Paul Stey

Autobiographical memory specificity among preschool-aged children.

Overgeneral memory refers to difficulty retrieving specific autobiographical memories and is consistently associated with depression and/or trauma. The present study developed a downward extension of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams & Broadbent, 1986) given the need to document normative developmental changes in ability to retrieve specific memories among preschoolers. Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory demonstrated that the AMT-Preschool Version maintained the same underlying 1-factor structure as the original. Additionally, the present study determined that child age was associated with increased specificity. Inhibitory control was evaluated as a potential mediator. Although age was related to inhibition, inhibition was unrelated to memory specificity. This finding adds to research suggesting that behavioral inhibition is unrelated to overgeneral memory among youth.

Factor Structure and Psychometric Properties of a Brief Measure of Dysfunctional Individuation

Individuation is widely considered a fundamental developmental task of adolescence. It is a process through which the adolescent seeks to define new boundaries between his or her self and others, and the failure to do so has been shown to have serious consequences. Given its importance for understanding developmental transitions, it is surprising that there are few assessments of dysfunctional individuation. Over three studies, we provide evidence of a promising new measure of this important construct: the 10-item Dysfunctional Individuation Scale (DIS). Using confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory, we demonstrate that the DIS possesses a strong one-factor structure and excellent psychometric properties. Furthermore, we document the convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity of the DIS through its relationships with indices of individuation, adjustment, and clinically relevant symptoms. Finally, we examine the incremental validity of the DIS over neuroticism as a predictor of depression (Beck Depression Inventory–II).

Knowing where to draw the line: perceptual differences between risk-takers and non-risk-takers.

There are a variety of reasons someone might engage in risky behaviors, such as perceived invulnerability to harm or a belief that negative outcomes are more likely for others than for oneself. However, these risk-taking biases are often measured at a decision-making level or from the developmental perspective. Here we assessed whether or not risk-taking influenced perceptual judgments associated with risk. Participants were provided an objective task to measure individual differences in the perception of physical dimensions (i.e., actual size of a balloon) versus the perception of risk (i.e., size at which the balloon would explode). Our results show that specific differences in risk-taking personalities produce specific differences in perceptual judgments about risk, but do not affect perception of the actual dimensions. Thus, risk-takers differ from non-risk-takers in the perceptual estimations they make about risks, and therefore may be more likely to engage in dangerous or uncertain behaviors because they perceive risks differently.

Moral judgement in adolescents: Age differences in applying and justifying three principles of harm

This study investigated the application and justification of three principles of harm in a cross-sectional sample of adolescents in order to test recent theories concerning the source of intuitive moral judgements. Participants were 46 early (M age = 14.8 years) and 40 late adolescents (M age = 17.8 years). Participants rated the permissibility of various ethical dilemmas, and provided justifications for their judgements. Results indicated participants aligned their judgements with the three principles of harm, but had difficulty explaining their reasoning. Furthermore, although age groups were consistent in the application of the principles of harm, age differences emerged in their justifications. These differences were partly explained by differences in language ability. Additionally, participants who used emotional language in their justifications demonstrated a characteristically deontological pattern of moral judgement on certain dilemmas. We conclude adolescents in this age range apply the principles of harm but that the ability to explain their judgements is still developing.

Development and validation of a multi-dimensional measure of intellectual humility

This paper presents five studies on the development and validation of a scale of intellectual humility. This scale captures cognitive, affective, behavioral, and motivational components of the construct that have been identified by various philosophers in their conceptual analyses of intellectual humility. We find that intellectual humility has four core dimensions: Open-mindedness (versus Arrogance), Intellectual Modesty (versus Vanity), Corrigibility (versus Fragility), and Engagement (versus Boredom). These dimensions display adequate self-informant agreement, and adequate convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity. In particular, Open-mindedness adds predictive power beyond the Big Six for an objective behavioral measure of intellectual humility, and Intellectual Modesty is uniquely related to Narcissism. We find that a similar factor structure emerges in Germanophone participants, giving initial evidence for the model’s cross-cultural generalizability.