ene
2
Científicos australianos de la Universidad de Griffith revelaron que la personalidad influye más en el éxito en los estudios universitarios que la inteligencia, divulgó recientemente la red social «PsychCentral».
De acuerdo con el sitio web, el estudio demostró, además, que las cualidades humanas tienen la misma influencia en los logros de la vida que el coeficiente intelectual.
El Dr. Artur Poropat, que encabezó la investigación, realizó un análisis completo de la personalidad y el rendimiento académico.
En el trabajo titulado «Los Cinco factores humanos» (conciencia, franqueza, amabilidad, estabilidad emocional y extroversión) Poropat reveló que la conciencia y la franqueza tienen una mayor influencia en los logros universitarios.
El investigador consideró que los profesores tienen que fijarse menos en la inteligencia y más en la personalidad de los alumnos, pues los estudiantes que se consideran bastante listos dejan de esforzarse y sus rendimientos van disminuyendo con el tiempo, mientras que los que se consideran muy trabajadores avanzan rápidamente.
Subrayó igualmente que es posible desarrollar los rasgos más importantes en relación con el éxito académico.
Se pueden cambiar las cualidades humanas influyendo de esa manera en el estudio, pero es muy poco probable cambiar la inteligencia o enseñarla, concluyó.
enero 2/2015 (PL)
Tomado del Boletín de Prensa Latina Copyright 2014 «Agencia Informativa Latinoamericana Prensa Latina S.A.
Abstract
Background. The relationship between personality and academic performance has long been explored, and a recent meta-analysis established that measures of the five-factor model (FFM) dimension of Conscientiousness have similar validity to intelligence measures. Although currently dominant, the FFM is only one of the currently accepted models of personality, and has limited theoretical support. In contrast, the Eysenckian personality model was developed to assess a specific theoretical model and is still commonly used in educational settings and research.
Aims. This meta-analysis assessed the validity of the Eysenckian personality measures for predicting academic performance.
Sample. Statistics were obtained for correlations with Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism (20–23 samples; N from 8,013 to 9,191), with smaller aggregates for the Lie scale (7 samples; N= 3,910).
Methods. The Hunter–Schmidt random effects method was used to estimate population correlations between the Eysenckian personality measures and academic performance. Moderating effects were tested using weighted least squares regression.
Results. Significant but modest validities were reported for each scale. Neuroticism and Extraversion had relationships with academic performance that were consistent with previous findings, while Psychoticism appears to be linked to academic performance because of its association with FFM Conscientiousness. Age and educational level moderated correlations with Neuroticism and Extraversion, and gender had no moderating effect. Correlations varied significantly based on the measurement instrument used.
Conclusions. The Eysenckian scales do not add to the prediction of academic performance beyond that provided by FFM scales. Several measurement problems afflict the Eysenckian scales, including low to poor internal reliability and complex factor structures. In particular, the measurement and validity problems of Psychoticism mean its continued use in academic settings is unjustified.
Comments
Noticias anteriores a 2010
Suscripción AL Día
