Development and Linguistic Cue Analysis of the State-Trait Cheerfulness Inventory–Short Form

References

• Albright, L., Kenny, D. A., & Malloy, T. E. (1988). Consensus in personality judgments at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(3), 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.3.387
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(4), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890902935878
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, F. B., & Kim, S. H. (2004). Item response theory: Parameter estimation techniques. CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beermann, U., & Ruch, W. (2011). Can people really “laugh at themselves?”—Experimental and correlational evidence. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 11(3), 492–501. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023444
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bortolotti, S. L. V., Tezza, R., de Andrade, D. F., Bornia, A. C., & de Sousa Júnior, A. F. (2013). Relevance and advantages of using the item response theory. Quality & Quantity, 47(4), 2341–2360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-012-9684-5
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, B. M. (2001). Application 1: Testing for the factorial validity of a theoretical construct (first order CFA model).In Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cappelleri, J. C., Lundy, J. J., & Hays, R. D. (2014). Overview of classical test theory and item response theory for the quantitative assessment of items in developing patient-reported outcomes measures. Clinical Therapeutics, 36(5), 648–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.04.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carretero-Dios, H., Eid, M., & Ruch, W. (2011). Analyzing multitrait-mulitmethod data with multilevel confirmatory factor analysis: An application to the validation of the State-Trait Cheerfulness Inventory. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(2), 153–164.
   Google Scholar
• Carretero-Dios, H., Benítez, I., Delgado-Rico, E., Ruch, W., & López-Benítez, R. (2014). Temperamental basis of sense of humor: The Spanish long form of the trait version of the State-Trait-Cheerfulness-Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 68, 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chalmers, R. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, W. H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiesi, F., Galli, S., Primi, C., Innocenti Borgi, P., & Bonacchi, A. (2013). The Accuracy of the Life Orientation Test–Revised (LOT–R) in measuring dispositional optimism: Evidence from item response theory analyses. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(5), 523–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2013.781029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). Lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software, 39(8), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v039.i08
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiStefano, C., & Morgan, G. B. (2014). A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Embretson, S. E. (1996). Item response theory models and spurious interaction effects in factorial ANOVA designs. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20(3), 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169602000302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Maheah.
   Google Scholar
• Evers, A., Muñiz, J., Hagemeister, C., Høtmaelingen, A., Lindley, P., Sjöbergr, A., & Bartram, D. (2013). Assessing the quality of tests: Revision of the EFPA review model. Psicothema, 25(3), 283–291. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falkenberg, I., Buchkremer, G., Bartels, M., & Wild, B. (2011). Implementation of a manual-based training of humor abilities in patients with depression: A pilot study. Psychiatry Research, 186(2-3), 454–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.10.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falkenberg, I., Jarmuzek, J., Bartels, M., & Wild, B. (2011). Do depressed patients lose their sense of humor. Psychopathology, 44(2), 98–105. https://doi.org/10.1159/000317778
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funder, D. C., & West, S. G. (1993). Consensus, self‐other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 61(4), 457–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00778.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray-Little, B., Williams, V. S., & Hancock, T. D. (1997). An item response theory analysis of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(5), 443–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297235001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Hofmann, J. (2018). Putting “Laughing at yourself” to the test. HUMOR, 31(2), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2016-0075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmann, J., Carretero-Dios, H., & Carrell, A. (2018). Assessing the Temperamental Basis of the Sense of Humor: Adaptation of the English Language Version of the State-Trait Cheerfulness Inventory Long and Standard Form. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2255. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Item response theory: Application to Psychological Measurement. Dorsey Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kacewicz, E., Pennebaker, J. W., Davis, M., Jeon, M., & Graesser, A. C. (2014). Pronoun use reflects standings in social hierarchies. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(2), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X13502654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, C., Chiesi, F., Hofmann, J., Ruch, W., & Saklofske, D. H. (2019). The Italian Version of the State-Trait Cheerfulness Inventory Trait Form: Psychometric Validation and Evaluation of Measurement Invariance. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282919875639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, C., Chiesi, F., & Saklofske, D. H. (2019). The combinative role of traits cheerfulness and seriousness relating to resiliency and well-being: A moderated mediation model. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, C., Chiesi, F., Saklofske, D. H., & Yan, G. (2019). What is the temperamental basis of humour like in China? A cross‐national examination and validation of the standard version of the state–trait cheerfulness inventory. International Journal of Psychology, 55(2), 264–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. A., Preacher, K. J. (2013). September). Calculation for the test of the difference between two dependent correlations with one variable in common [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org.
   Google Scholar
• Litman, L., Robinson, J., & Abberbock, T. (2017). TurkPrime. com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 49(2), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0727-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• López-Benítez, R., Acosta, A., Lupiáñez, J., & Carretero-Dios, H. (2018). High trait cheerfulness individuals are more sensitive to the emotional environment. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(6), 1589–1524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9871-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martín-Albo, J., Núñiez, J. L., Navarro, J. G., & Grijalvo, F. (2007). The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: translation and validation in university students. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10(2), 458–467. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1138741600006727
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P. (2013). Test theory: A unified treatment. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meijer, R. R., Tendeiro, J. N., & Wanders, R. B. K. (2015). The use of nonparametric item response theory to explore data quality. In S. P. Reise and D. A. Revicki eds. Handbook of Item response Theory Modeling: Applications to Typical Performance Assessment (pp. 85–110). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Meriac, J. P., Woehr, D. J., Gorman, C. A., & Thomas, A. L. (2013). Development and validation of a short form for the multidimensional work ethic profile. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82(3), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further investigation of the performance of S-X2: An item fit index for use with dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(4), 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621603027004004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). The affective and cognitive context of self-reported measures of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 28(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01086714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., & Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015.
   Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., & King, L. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1296–1312. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1296
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 547–577. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papousek, I., & Schulter, G. (2010). “Don't take an X for a U. Why laughter is not the best medicine, but being cheerful has many benefits.” In Psychological Well-being, I. Wells, (ed.), Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, 1–75.
   Google Scholar
• Proyer, R. T. (2012). Development and initial assessment of a short measure for adult playfulness: The SMAP. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(8), 989–994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.07.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proyer, R. T., & Brauer, K. (2018). Exploring adult playfulness: examining the accuracy of personality judgments at zero-acquaintance and an LIWC analysis of textual information. Journal of Research in Personality, 73, 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapp, A. M., Wild, B., Erb, M., Rodden, F. A., Ruch, W., & Grodd, W. (2008). Trait cheerfulness modulates BOLD response in lateral cortical but not limbic brain areas—A pilot fMRI study. Neuroscience Letters, 445(3), 242–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2008.09.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reise, S. P., & Waller, N. G. (2009). Item response theory and clinical measurement. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153553
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Measures Package, 61, 52.
   Google Scholar
• Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA. ).Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruch, W. (1997). State and trait cheerfulness and the induction of exhilaration: A FACS study. European Psychologist, 2(4), 328–341. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.2.4.328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2008). Who is gelotophobic? Assessment criteria for the fear of being laughed at. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 67(1), 19–27.
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., & Hofmann, J. (2012). A temperament approach to humor. In Gremigni, P. (Ed.), Humor and Health Promotion (p. 79–112). Nova Science Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., & Hofmann, J. (2017). Fostering humour. In Proctor C. (Ed.). Positive Psychology Interventions in Practice (pp. 65–80). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W. F., Hofmann, J., Rusch, S., & Stolz, H. (2018). Training the sense of humor with the 7 Humor Habits Program and satisfaction with life. HUMOR, 31(2), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2017-0099
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., Köhler, G., & Van Thriel, C. (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(3-4), 303–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., Köhler, G., & Van Thriel, C. (1997). To be in good or bad humour: Construction of the state form of the State-Trait-Cheerfulness-Inventory—STCI. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(4), 477–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00231-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Psychometrika, 34(S1), 1–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03372160
   Google Scholar
• Samejima, F. (1996). Graded response model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 85–100). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
   Google Scholar
• Sprecher, S., & Fehr, B. (2005). Compassionate love for close others and humanity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(5), 629–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407505056439
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sprecher, S., & Fehr, B. (2006). Enhancement of mood and self-esteem as a result of giving and receiving compassionate love. Current Research in Social Psychology, 11(16), 227–242.
   Google Scholar
• Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147–169). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Tsutakawa, R. K., & Johnson, J. C. (1990). The effect of uncertainty of item parameter estimation on ability estimates. Psychometrika, 55(2), 371–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Ark, L. A. (2012). New developments in Mokken scale analysis in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(5), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i05
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar