Rammsayer, Thomas H.

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","207"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3-4"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","217"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","15"],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:31:28Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:31:28Z"],["dc.date.issued","2001"],["dc.description.abstract","Studies on self-estimated intelligence indicate that males rate their intelligence higher than females. The present study investigates gender differences in self-estimated intelligence of children and young adults. One hundred and twenty-four elementary school children aged eight to ten years and 243 high-school children aged 12 to 15 years participated in the study. Self-ratings were obtained for 11 specific aspects of intelligence including Thurstone's (1938) Primary Mental Abilities as well as musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence as proposed by Gardner (1983). The results revealed that males do not estimate their intelligence generally higher than females. Across both age groups boys, in contrast to girls, rated their abilities higher in mathematical and spatial intelligence, perceptual speed, and logical reasoning. However, girls rated their musical intelligence higher than males. The effect sizes of gender differences in both age groups suggest that already a tendency for specific gender differences exists in prepubertal children which stabilizes and becomes significant in pubertal children."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1024//1010-0652.15.34.207"],["dc.identifier.isi","000172754800009"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/17126"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Verlag Hans Huber"],["dc.relation.issn","1010-0652"],["dc.title","Gender differences in self-estimated intelligence in children and early adolescents"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","275"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","4"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Psychologist"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","284"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","7"],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:44:23Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:44:23Z"],["dc.date.issued","2002"],["dc.description.abstract","A total of 121 male and 107 female students from various German universities and vocational colleges estimated their own intelligence scores and were tested by psychometric intelligence tests on each of Thurstone's (1938) seven primary mental abilities. The correlations between self-estimated and tested intelligence differed largely among the various intelligence domains. In accordance with former studies, gender differences in self-estimated mathematical and spatial intelligence, perceptual speed, and reasoning were found. When controlling for psychometric intelligence, only gender-related differences in self-estimated mathematical abilities could be markedly reduced. Besides gender level of education was identifted as another variable that significantly moderates self-estimates of specific aspects of intelligence. The theoretical implications of the results are discussed."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1027//1016-9040.7.4.275"],["dc.identifier.isi","000180829700004"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/34383"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Hogrefe & Huber Publishers"],["dc.relation.issn","1016-9040"],["dc.title","Self-estimated intelligence - Gender differences, relationship to psychometric intelligence and moderating effects of level of education"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","115"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Diagnostica"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","120"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","48"],["dc.contributor.author","Troche, Stefan J."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:33:00Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:33:00Z"],["dc.date.issued","2002"],["dc.description.abstract","The increasing use of computerized diagnostic procedures inevitably questions the equivalence of conventional paper-and-pencil versions and corresponding computer transpositions. To investigate the equivalence of the computerized version of the Leistungsprufsystem (LPS), as implemented in the Hogrefe Testsystem, and the conventional paper-and-pencil version, 131 participants, were tested applying a counter-balanced design with repeated measures. Heterogeneous results of the paper-and-pencil and the compterized version clearly show that one cannot proceed on the assumption that both versions are equivalent, and the results, emphasize the necessity of systematic I equivalence checks. An additionally performed investigation of retest reliability-of the computerized LPS version resulted in reliability coefficients ranging from r(n) = 0.55 to r(n) = 0.94 for a 2-week retest interval. Potential reasons for the non-equivalence of both LPS versions are discussed."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1026//0012-1924.48.3.115"],["dc.identifier.isi","000179195700001"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/44495"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Hogrefe & Huber Publishers"],["dc.relation.issn","0012-1924"],["dc.title","Comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized administration of the Leistungsprufsystem (LPS)"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","369"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","5"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Journal of Personality"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","382"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","16"],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:04:45Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:04:45Z"],["dc.date.issued","2002"],["dc.description.abstract","Previous research has demonstrated that gender differences in self-estimated intelligence are domain specific: Males estimate their mathematical, logical and spatial abilities significantly higher than females. It has been frequently hypothesized that these differences are moderated by the individual's degree of gender-role orientation. However, studies investigating the effect of gender-role orientation on self-estimated intelligence revealed highly inconsistent results. In the present study, 267 participants estimated their own abilities in 11 intelligence domains and completed the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). Factor analysis of the 11 intelligence domains yielded four interpretable factors. Gender differences were identified for the mathematical-logical and the artistic intelligence factor. Additional analyses revealed a moderating effect of gender-role orientation on gender differences in factor scores. Thus, the present study provided direct evidence for the notion that in male, but not in female individuals, self-estimates of specific aspects of intelligence are markedly influenced by gender-role orientation. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1002/per.454"],["dc.identifier.isi","000178698000003"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/38761"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","John Wiley & Sons Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","0890-2070"],["dc.title","Gender differences in self-estimated intelligence and their relation to gender-role orientation"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","869"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","5"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Personality and Individual Differences"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","880"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","29"],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:45:19Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:45:19Z"],["dc.date.issued","2000"],["dc.description.abstract","Fifty-four male and 51 female German students estimated their own and their parents' IQ scores on each of Thurstone's [Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.] seven primary mental abilities (verbal fluency, verbal comprehension, numerical ability, spatial visualization, memory, perceptual speed and reasoning) and four additional types of intelligence proposed by Gardner [Gardner, G. (1983). Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.], namely musical, body-kinesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. Gender differences were identified for only some of the intelligence domains. Males rated their mathematical, logical and spatial intelligence higher than females, while females gave higher scores than males for musical and interpersonal intelligence. Furthermore, there was some direct evidence for the assumption that estimates of intelligence are susceptible to gender stereotypes. When controlling for gender stereotypes, sex-related differences in self-estimated types of intelligence were confined to mathematical abilities and memory with higher ratings of males in the former and higher ratings of females in the latter one. Finally, factor analyses suggested gender differences in the conceptualization of some aspects of intelligence. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00238-X"],["dc.identifier.isi","000089227400008"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/20408"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Pergamon-elsevier Science Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","0191-8869"],["dc.title","Sex differences in self-estimates of different aspects of intelligence"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","301"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Personality and Individual Differences"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","312"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","29"],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:38:20Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:38:20Z"],["dc.date.issued","2000"],["dc.description.abstract","Ambiguous findings on sex-related differences in time estimation may be primarily caused by two factors: (1) unreliable psychophysical methods for assessment of timing performance and (2) lack of control for personality traits that are likely to moderate estimation of time. In the present study, therefore, individual Big-Five personality traits as well as functional and dysfunctional impulsivity scores were obtained from 25 male and 35 female students. Furthermore, all participants were required to reproduce durations ranging from 1 to 5 s, As indicators of timing performance ratio scores, absolute error scores and coefficients of variation were determined. Neither of these psychophysical measures yielded significant differences between the male and female samples. However. stepwise multiple regression analyses revealed that the personality traits Openness to Experience and Dysfunctional Impulsivity account for 45% of the total variance of individual variability in temporal reproductions in are likely to moderate estimation of time. In the present study, the male sample, as compared to only 5% in the female sample. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00194-4"],["dc.identifier.isi","000087294500007"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/45786"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Pergamon-elsevier Science Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","0191-8869"],["dc.title","Sex-related differences in time estimation: the role of personality"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","88"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Diagnostica"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","97"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","50"],["dc.contributor.author","Rammstedt, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Holzinger, B."],["dc.contributor.author","Rammsayer, Thomas H."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:52:21Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:52:21Z"],["dc.date.issued","2004"],["dc.description.abstract","To investigate the equivalence of the computerized version of the NEO-Five-Factor-Inventory (NEO-FFI), as implemented in the Hogrefe Testsystem, and the conventional paper-and-pencil version, 220 participants were tested applying a completely balanced design with repeated measures. Equivalence was examined on both the subjective and the psychometric levels. No differences between both versions could be found with regard to means and standard deviations for the single items as well as for the NEO-FFI scales. Furthermore, high convergent correlations between the corresponding items and scales of the two versions could be identified. Also internal consistencies, retest reliability, and factorial validity of the computerized and the conventional versions proved to be highly similar. The overall pattern of results provided strong evidence for a high level of equivalence between both NEO-FFI versions."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1026/0012-1924.50.2.88"],["dc.identifier.isi","000221112700003"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/49096"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Hogrefe & Huber Publishers"],["dc.relation.issn","0012-1924"],["dc.title","Comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized administration of the NEO-Five-Factor-Inventory (NEO-FFI)"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]