RESEARCH PAPER
Assessment of the histrionic self-presentation style:
initial validation of the Polish version
of the As-If-Scale
1
Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
2
Bundeswehr University Munich, Munich, Germany
Submission date: 2020-10-30
Final revision date: 2021-01-12
Acceptance date: 2021-01-18
Online publication date: 2021-04-12
Publication date: 2021-06-22
Current Issues in Personality Psychology 2021;9(2):165–178
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
the role of personality in interpersonal relations and social behaviorsindividual differencespersonality assessment and diagnosis
ABSTRACT
Background:
The main research objective was to translate and evaluate the Polish version of the As-If-Scale (AIS) as well as to test the measurement invariance of the Polish and the original (German) versions of the tool, and to analyze the differ-ences in histrionic self-presentation style among Poles and Germans. The AIS consists of 8 items for the subjective assessment of the histrionic self-presentation style which involves behaviors such as playing roles, imitating people or even engaging others in performing small role-plays, and is seen as an individual difference phenomenon.
Participants and procedure:
The psychometric properties of the Polish version were tested in two samples with a total of 762 participants.
Results:
The article presents the factor structure and reliability of the scale. In addition, the AIS was correlated with measures of the Big Five personality traits, pragmatism and gelotophobia to provide initial validation. Measurement invariance was tested using data collected in this study (Polish sample) and existing and previously published data (German sample).
Conclusions:
Overall, the results provide support for the reliability of the scale as its properties are similar to those of the German version. The findings also allow one to make broader cross-cultural comparisons of the histrionic self-presentation style, which includes various types of behavior and is often associated with humor.
The main research objective was to translate and evaluate the Polish version of the As-If-Scale (AIS) as well as to test the measurement invariance of the Polish and the original (German) versions of the tool, and to analyze the differ-ences in histrionic self-presentation style among Poles and Germans. The AIS consists of 8 items for the subjective assessment of the histrionic self-presentation style which involves behaviors such as playing roles, imitating people or even engaging others in performing small role-plays, and is seen as an individual difference phenomenon.
Participants and procedure:
The psychometric properties of the Polish version were tested in two samples with a total of 762 participants.
Results:
The article presents the factor structure and reliability of the scale. In addition, the AIS was correlated with measures of the Big Five personality traits, pragmatism and gelotophobia to provide initial validation. Measurement invariance was tested using data collected in this study (Polish sample) and existing and previously published data (German sample).
Conclusions:
Overall, the results provide support for the reliability of the scale as its properties are similar to those of the German version. The findings also allow one to make broader cross-cultural comparisons of the histrionic self-presentation style, which includes various types of behavior and is often associated with humor.
REFERENCES (72)
1.
Alicke, M. D., Braun, J. C., Glor, J. E., Klotz, M. L., Magee, J., Sederhoim, H., & Siegel, R. (1992). Complaining behavior in social interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 286–295. https//doi.org/10.1177/0146167292183004.
2.
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5). Fifth edition. APA.
3.
Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2....
4.
Bressler, E. R., & Balshine, S. (2006). The influence of humor on desirability. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evol....
5.
Carretero-Dios, H., Proyer, R. T., Ruch, W., & Rubio, V. J. (2010). The Spanish version of the GELOPH: Properties of a questionnaire for the assessment of the fear of being laughed at. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 10, 345–357.
6.
Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equa-tion Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/107055....
7.
Chłopicki, W., Radomska, A., Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2010). The assessment of the fear of being laughed at in Poland: Translation and first evaluation of the Polish GELOPH. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 41, 172–181. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10059....
8.
Cohen, A. R. (1959). Some implications of self-esteem for social influence. In C. Hovland & I. Janis (Eds.), Personality and persuasibility (pp. 102–120). Yale University Press.
9.
Costa. P.T., Jr, & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differ-ences, 13, 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8....
10.
DeYoung, C., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880–896. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3....
11.
Dionigi, A. (2016). Personality of clown doctors. An exploratory study. Journal of Individual Differences, 37, 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0....
12.
Dupree, C. H., & Fiske, S. T. (2019). Self-presentation in interracial settings: The competence downshift by white liberals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117, 579–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi00....
13.
Eysenck, M. W., & Derakshan, N. (2011). New perspectives in attentional control theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 955–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid....
14.
Gangestad, S. W., & Snyder, M. (2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 530–555. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-....
16.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality do-mains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-....
17.
Greengross, G., Martin, R. A., & Miller, G. F. (2011). Personality traits, intelligence, humor styles, and humor production ability of professional stand-up comedians compared to college students. Psychology of Aes-thetics, Creativity and the Arts, 6, 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/a00257....
18.
Greengross, G., & Miller, G. F. (2009). The Big Five personality traits of professional comedians compared to amateur comedians, comedy writers, and college students. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid....
19.
Greengross, G., & Miller, G. F. (2012). Humor ability reveals intelligence, predicts mating success, and is higher in males. Intelligence, 39, 188–192. http://dx.doi.org./10.1016/j.i....
20.
Hrebícková, M., Ficková, E., Klementová, M., Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2009). Strach ze zesmesnení: Ceská a slovenská verze dotazníku pro zjistování gelotofobie [The fear of being laughted at: The Czech and Slo-vak version of the GELOPH for the assessment of gelotophobia]. Ceskoslovenská Psychologie, 53, 469–480.
21.
International Test Commission (2017). The ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests (2nd ed.). Re-trieved from www.intestcom.org.
22.
Jones, E. E., & Wortman, C. (1973). Ingratiation: an attributional approach. General Learning Press.
23.
Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psy-chological perspectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 231–262). Erlbaum.
24.
Jones, E. E., Rhodewalt, F., Berglas, S., & Skelton, J. A. (1981). Effects of strategic self-presentation on subse-quent self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 407–421. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.41.3.407.
25.
Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small de-grees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44, 486–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/004912....
26.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
27.
Köhler, G., & Ruch, W. (1996). Sources of variance in current sense of humor inventories: How much sub-stance, how much method variance? Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 9, 363–398. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1....
28.
Koppel, M. A., & Sechrest, L. (1970). A multitrait-multimethod matrix analysis of sense of humor. Education-al and Psychological Measurement, 30, 77–85. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465....
29.
Kowalski, R. M. (1996). Complaints and complaining: Functions, antecedents, and consequences. Psychologi-cal Bulletin, 119, 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2....
30.
Kowalski, R. M. (2002). Whining, griping, and complaining: Positivity in the negativity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58, 1023–1035. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.1....
31.
Leary, M. R. (1995). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Westview Press.
32.
Lundy, D. E., Tan, J., & Cunningham, M. R. (1998). Heterosexual romantic preferences: The importance of humor and physical attractiveness for different types of relationships. Personal Relationships, 5, 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475....
33.
Martin, R. A., & Ford, T. E. (2018). The psychology of humor. An integrative approach. Elsevier, Academic Press.
34.
McDonald, R. P. (2010). Structural models and the art of approximation. Perspectives on Psychological Sci-ence, 5, 675–686. https://doi.org/10.1177/174569....
36.
Nussbaum, E. C., Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2017). Ha ha? Assessing individual differences in humor produc-tion ability. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity & the Arts, 11, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca000....
37.
Platt, T. (2008). Emotional responses to ridicule and teasing: Should gelotophobes react differently? Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 21, 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR.....
38.
Platt, T., Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2009). Gelotophobia and bullying: The assessment of the fear of being laughed at and its application among bullying victims. Psychology Science Quarterly, 51, 135–147.
39.
Platt, T., Ruch, W., Hofmann, J., & Proyer, R. T. (2012). Extreme fear of being laughed at: Components of gel-otophobia. Israeli Journal of Humor Research, 1, 86–106.
40.
Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2010). Dispositions towards ridicule and being laughed at: Current research on gelotophobia, gelotophilia, and katagelasticism. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 52, 49–59.
41.
R Core Team (2020). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org.
42.
Radomska, A., & Tomczak, J. (2010). Gelotophobia, self-presentation styles, and psychological gender. Psy-chological Test and Assessment Modeling, 52, 191–201.
43.
Renner, K. H., Enz, S., Friedel, H., Merzbacher, G., & Laux, L. (2008). Doing as if: The histrionic self-presentation style. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1303–1322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.....
44.
Renner, K. H., & Heydasch, T. (2010). Performing humor: On the relations between self-presentation styles, gelotophobia, gelotophilia, and katagelasticism. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 52, 171–190.
45.
Renner, K. H., & Manthey, L. (2018). Relations of dispositions toward ridicule and histrionic self-presentation with quantitative and qualitative humor creation abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 78. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.....
46.
Rogers, C., & Dymond, R. (1954). Psychotherapy and personality change. University of Chicago Press.
47.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v....
48.
Ruch, W. (1995). A psycholexical study of the “sense of humor”: Taxonomizing German humor related nouns. Paper presented at the Thirteenth International Humor Conference, Birmingham, July 31-August 4.
49.
Ruch, W., Beermann, U., & Proyer, R. T. (2009). Investigating the humor of gelotophobes: Does feeling ridic-ulous equal being humorless? Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 22, 111–143. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMR.2....
50.
Ruch, W., Köhler, G., & Van Thriel (1996). Assessing the “humorous temperament”: Construction of the facet and standard trait forms of the State-Trait-Cheerfulness-Inventory – STCI. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 9, 303–339. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1....
51.
Ruch, W., & Hofmann, J. (2012). A temperament approach to humor. In P. Gremigni (Ed.), Health psychology research focus. Humor and health promotion (pp. 79–112). Nova Biomedical Books.
52.
Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2008a). The fear of being laughed at: Individual and group differences in gelo-tophobia. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 2, 47–67. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR.....
53.
Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2008b). Who is gelotophobic? Assessment criteria for the fear of being laughed at. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 67, 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0....
54.
Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2009). Extending the study of gelotophobia: On gelotophiles and katagelasticists. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 22, 183–212. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMR.2....
55.
Scopelliti, I., Loewenstein, G., & Vosgerau, J. (2015). You call it “selfexuberance”; I call it “bragging”: Miscali-brated predictions of emotional responses to self-promotion. Psychological Science, 26, 903–914. https://doi.org/10.1177/095679....
56.
Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Brooks/Cole.
57.
Schlenker, B. R., & Pontari, B. A. (1973). The strategic control of information: Impression management and self-presentation in daily life. In A. Tesser, R. B. Felson, & J. M. Suls (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on self and identity (pp. 199–232). American Psychological Association.
58.
Sezer, O., Gino, F., & Norton, M. I. (2018). Humblebragging: a distinct and ineffective self-presentation strat-egy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114, 52–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi00....
59.
Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/h00370....
60.
Snyder, M., & Campbell, B. H. (1982). Self-monitoring: The self in action. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological per-spectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 185–207). Erlbaum.
61.
Sorokowska, A., Słowińska, A., Zbieg, A., & Sorokowski, P. (2014). Polska adaptacja testu Ten Item Personali-ty Inventory (TIPI) – TIPI-PL – wersja standardowa i internetowa. [Polish adaptation of Ten Item Person-ality Inventory – TIPI-PL – standard and Internet version]. WrocLab.
62.
Steptoe, A., Malik, F., Pay, C., Pearson, P., Price, C., & Win, Z. (1995). The impact of stage fright on student actors. British Journal of Psychology, 86, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044....
63.
Szarota, P. (2006). Psychologia uśmiechu. Analiza kulturowa [The psychology of a smile. Cultural analysis]. Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
64.
Szmajke, A. (1995). Popularność w grupie a styl autoprezentacji [Popularity in the group and the style of self-presentation]. Psychologia Wychowawcza, 38, 385–392.
65.
Titze, M. (1996). The Pinocchio Complex: Overcoming the fear of laughter. Humor & Health Journal, 5, 1–11.
66.
Titze, M. (2009). Gelotophobia: The fear of being laughed at. Humor: International Journal of Humor Re-search, 22, 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMR.2....
67.
Twenge, J. M. (2018). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy – and completely unprepared for adulthood – and what that means for the rest of us. Simon & Schuster.
68.
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442....
69.
Vohs, K. D., Baumeister, R. F., & Ciarocco, N. J. (2005). Self-regulation and self-presentation: Regulatory re-source depletion impairs impression management and effortful self-presentation depletes regulatory re-sources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 632–657. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3....
71.
Wojciszke, B. (1984). Skala pragmatyzmu – treść i charakterystyka psychometryczna [Pragmatism Scale – the content and psychometric properties]. Przegląd Psychologiczny, 27, 725–743.
72.
Wojciszke, B., & Baryła, W. (2002). Jak odstrzelić sobie nogę: funkcje i konsekwencje narzekania [How to shoot a leg off: Functions and consequences of complaining]. Kolokwia Psychologiczne, 10, 213–235.
Copyright: © Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk This is an Open Access journal, all articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.