The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors?
Abstract
Global self-esteem based on M. Rosenberg's (1965) scale is typically treated as a unidimensional scale. However, factor analyses suggest separate factors associated with positively and negatively worded items, and there is an ongoing debate about the substantive meaningfulness of this distinction. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate alternative 1- and 2-factor models and to test hypotheses about how the factors vary with reading ability and age. Responses based on the National Longitudinal Study of 1988 (S.J. Ingles et al., 1992) reflected a relatively unidimensional factor and method effects associated with negatively worded items. Such effects are common in rating scale responses, and this CFA approach may be useful in evaluating whether factors associated with positively and negatively worded items are substantively meaningful or artifactors.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The results of the exploratory factor analysis were considered to be due to artifacts caused by the characteristics of the Japanese language.”
From Validation of the Tinnitus Acceptance Questionnaire: Japanese Version (2022) · cites this paper as [30]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Differences Between Tight and Loose Cultures: A 33-Nation Study
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., Duan, L., Almaliach, A., Ang, S., Arnadottir, J., et al. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1197754 · Cited by 3,252
Fearing the unknown: A short version of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale
Carleton, R. N., Norton, M. A. P. J., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2007) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.03.014 · Cited by 2,288
Schmitt, D. P., & Allik, J. (2005) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.623 · Cited by 1,665
Sources of Self-Efficacy in School: Critical Review of the Literature and Future Directions
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654308321456 · Cited by 1,514
The PERMA-Profiler: A brief multidimensional measure of flourishing.
Butler, J., & Kern, M. L. (2016) · International Journal of Wellbeing · doi:10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526 · Cited by 1,485
Metadata
- Authors
- Marsh, H. W.
- Affiliations
- Western Sydney University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Marsh, Herbert W.
- ORCID
- Marsh, Herbert W.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1996
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 810-819
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W4237817862
- Cited by
- 811
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 35 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 41
- FWCI
- 6.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- global self-esteem, positive self-esteem, negative self-esteem, self-esteem measurement, measurement artifacts, self-concept
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Child, Educational Status, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Personality Development, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Reading, Self Concept, Reproducibility of Results
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
