Self-Validation of Programmed Feedback Statements

Wolfgang G. Bringmann · William D. G. Balance · Sonny S. Sandberg

7 citations0/0 files storedPsychological Reports

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Psychological Testing and Assessment Psychometric Methodologies and Testing Personality Traits and Psychology

Abstract

46 men and 42 women of college age received 6 statements representing each S's own highest scales on the Personality Research Form and MMPI and randomly selected items. The ranks given items showed greater endorsement of items from their own profiles.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

References

1951Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, Manual.1956Wanted—a good cook-book.1967Computer interpretation of personality tests: The automated psychologist 1969The Current Status of Computer Interpretation of Psychological Tests 1967Methodological problems in programmed composition of psychological test reports

Cited by

1982Comparison of Computerized versus Standardized Feedback and Accurate versus Inaccurate Feedback 1982Variables affecting subjects' endorsements of psychological test results.1978The effects of positive vs. negative wording on subjects' validity ratings of “true” and “false” feedback statements 1983Confirming Personality Test Results in the Classroom

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.