ellauri082.html on line 757: They found that Victim Signaling scores highly correlated with dark triad scores (r = .35). This association held after controlling for gender, ethnicity, income, and other factors that might make people vulnerable to mistreatment.
ellauri082.html on line 761: They also found that Virtue Signaling was significantly correlated with dark triad scores (r = .18).
ellauri100.html on line 301: Intelligence (for those who might care) and its application: Graduate Record Examinations scores: verbal aptitude, 96th percentile; quantitative aptitude, 99th percentile; advanced test in economics, 99th percentile. Combined verbal and quantitative scores qualify me for membership (which I do not seek) in the Triple-Nine Society, whose members “have tested at or above the 99.9th percentile on at least one of several standardized adult intelligence tests”. But I am much older now — more than thrice the age I was when I took the GREs — so I do not claim to be “brilliant”. On the other hand, I know a lot more now than I did then, and the more one knows the better one gets at assembling information into meaningful patterns and sorting bad ideas from good ones.
ellauri100.html on line 375: I am an INTJ, and an especially strong I, T, and J. Here are my latest scores (02/16/17) on the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS), which is similar to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The descriptive excerpts are from David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates’s Please Understand Me.
ellauri100.html on line 403: My scores are in green; the average scores of all other test-takers are in purple. The five traits are defined as follows:
ellauri100.html on line 427: In the graph below, your scores on each foundation are shown in green (the 1st bar in each set of 3 bars). The scores of all liberals who have taken it on our site are shown in blue (the 2nd bar), and the scores of all conservatives are shown in red (3rd bar). Scores run from 0 (the lowest possible score, you completely reject that foundation) to 5 (the highest possible score, you very strongly endorse that foundation and build much of your morality on top of it).
ellauri100.html on line 435: Note that there is a great deal of controversy as to the exact meaning of what these reaction time associations actually mean, so please take your results with a grain of salt. While a great deal of previous research has validated the use of such procedures to detect associations of group level bias across groups, the use of IAT procedures to measure individual ethicality is still in development and all of these procedures have been validated probibalistically, at the group level, rather than being validated as being absolutely diagnostic for individuals. That being said, many (though not all) people have found validity in their implicit scores and have found there to be some real psychological process that tracks implicit associations.
ellauri100.html on line 439: Positive scores indicate that ethical associations with the self-concept are stronger than negative associations, and a negative score indicates the opposite.
ellauri100.html on line 457: The graph below shows how often people say that they find various everyday ethical situations to be acceptable in everyday life. This business ethics questionnaire includes 5 categories: Usurpation of company resources, Offering kickbacks, Corporate gamesmanship, Concealment of misconduct, & Cheating Customers. Higher scores indicate greater acceptance of these behaviors.
ellauri100.html on line 463: The scale you just completed was the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale, developed by Douglas Crowne and David Marlowe (1960). This scale measures social desirability concern, which is people’s tendency to portray themselves favorably during social interaction. Each of the 33 true-false items that you just filled out describes a behavior that is either socially acceptable but unlikely, or socially unacceptable but likely. As a result, people who receive high scores on this measure may be more likely to respond to surveys in a self-promoting fashion.
ellauri100.html on line 467: The graph below shows your score on this scale. The scores range from 0% to 100% and represent the proportion of answers that indicated socially desirable responding. Thus, higher scores correspond with higher degrees of socially desirable responding. Your score is shown in green (1st bar). The score of the average liberal respondent is shown in light blue and the score of the average strong liberal is shown in dark blue. The average conservative score is shown in light red and the score of the average strong conservative is shown in dark red.
ellauri100.html on line 487: In the graphs below, your score is shown in green (the first bar in each cluster). The scores of all people who have taken the scale on our site and who described themselves during registration as politically liberal are shown in the blue bars. The scores of people who described themselves as politically conservative are in red. Scores run from 1 (the lowest possible score, least belief in that construct) to 5 (the highest possible score).
ellauri100.html on line 495: In the graph below, your score is shown in green. The scores of all people who have taken the scale on our site and who say that they go to religious services never, or just a few times a year, are shown in blue. The scores of all people who have taken the scale on our site and who said (during registration) that they go to religious services a few times a month or more are shown in red. Scores run from 1 (the lowest possible score, least happy) to 7 (the highest possible score, most happy).
ellauri100.html on line 497: In addition, we asked you some questions on the second page about your mental health. That recent Gallup poll showed that conservatives and religious people report having better mental health when asked using a single question (“how would you rate your mental health?”). We want to see if their finding holds up using a more specific scale, so we asked you to report on a variety of symptoms related to depression and anxiety, which are the most common kinds of mental health symptoms that people report. In the graph below, your score is shown in green. High scores mean MORE mental health complaints. Scores run from 1 (the lowest possible score, no symptoms at all) to 5 (the highest possible score, people who responded “extremely” to all items). As before, the blue bar shows the score of the less religious people; the red bar shows the average score of the most religious people.
ellauri100.html on line 507: Positive scores indicate that “happiness” associations with the self-concept are stronger (i.e., faster) than “sadness” associations, and a negative score indicates the opposite.
ellauri100.html on line 515: The graph below shows your scores (in green) on the items from the first page, compared to those of the average liberal (in blue) and the average conservative (in red) visitor to this website. The scale runs from 1 (lowest score) to 7 (highest score).
ellauri100.html on line 523: Low = formal; high = intuitive reasoning. Also, scores of zero are common. It simply means you chose all formal reasoning options.
ellauri100.html on line 529: Your score on the OCT is calculated by taking into account your familiarity with the real items (e.g., Bill Clinton) and subtracting how familiar you rated the false/fake items to be (e.g., Fred Gruneberg — my next door neighbor). Also, familiarity ratings of 1 to 4 are treated the same. So if you rated your familiarity with “Bill Clinton” as 1, 2, 3, or 4 then you scored a +1 for that item. And if you rated your familiarity with “Fred Gruneberg” as 1, 2, 3, or 4 then you scored a -1 for that item. If you were unfamiliar with any real or false items, your scores for those items are 0. A perfect score would be identifying all real items and not recognizing any of the false items.
ellauri100.html on line 531: The graph below shows your score on the OCT as it compares to others who have taken this survey on our website. Scores range from 0%-100% and higher values correspond to more correct responses to the OCT. Your score is shown in green, scores of the average liberal are in blue, and scores of the average conservative are in red.
ellauri100.html on line 549: The graphs below show your scores (in green) compared to those of the average liberal (in blue), the average conservative (in red), and the average libertarian (in orange) visitor to this website. The first graph shows your score on the political knowledge scale in comparison to other liberals and conservatives and scores run from 0% (the lowest possible score) to 100% (the highest possible score*).
ellauri100.html on line 561: Positive scores indicate a greater implicit preference for European Americans relative to African Americans, and negative scores indicate an implicit preference for African Americans relative to European Americans.
ellauri143.html on line 271: Manly excellence, that scores not on another's wife,

ellauri151.html on line 451: Let us assume that we invited an unknown person to a game of cards. If this person answered us, “I don’t play,” we would either interpret this to mean that he did not understand the game, or that he had an aversion to it which arose from economic, ethical, or other reasons. Let us imagine, however, that an honorable man, who was known to possess every possible skill in the game, and who was well versed in its rules and its forbidden tricks, but who could like a game and participate in it only when it was an innocent pastime, were invited into a company of clever swindlers, who were known as good players and to whom he was equal on both scores, to join them in a game. If he said, “I do not play,” we would have to join him in looking the people with whom he was talking straight in the face, and would be able to supplement his words as follows: “I don’t play, that is, with people such as you, who break the rules of the game, and rob it of its pleasure. If you offer to play a game, our mutual agreement, then, is that we recognize the capriciousness of chance as our master; and you call the science of your nimble fingers chance, and I must accept it as such, it I will, or run the risk of insulting you or choose the shame of imitating you.” … The opinion of Socrates can be summarized in these blunt words, when he said to the Sophists, the leaned men of his time, “I know nothing.” Help! TLDR!
ellauri163.html on line 740: In fact, scores of 32 or above are one of strong indicators of having as ASD.
ellauri163.html on line 748: People with higher scores on the Autism Spectrum Quotient (items included "I am fascinated by numbers," and "I find social situations difficult") had weaker belief in a personal God than those with lower IQ score ("I am fascinated by skirts", and "I find zippers difficult"). Second, reduced ability to mentalize mediated this correlation. (Mentalizing was measured with the Empathy Quotient, which assesses self-reported ability to recognize and react to others' emotions, and with a task that requires identifying what's being expressed in pictures of eyes. Systematizing -- interest in and aptitude for mechanical and abstract systems -- was correlated with autism but was not a mediator.) Third, men were much less likely than women to say they strongly believed in a personal God (even controlling for autism), and this correlation was also mediated by reduced mentalizing. They were also clearly more interested in skirts and puzzled by zippers.
ellauri171.html on line 1062: Tamar was assertive of her rights and subversive of convention. She was also deeply loyal to Judah’s family. These qualities also show up in Ruth, who appears later in the lineage of Perez and preserves Boaz’s part of that line. The blessing at Ruth’s wedding underscores the similarity in its hope that Boaz’s house “be like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah” (Ruth 4:12). Tamar’s (and Ruth’s) traits of assertiveness in action, willingness to be unconventional, and deep loyalty to family are the very qualities that distinguish their descendant, King David.
ellauri181.html on line 134: One of the main limitations of this theory lies in the methodology of the research. The SVS is quite difficult to answer, because respondenz have to first read the set of 30 value items and give one value the highest as well as the lowest ranking (0 or −1, depending on whether an item is opposed to their values). Hence, completing one questionnaire takes approximately 12 minutes resulting in a significant amount of only half-filled in forms. Furthermore, many respondenz have a tendency to give the majority of the values a high score, resulting in a skewed responses to the upper end. However, this issue can be mitigated by providing respondenz with an additional filter to evaluate the items they marked with high scores. When administering the Schwartz Value Survey in a coaching setting, respondenz are coached to distinguish between a "must-have" value and a "meaningful" value. A "must-have" value is a value you have acted on or thought about in the previous 24 hours (this value item would receive a score of 6 or 7 on the Schwartz scale). A "meaningful" value is something you have acted on or thought about recently, but not in the previous 24 hours (this value item would receive a score of 5 or less).
ellauri181.html on line 136: Another methodological limitations are the resulting ordinal, ipsatised (?) scores that limit the type of useful analyses researchers can perform.
ellauri181.html on line 376: While mean scores from Likert-type scales can be compared across individuals, scores from an ipsative measure cannot. To explain, if an individual was equally extroverted and conscientious and was assessed on a Likert-type scale, each trait would be evaluated singularly, i.e. respondents would see the item "I enjoy parties" and agree or disagree with it to whatever degree reflected their preferences.[citation needed]
ellauri222.html on line 193: And it got even better. Jack Ludwig reviewed the novel. He informed readers of Holiday that “the book is a major breakthrough.” By no means should it be read as autobiography—“as if an artist with Bellow’s enormous gifts were simply playing at second-guessing reality, settling scores.” No, in this book, Ludwig wrote, “Bellow is after something greater.” The greater something turns out to be “man’s contradiction, his absurdity, his alienation,” and so on. It was pretty chutzpadik, as even Bellow had to admit. But by then he was laughing all the way to the bank.
ellauri257.html on line 419: Upon the 2009 American release (of the book, after the film of course, this is America), Michael Dirda wrote in The Washington Post that Pornografia "seems as sick, as pathologically creepy a novel as one is ever likely to read. In some ways, it resembles a rather more polymorphously perverse version of Les Liaisons Dangereuses or one of those disturbing fictions by European intellectuals that blend the philosophical with the erotic: Think of Georges Bataille's The Story of the Eye or Pierre Klossowski's Roberte Ce Soir. ... Through its sado-masochistic material and its almost Henry Jamesian analyses of human motives, Pornografia underscores Gombrowicz's lifelong philosophical obsession: the quest for authenticity." Dirda continued: "Certainly, most readers will find Pornografia perturbing, or worse: repulsive, confusing, ugly. As Milosz once said of Gombrowicz: 'He had no reverence whatsoever for literature. He derided it as a snobbish ritual, and if he practiced it, he attempted to get rid of all its accepted rules.'"
ellauri264.html on line 153: Audience reception to Velma has been overwhelmingly negative. It became one of the lowest-rated television shows on IMDb, receiving similar low scores from audiences on Rotten Tomatoes and Google.
ellauri284.html on line 621: Ethics experts say engaging partners who have ongoing legal issues underscores the growing concern that the president’s business projects around the world could create conflicts of interest or other challenges for his administration.
ellauri347.html on line 190: