Development and validation of a multi-dimensional measure of intellectual humility

Journal Article (2017)
Author(s)

Mark Alfano (TU Delft - Ethics & Philosophy of Technology)

Kathryn Iurino (University of Oregon)

Paul Stey (Brown University)

Brian Robinson (Texas A&M University)

Markus Christen (Universitat Zurich)

Feng Yu (Xian Jiaotong University)

Daniel Lapsley (University of Notre Dame)

Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Copyright
© 2017 M.R. Alfano, Kathryn Iurino, Paul Stey, Brian Robinson, Markus Christen, Feng Yu, Daniel Lapsley
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182950
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2017
Language
English
Copyright
© 2017 M.R. Alfano, Kathryn Iurino, Paul Stey, Brian Robinson, Markus Christen, Feng Yu, Daniel Lapsley
Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Issue number
8
Volume number
12
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

This paper presents five studies on the development and validation of a scale of intellectual humility. This scale captures cognitive, affective, behavioral, and motivational components of the construct that have been identified by various philosophers in their conceptual analyses of intellectual humility. We find that intellectual humility has four core dimensions: Open-mindedness (versus Arrogance), Intellectual Modesty (versus Vanity), Corrigibility (versus Fragility), and Engagement (versus Boredom). These dimensions display adequate self-informant agreement, and adequate convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity. In particular, Open-mindedness adds predictive power beyond the Big Six for an objective behavioral measure of intellectual humility, and Intellectual Modesty is uniquely related to Narcissism. We find that a similar factor structure emerges in Germanophone participants, giving initial evidence for the model’s cross-cultural generalizability.