Deutsch
 
Hilfe Datenschutzhinweis Impressum
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Zeitschriftenartikel

The structure of human prosociality revisited: Corrigendum and addendum to Böckler, Tusche, and Singer (2016)

MPG-Autoren
/persons/resource/persons71667

Böckler,  Anne
Department Social Neuroscience, MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;
Julius Maximilian University, Würzburg, Germany;

/persons/resource/persons20000

Singer,  Tania
Department Social Neuroscience, MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine externen Ressourcen hinterlegt
Volltexte (beschränkter Zugriff)
Für Ihren IP-Bereich sind aktuell keine Volltexte freigegeben.
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Volltexte in PuRe verfügbar
Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Böckler, A., Tusche, A., & Singer, T. (2018). The structure of human prosociality revisited: Corrigendum and addendum to Böckler, Tusche, and Singer (2016). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(6), 754-759. doi:10.1177/1948550617722200.


Zitierlink: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0000-6EB4-A
Zusammenfassung
In a recent publication, we employed factor analyses to integrate 14 measures of prosocial behavior, proposing four subcomponents of human prosociality: altruistically motivated, norm motivated, strategically motivated, and self-reported prosocial behavior. However, the reported confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) yielded standardized regression weights above 1, resulting from an improper solution (Heywood cases), which precludes straightforward interpretation of results. Here, we present two adjusted CFA models that rectify this problem. Model 1 resolves the issue of Heywood cases by implementing equality constraints, yielding a four-factor structure that is largely similar to the original model. Model 2 accommodates additional methodological considerations and presents a revised structure of prosociality with three subcomponents: altruistically motivated, norm motivated, and self-reported prosocial behavior. We also report minor corrections of descriptive results, none of which alter the pattern of results and interpretations of the original publication.