Relationship between contrived in vivo and role-play assertive behavior

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Behavioral Science

Background:

• Assessing assertiveness is crucial for understanding social interactions.
• The external validity of common assessment methods, like role-play and self-report, requires rigorous investigation.
• Previous research has not fully clarified the generalizability of role-play findings to real-world behaviors.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the external validity of role-play assessments of assertiveness.
• To compare the predictive power of self-report measures versus role-play in different behavioral contexts.
• To examine how assertiveness levels are affected by assessment conditions (role-play vs. contrived in vivo).

Main Methods:

• A 2x2 factorial design was employed with 32 participants.
• Independent variables included assertiveness level (high/low) and assessment condition (role-play/contrived in vivo).
• The Conflict Resolution Inventory served as the selection instrument to measure assertiveness.

Main Results:

• A positive correlation was observed between self-report assertiveness scores and observed behavior in the role-play condition.
• Self-report scores did not predict behavior in the contrived in vivo (real-life) condition.
• Assertiveness was enhanced in the role-play setting, whereas it decreased in the contrived in vivo setting.

Conclusions:

• Generalizing findings from role-play assessments to naturalistic settings should be done with caution.
• Self-report measures of assertiveness may not accurately predict behavior in real-world situations.
• The assessment method significantly influences the manifestation of assertive behavior.