Die Themen soziale Erwünschtheit und Faking sind für Psychologen verbunden mit Kontrollinstrumenten, die eingesetzt werden müssen, um Antwortverzerrungen zu vermeiden. Lange Zeit wurde erforscht, ob sozial erwünschtes Verhalten beziehungsweise Faking Konsequenzen hat. Es gibt einzelne Studien, die die Eigenschaft der Konstrukte untersuchen und daran knüpft die vorliegende Arbeit an. Es existieren in den Studien zur sozialen Erwünschtheit und Faking zwei typische Situationen. In Forschungsstudien werden eher unbewusste Prozesse der Antwortverzerrungen untersucht. Studien aus der Praxis beschäftigen sich vor allem mit bewusster Verfälschung. Die erste Studie wurde online durchgeführt, in der Probanden eine Vielzahl von Fragebögen zu den Themen soziale Erwünschtheit, Overclaiming, Overconfidence und Persönlichkeit ausfüllten, um den gemeinsamen Kern eines nomologischen Netzwerkes zu untersuchen. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass kein gemeinsamer Kern der Fragebögen gefunden werden konnte. Overclaiming scheint ein eigenes nomologisches Netzwerk zu bilden. Overconfidence kann eher als Fähigkeit der Metakognition als eine Antwortverzerrung bezeichnet. In der zweiten Studie wurde mit einem Model (Ziegler et al., 2015) eine latente Fakingvariable modelliert und anschließend der Zusammenhang zu Skalen der sozialen Erwünschtheit, Overclaiming und den Dark Triad untersucht. Dabei wurden Daten einer Experimentalstichprobe und einer Kontrollgruppe zu zwei Messzeitpunkten erhoben. Die Experimentalstichprobe füllte online zum ersten Messzeitpunkt mehrere Skalen aus. Zum zweiten Messzeitpunkt beantworteten die Probanden im Labor den Persönlichkeitsfragebogen erneut, unter einer zufällig zugeordneten Fakinginstruktion. Die Analyse der Daten ergab bedeutsame Zusammenhänge zwischen der latenten Fakingvariablen und Machiavellismus und einem Faktor zur sozialen Erwünschtheit. Außerdem wurde deutlich, dass der psychologische Prozess für die zwei Faking Situationen unterschiedlich ist. / The issues of social desirability and faking are for many psychologists associated with control instruments to avoid response distortion. For a long time, research questions tended to examine the consequences of faking. There are only a few studies which explored the nature of social desirability or faking, and that is where the current dissertation makes a contribution. In most studies of social desirability or faking, the investigation of response distortion in two different situations is described. On the one hand, unintentional distortion is often explored in research. On the other hand, intentional distortion is examined in the practical field. The first study was an online survey in which the sample completed a large number of questionnaires regarding social desirability, overclaiming, overconfidence, and personality to investigate the common core of a shared nomological network. The results suggest there is no common core among response distortion forms. Overclaiming seems to have its own nomological network. Overconfidence is regarded more as a metacognitive ability rather than a response distortion form. In the second study, by dint of a modeling technique (Ziegler, Maaß, Griffith, & Gammon, 2015), a latent faking variable could be modeled. Subsequently, the relationship between the faking variable and social desirability, overclaiming, and the dark triad was examined. The data of an experimental group and a control group were collected with two measurement occasions. The experimental group was first asked in an online survey to fill out questionnaires. Later the participants came to the laboratory and were randomly assigned to a special instruction group. The results show that Machiavellianism and one factor of socially desirable responding have significant regression weights for both faking conditions. Furthermore, Study 2 implies different psychological processes of faking good and faking bad.

The Online Student Connectedness Survey (OSCS) was introduced to the academic community in 2012 as an instrument designed to measure feelings of connectedness between students participating in online degree and certification programs. The purpose of this study was to examine data from the instrument for initial evidence of validity and reliability and to establish a nomological network between the OSCS and similar instruments utilized in the field. The study utilized sequential exploratory factor analysis- confirmatory factor analysis (EFA-CFA) and correlational analysis to assess results of the data. Students enrolled in online courses at higher education institutions located in the United States served as the sample for this study. Three instruments were used during the study. The OSCS was administered first so that the factor structure could be examined for factor validity. Once confirmed, the Classroom Community Scale (CCS) and the Community of Inquiry Scale (COI) served as the instruments to examine nomological validity through correlational analysis of data.This study provided evidence of factor validity and reliability for data from the OSCS. After the initial EFA-CFA, the four-factor structure held, and 16 of the 25 original items remained for nomological testing. Statistically significant correlations were demonstrated between factors contained in the OSCS, CCS, and COI, providing further evidence of construct validity. These results indicate that for the sample used in this study, the OSCS provides data that are valid and reliable for assessing feelings of connection between participants in online courses at institutions of higher learning.

The dispute between nomological realists and anti-realists has been reflected in the formulation of various arguments and counterarguments that reach topics as diverse as modality, induction and the very scientific practice. In this context it is common to take the main realist argument –the nomological argument– for an instance of Inference to the Best Explanation, while Nomological Anti-realism is considered a skeptical alternative concerning natural laws, sustained by independent reasons. This paper aims to review that image of the Nomological Realism vs. Anti-realism debate in light of what we believe is an appropriate distinction between abduction and Inference to the Best Explanation. / La disputa entre realistas y antirrealistas nomológicos se ha plasmado en la formulación de diversos argumentos y contraargumentos que alcanzan tópicostan heterogéneos como la modalidad, la inducción y la misma práctica científica.En ese marco es frecuente tomar al principal argumento realista, el llamadoargumento nomológico, por una instancia de la inferencia a la mejor explicación,mientras que el antirrealismo nomológico se considera una alternativa escépticarespecto de las leyes naturales fundamentada por razones independientes. Elpresente trabajo propone revisar esa imagen del debate realismo vs. antirrealismonomológicos a la luz de lo que, consideramos, es una adecuada distinción entreabducción e inferencia a la mejor explicación.

The research objective was to develop, through two phases involving development and validation, a measure of the psychological work contract for managerial level employees. The psychological contract is the unwritten implicit contract that forms in the minds of employees and contains the obligations and expectations that they believe exists between themselves and the organization. In the first and qualitative phase of the study, a structured interview procedure resulted in the collection of 651 responses from a convenience sample of 35 managers from seven New Zealand organizations. Responses related to what these managers believed they were obligated to provide the organization (perceived organizational expectations), and what they believed the organization was obligated to provide them (their expectations). Content analysis of these 651 statements resulted in the development of two initial measures of the psychological contract (employee obligations, organization obligations). The employee obligations measure (perceived organizational expectations of the employee) contained 16 items, and the organization obligations measure (employee expectations of the organization) contained 23 items. In the second and quantitative phase of the study, and using the same criteria for participation as for phase one, a convenience sample of 124 managers from 13 New Zealand organizations completed questionnaires. The questionnaires included the measures of psychological contract content developed in phase one of the study, and 8 organizational psychology variables to be included in a nomological network. The nomological network included intention to quit, perceived organizational support, work and job involvement, job satisfaction, career plateau, organizational commitment, person-organization fit, and 2 performance measures. A separate questionnaire covering job performance and organizational citizenship behaviour was completed by 94 of the participants' managers. Of the 54 relationships predicted in the nomological network, 41 were significant. Of the 13 non-significant relationships, 10 involved relationships with the two performance measures. The measures of the psychological contract were subjected to a construct validation process involving two steps. The first step involved item and factor analysis. Factor analysis of the two measures of the psychological contract revealed two factors in each. One factor, termed relational obligations and reflecting a collective interest between the employee and the organization, included the items that were believed to influence more directly the relationship between managers and the organization. This factor included items such as be committed to the job (an employee obligation) and provide a physically and socially safe environment (an organizational obligation). The other factor, termed transactional obligations and reflecting a self/other interest on the part of the employee, included the items that were believed to be of a more direct employment transactions nature. This factor included items such as stay true to your own values and beliefs (an employee obligation) and provide professional and personal support (an organizational obligation). In the second step of the validation process, the measures of the psychological contract were embedded into the nomological network and their relationships with the ten variables in that network were tested. Of the ten hypothesised relationships, only one emerged as significant, that being the relationship between the organization obligations component of the psychological contract and person-organization fit. Minimal support for construct validity of the measures of the psychological contract was provided confirming that further effort will be required before complete construct validity may be claimed for the measured. Although the contribution the research makes to the field of knowledge may be limited, it does provide some validation of existing measures of the psychological contract, developed in other studies using different samples. The present findings increase our knowledge of the content of the psychological contract for managers. Additionally, a methodological framework has been established for continuing research into the content of psychological contracts, including an exploration of the relationship between content and fulfilment, along with a structure for comparing the psychological contract of disparate occupational groups. The most likely explanation for the hypotheses not being fully supported is that it is fulfilment (or conversely breach or violation) of the psychological contract, rather than the content of the contract per se, that is related to the variables in the nomological network. Whilst the hypotheses were based on research that considered fulfilment of the contract, this study focussed on the content of psychological contracts. The reasons for basing the hypotheses on research that considered fulfilment, the influence of this decision on hypothesis testing, and other possible explanations for the hypotheses not finding greater support, are explored. The limitations of the study, and possible directions for future research, are discussed.

Contemporary philosopher of science Nancy Cartwright (b. 1944) has raised many an eyebrow with her books How the Laws of Physics Lie (1983) and The Dappled World (1999), among others. The primary task of this dissertation is to link her philosophy with that of Charles S. Peirce (1839–1914)—a link that includes Duns Scotus. My focus is especially on the criticism Peirce would have of Cartwright, and on the philosophical support he can offer her. The question is this: Given her stated philosophy of science, to what else must Cartwright be philosophically committed? This includes discussions of metaphysics, scholastic realism, laws of nature, and the very possibility of science. There are many striking similarities between Peirce and Cartwright, but I argue that he sees further and deeper into the metaphysical implications of her views on science. / Graduate