Prof. Ziegler erforscht derzeit die psychometrische Messung von Persönlichkeit, Emotionen und Kompetenzen in dynamischen, alltäglichen Situationen — mit Fokus auf Persönlichkeitszustände, Emotionsregulation bei Jugendlichen und die Validierung von Messinstrumenten unter realen Bedingungen. Seine jüngsten Arbeiten adressieren auch die Anwendung von künstlicher Intelligenz in der automatisierten Bewertung (z. B. Essay-Scoring) und die Erkennung von Antwortverzerrungen in Personalauswahlverfahren. Für Unternehmen und Bildungseinrichtungen bietet er wissenschaftlich fundierte Methoden zur objektiven Erfassung von Fähigkeiten, Persönlichkeitsmerkmalen und elterlichen Kompetenzen im Umgang mit digitalen Medien — etwa für Personalentwicklung, Ausbildungsmanagement und Risikobewertung. Seine Expertise ist relevant für HR-Abteilungen, Bildungsträger und Organisationen, die valide, praxisgerechte Assessmentinstrumente benötigen.
🔒 Das System hat 1446 mögliche Industrie-Partner gefunden — Firmen, Scores und Begründungen sind nur für eingeloggte Nutzer:innen sichtbar. Anmelden
Prof. Dr. Matthias Ziegler
HU-FIS-Profil ↗GRK 2434: Facetten der Komplexität
university
GRK 2434: Facetten der Komplexität
university
Moral Exceptionality in Daily Life: Antecedents, Dynamics, and Consequences of Morally Exceptional Person-Situation Transactions
university
Zeitraum: 12/2008 - 02/2009 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Matthias Ziegler
Förderer: Wirtschaftsunternehmen / gewerbliche Wirtschaft Zeitraum: 06/2009 - 09/2009 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Matthias Ziegler
Förderer: Andere Hochschulfördergesellschaften Zeitraum: 08/2009 - 09/2009 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Matthias Ziegler
Methodology · DOI
Empirical evidence to the robustness of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) concerning violation of the normality assumption is presented by means of Monte Carlo methods. High-quality samples underlying normally, rectangularly, and exponentially distributed basic populations are created by drawing samples which consist of random numbers from respective generators, checking their goodness of fit, and allowing only the best 10% to take part in the investigation. A one-way fixed-effect design with three groups of 25 values each is chosen. Effect-sizes are implemented in the samples and varied over a broad range. Comparing the outcomes of the ANOVA calculations for the different types of distributions, gives reason to regard the ANOVA as robust. Both, the empirical type I error α and the empirical type II error β remain constant under violation. Moreover, regression analysis identifies the factor “type of distribution” as not significant in explanation of the ANOVA results.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · DOI
Taxonomies of person characteristics are well developed, whereas taxonomies of psychologically important situation characteristics are underdeveloped. A working model of situation perception implies the existence of taxonomizable dimensions of psychologically meaningful, important, and consequential situation characteristics tied to situation cues, goal affordances, and behavior. Such dimensions are developed and demonstrated in a multi-method set of 6 studies. First, the "Situational Eight DIAMONDS" dimensions Duty, Intellect, Adversity, Mating, pOsitivity, Negativity, Deception, and Sociality (Study 1) are established from the Riverside Situational Q-Sort (Sherman, Nave, & Funder, 2010, 2012, 2013; Wagerman & Funder, 2009). Second, their rater agreement (Study 2) and associations with situation cues and goal/trait affordances (Studies 3 and 4) are examined. Finally, the usefulness of these dimensions is demonstrated by examining their predictive power of behavior (Study 5), particularly vis-à-vis measures of personality and situations (Study 6). Together, we provide extensive and compelling evidence that the DIAMONDS taxonomy is useful for organizing major dimensions of situation characteristics. We discuss the DIAMONDS taxonomy in the context of previous taxonomic approaches and sketch future research directions.
Psychological Methods · DOI
Fit indices are widely used in order to test the model fit for structural equation models. In a highly influential study, Hu and Bentler (1999) showed that certain cutoff values for these indices could be derived, which, over time, has led to the reification of these suggested thresholds as "golden rules" for establishing the fit or other aspects of structural equation models. The current study shows how differences in unique variances influence the value of the global chi-square model test and the most commonly used fit indices: Root-mean-square error of approximation, standardized root-mean-square residual, and the comparative fit index. Using data simulation, the authors illustrate how the value of the chi-square test, the root-mean-square error of approximation, and the standardized root-mean-square residual are decreased when unique variances are increased although model misspecification is present. For a broader understanding of the phenomenon, the authors used different sample sizes, number of observed variables per factor, and types of misspecification. A theoretical explanation is provided, and implications for the application of structural equation modeling are discussed.