positive behavioral implications among highly sensitive persons when dealing with job complexity. Overall, the study presents an interesting point of departure for the role of SPS in employee proactivity that calls for more research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Sensory Processing Sensitivity as a Predictor of Proactive Work Behavior and a Moderator of the Job Complexity–Proactive Work Behavior Relationship

Schmitt

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Highly Sensitive Child Scale Across Age Groups, Gender, and Informants

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory Processing Sensitivity (SPS) is theorized to be a fundamental trait capturing children’s general sensitivity to the environment. Yet, scientific knowledge of SPS is mostly based on findings from Western cultures and few translated measures exist to assess children’s SPS outside of Western countries. Therefore, we developed the Chinese Highly Sensitive Child (HSC) scale. In Study 1, we investigated the scale’s psychometric properties for both self-reports (N = 2925, Mage = 11.74 years, 43.3% girls) and caregiver reports (n = 460, Mchild age = 9.02 years, 44.0% girls). Findings replicated most psychometric properties found in international studies including: (a) a bifactor structure with one general sensitivity component and three specific components, (b) acceptable internal consistency of the total scale (although not for self-report of elementary school children, and not for the subscales), and (c) at least partial invariance across age groups, gender, and informants. In Study 2, we investigated convergent validity with related temperament and personality measures using self-reports from both elementary school children (n = 845, Mage = 9.71 years, 41.9% girls) and middle school children (n = 563, Mage = 13.17 years, 43.2% girls). Findings replicated bivariate associations found in Western studies: Ease of Excitation (EOE) was associated with more positive traits, whereas Aesthetic Sensitivity (AES) was associated with more negative traits, suggesting that EOE and AES may capture the “dark” and “bright side” of sensitivity, respectively. We hope that our studies help spur research on SPS across western and Chinese cultures.

show abstract

Environmental sensitivity predicts interpersonal sensitivity above and beyond Big Five personality traits

Tabak

Gupta

Sunahara

et al. 2022

Journal of Research in Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual ambiguities and measurement issues in sensory processing sensitivity

Cited by 21 publications

References 51 publications

Sensory Processing Sensitivity as a Predictor of Proactive Work Behavior and a Moderator of the Job Complexity–Proactive Work Behavior Relationship

Sensory Processing Sensitivity as a Predictor of Proactive Work Behavior and a Moderator of the Job Complexity–Proactive Work Behavior Relationship

Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Highly Sensitive Child Scale Across Age Groups, Gender, and Informants

Environmental sensitivity predicts interpersonal sensitivity above and beyond Big Five personality traits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About