211 college students completed the Self-monitoring Scale, the Traditional Religious Belief subscale of the Paranormal Belief Scale, and the Threat Index measure of death threat and self-esteem. As hypothesized, the low self-monitoring group showed the largest and only significant rs between Traditional Religious Belief and the two criteria—death threat and self-esteem. Findings are consistent with the notion that low self-monitors show greater dispositional/behavioral consistency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BriggsS. R.CheekJ. M. (1988) On the nature of self-monitoring: Problems with assessment, problems with validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 663–678.
2.
BriggsS. R.CheekJ. M.BussA. H. (1980) An analysis of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 679–686.
3.
GangestadS.SnyderM. (1985) “To carve nature at its joints”: On the existence of discrete classes in personality. Psychological Review, 92, 317–349.
4.
KriegerS. R.EptingF. R.HaysC. H. (1979) Validity and reliability of provided constructs in assessing death threat: A self-administered form. Omega, 10, 87–95.
5.
MillerM. L.ThayerJ. F. (1989) On the existence of discrete classes in personality: Is self-monitoring the correct joint to carve?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 143–155.
6.
RigdonM.EptingF.NeimeyerR.KriegerS. (1979) The Threat Index: A research report. Death Education, 3, 245–270.
7.
SnyderM. (1987) Public appearances/private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New York: Freeman.
8.
SnyderM.GangestadS. (1986) On the nature of self-monitoring: Matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 125–139.
9.
TobacykJ.MilfordG. (1983) Beliefs in paranormal phenomena: Assessment instrument development and implications for personality functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1029–1037.
