@article{ThienenWeinsteinMeinel2023,
  author    = {Thienen, Julia von and Weinstein, Theresa Julia and Meinel, Christoph},
  title     = {Creative metacognition in design thinking},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1157001},
  pages     = {20},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Design thinking is a well-established practical and educational approach to fostering high-level creativity and innovation, which has been refined since the 1950s with the participation of experts like Joy Paul Guilford and Abraham Maslow. Through real-world projects, trainees learn to optimize their creative outcomes by developing and practicing creative cognition and metacognition. This paper provides a holistic perspective on creativity, enabling the formulation of a comprehensive theoretical framework of creative metacognition. It focuses on the design thinking approach to creativity and explores the role of metacognition in four areas of creativity expertise: Products, Processes, People, and Places. The analysis includes task-outcome relationships (product metacognition), the monitoring of strategy effectiveness (process metacognition), an understanding of individual or group strengths and weaknesses (people metacognition), and an examination of the mutual impact between environments and creativity (place metacognition). It also reviews measures taken in design thinking education, including a distribution of cognition and metacognition, to support students in their development of creative mastery. On these grounds, we propose extended methods for measuring creative metacognition with the goal of enhancing comprehensive assessments of the phenomenon. Proposed methodological advancements include accuracy sub-scales, experimental tasks where examinees explore problem and solution spaces, combinations of naturalistic observations with capability testing, as well as physiological assessments as indirect measures of creative metacognition.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{MaassKuehneHeinzeetal.2022,
  author    = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Heinze, Peter Eric and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian},
  title     = {The concise measurement of clinical communication skills},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {820},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-58264},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-582642},
  pages     = {10},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Objective: There is a lack of brief rating scales for the reliable assessment of psychotherapeutic skills, which do not require intensive rater training and/or a high level of expertise. Thus, the objective is to validate a 14-item version of the Clinical Communication Skills Scale (CCSS-S). Methods: Using a sample of N = 690 video-based ratings of role-plays with simulated patients, we calculated a confirmatory factor analysis and an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), assessed convergent validities, determined inter-rater reliabilities and compared these with those who were either psychology students, advanced psychotherapy trainees, or experts. Results: Correlations with other competence rating scales were high (rs > 0.86-0.89). The intraclass correlations ranged between moderate and good [ICC(2,2) = 0.65-0.80], with student raters yielding the lowest scores. The one-factor model only marginally replicated the data, but the internal consistencies were excellent (α = 0.91-95). The ESEM yielded a two-factor solution (Collaboration and Structuring and Exploration Skills). Conclusion: The CCSS-S is a brief and valid rating scale that reliably assesses basic communication skills, which is particularly useful for psychotherapy training using standardized role-plays. To ensure good inter-rater reliabilities, it is still advisable to employ raters with at least some clinical experience. Future studies should further investigate the one- or two-factor structure of the instrument.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MaassKuehneHeinzeetal.2022,
  author    = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Heinze, Peter Eric and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian},
  title     = {The concise measurement of clinical communication skills},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychiatry},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychiatry},
  publisher = {Frontiers},
  address   = {Lausanne, Schweiz},
  issn      = {1664-0640},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyt.2022.977324},
  pages     = {10},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Objective: There is a lack of brief rating scales for the reliable assessment of psychotherapeutic skills, which do not require intensive rater training and/or a high level of expertise. Thus, the objective is to validate a 14-item version of the Clinical Communication Skills Scale (CCSS-S). Methods: Using a sample of N = 690 video-based ratings of role-plays with simulated patients, we calculated a confirmatory factor analysis and an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), assessed convergent validities, determined inter-rater reliabilities and compared these with those who were either psychology students, advanced psychotherapy trainees, or experts. Results: Correlations with other competence rating scales were high (rs > 0.86-0.89). The intraclass correlations ranged between moderate and good [ICC(2,2) = 0.65-0.80], with student raters yielding the lowest scores. The one-factor model only marginally replicated the data, but the internal consistencies were excellent (α = 0.91-95). The ESEM yielded a two-factor solution (Collaboration and Structuring and Exploration Skills). Conclusion: The CCSS-S is a brief and valid rating scale that reliably assesses basic communication skills, which is particularly useful for psychotherapy training using standardized role-plays. To ensure good inter-rater reliabilities, it is still advisable to employ raters with at least some clinical experience. Future studies should further investigate the one- or two-factor structure of the instrument.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{TomaszewskaSchuster2021,
  author    = {Tomaszewska, Paulina and Schuster, Isabell},
  title     = {Prevalence of teen dating violence in Europe},
  series = {New directions for child and adolescent development},
  volume    = {178},
  journal   = {New directions for child and adolescent development},
  number    = {Special Issue: Prevalence and predictors of teen dating violence: a European perspective},
  publisher = {Jossey-Bass},
  address   = {San Francisco},
  issn      = {1534-8687},
  doi       = {10.1002/cad.20437},
  pages     = {11 -- 37},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Violence in adolescent relationships is a common problem with numerous negative short- and long-term consequences. Because most of the evidence on teen dating violence (TDV) synthesized in reviews comes from North American studies, this review aimed to compile evidence on prevalence rates of TDV based on studies identified for Europe only. Specifically, we considered different forms of TDV victimization and perpetration, gender differences, and its measurement. A systematic literature search of the most popular databases Ebsco and PubMed yielded a total of N = 34 studies, with most of the studies identified for Spain, and only a few studies in other European countries. In sum, the results revealed a great variability in prevalence rates across and within the European countries, a common pattern of gender differences, and a wide range of applied measures, corresponding with the evidence from the North American studies. Implications for future research and policy were discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{GieblerRuthTanneberg2018,
  author    = {Giebler, Heiko and Ruth, Saskia P. and Tanneberg, Dag},
  title     = {Why choice matters},
  series = {Politics and Governance},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Politics and Governance},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Cogitatio Press},
  address   = {Lisbon},
  issn      = {2183-2463},
  doi       = {10.17645/pag.v6i1.1428},
  pages     = {1 -- 10},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Measures of democracy are in high demand. Scientific and public audiences use them to describe political realities and to substantiate causal claims about those realities. This introduction to the thematic issue reviews the history of democracy measurement since the 1950s. It identifies four development phases of the field, which are characterized by three recurrent topics of debate: (1) what is democracy, (2) what is a good measure of democracy, and (3) do our measurements of democracy register real-world developments? As the answers to those questions have been changing over time, the field of democracy measurement has adapted and reached higher levels of theoretical and methodological sophistication. In effect, the challenges facing contemporary social scientists are not only limited to the challenge of constructing a sound index of democracy. Today, they also need a profound understanding of the differences between various measures of democracy and their implications for empirical applications. The introduction outlines how the contributions to this thematic issue help scholars cope with the recurrent issues of conceptualization, measurement, and application, and concludes by identifying avenues for future research.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{GieblerRuthTanneberg2018,
  author    = {Giebler, Heiko and Ruth, Saskia P. and Tanneberg, Dag},
  title     = {Why choice matters},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {104},
  issn      = {1867-5808},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42789},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-427891},
  pages     = {10},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Measures of democracy are in high demand. Scientific and public audiences use them to describe political realities and to substantiate causal claims about those realities. This introduction to the thematic issue reviews the history of democracy measurement since the 1950s. It identifies four development phases of the field, which are characterized by three recurrent topics of debate: (1) what is democracy, (2) what is a good measure of democracy, and (3) do our measurements of democracy register real-world developments? As the answers to those questions have been changing over time, the field of democracy measurement has adapted and reached higher levels of theoretical and methodological sophistication. In effect, the challenges facing contemporary social scientists are not only limited to the challenge of constructing a sound index of democracy. Today, they also need a profound understanding of the differences between various measures of democracy and their implications for empirical applications. The introduction outlines how the contributions to this thematic issue help scholars cope with the recurrent issues of conceptualization, measurement, and application, and concludes by identifying avenues for future research.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KraheVanwesenbeeck2016,
  author    = {Krah{\´e}, Barbara and Vanwesenbeeck, Ine},
  title     = {Mapping an agenda for the study of youth sexual aggression in Europe: assessment, principles of good practice, and the multilevel analysis of risk factors},
  series = {Journal of sexual aggression},
  volume    = {22},
  journal   = {Journal of sexual aggression},
  publisher = {Karger},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1355-2600},
  doi       = {10.1080/13552600.2015.1066885},
  pages     = {161 -- 174},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Sexual aggression is a serious threat to young people's sexual health in Europe, but establishing the exact scale of the problem has been hampered by a variety of conceptual and methodological problems. This article presents a framework for studying youth sexual aggression that addresses both prevalence and risk factors of victimisation and perpetration. It proposes a research tool to comprehensively assess the perpetration of, and victimisation by, sexual aggression that captures different coercive strategies, sexual acts, victim-perpetrator relations, and gender constellations. The instrument is rooted in a clear conceptual definition of sexual aggression and was pilot-tested in 10 countries of the European Union (EU). Furthermore, a list of good practice criteria is proposed to promote the quality and comparability of research on youth sexual aggression in Europe. A multilevel approach combining individual-level and country-level predictors of sexual aggression is outlined and illustrated with data from the pilot study in 10 countries.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KahlertBrand2011,
  author    = {Kahlert, Daniela and Brand, Ralf},
  title     = {Questionnaires for assessing physical activity different response scale categories influence responses concerning health- and sport-related cognitions},
  series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gesundheitspsychologie},
  volume    = {19},
  journal   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gesundheitspsychologie},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Hogrefe},
  address   = {G{\"o}ttingen},
  issn      = {0943-8149},
  doi       = {10.1026/0943-8149/a000044},
  pages     = {96 -- 100},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {The present study examines whether the use of different frequency scales in questionnaires about physical activity influences respondents' own estimation of their activity, as well as subsequent measurements of health- und sport-related cognitions and evaluations. Using a randomized research design we recruited a sample of 118 participants. One group received a high frequency scale for assessing their exercise frequency with the response categories "never", "less often", "once a month", "once a week", or "most days." The other group answered with a medium frequency scale with the alternatives "never", "less often", " once every few months", "once a month", and " once a week or more often." As dependent variables all participants judged the subjective importance of physical activity and their health-related quality of life (WHO-QOL-bref). Results indicate the expected response errors, owing to the fact that using a high-frequency scale produces higher levels of self-reported physical activity (Cramer's V = .30). Corresponding to this the subjective importance of physical activity increased (d = .37) and the health-related quality of life was judged to be better (d = .36). Such artefacts might be eliminated by using standardized formulations such as "I exercise... times per week/month for... minutes."},
  language  = {de}
}