Resumen de Correction to Carey et al. (2015).
Reports an error in "Narcissism and the Use of Personal Pronouns Revisited" by Angela L. Carey, Melanie S. Brucks, Albrecht C. P. Küfner, Nicholas S. Holtzman, Fenne große Deters, Mitja D. Back, M. Brent Donnellan, James W. Pennebaker and Matthias R. Mehl (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Mar 30, 2015, np). The authors erroneously reported the overall correlation, first stated in the abstract, between Narcissism and total first-person-singular use as .02 (.017) instead of .01 (.010). The misreporting of the overall correlation between Narcissism and total use of first-person singular does not change the results or interpretation in any way (i.e., the near-zero association between Narcissism and I-talk). The online version of this article has been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-13968-001.) Among both laypersons and researchers, extensive use of first-person singular pronouns (i.e., I-talk) is considered a face-valid linguistic marker of narcissism. However, the assumed relation between narcissism and I-talk has yet to be subjected to a strong empirical test. Accordingly, we conducted a large-scale (N = 4,811), multisite (5 labs), multimeasure (5 narcissism measures) and dual-language (English and German) investigation to quantify how strongly narcissism is related to using more first-person singular pronouns across different theoretically relevant communication contexts (identity-related, personal, impersonal, private, public, and stream-of-consciousness tasks). Overall (r = .02, 95% CI [?.02, .04]) and within the sampled contexts, narcissism was unrelated to use of first-person singular pronouns (total, subjective, objective, and possessive). This consistent near-zero effect has important implications for making inferences about narcissism from pronoun use and prompts questions about why I-talk tends to be strongly perceived as an indicator of narcissism in the absence of an underlying actual association between the 2 variables. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved)
