Talk:Honesty-humility factor of the HEXACO model of personality

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2022 and 11 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Keagan M (article contribs). Abj89 (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination

Editing this article

The banner sounds harsher than it really is. These are all fixable problems, which I am confident you will fix within a short period of time. Also, please add the Wikipedia course initiative banner to the talk page for this article. William Fleeson (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see the course banner (never mind about that part)...William Fleeson (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing Tags

I used the tool that prevents link rot. I understand that using bare links for citations isn't ideal, but in this instance, I think it's beneficial. As far as notability goes, there are several citations in the paper that indicate that it has been widely used in personality literature in the last few years. Additionally, the citations in the article have all been cited many times (some have even been cited more than 50 times by other papers). As far as seeming like a personal reflection or essay rather than an encyclopedic entry, I disagree and welcome specific comments about what sounds that way/what should be changed. Abj89 (talk) 03:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Great article! I only have a couple of suggestions, but feel free to disagree with anything I say...

The first section of the article that describes the factor doesn't have a citation- you may want to cite the scale itself?

There are a lot of distinctly psychological terms throughout the page that may be confusing to people not super familiar with psychology- I would either define these terms, or provide a Wiki link if possible. (For example, social adroitness and disinhibition).

Those are my only suggestions! Whitmb11 (talk) 18:56, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2nd review

I think that the subscales section needs a citation (added a “citation needed” tag).

The History section needs work. I started with a little sentence cleaning. In addition, I think more time should be spent talking about the development of the HEXACO model and the controversy surrounding it. In the context of this debate, it makes sense to mention the changes that the sixth factor wrought on the existing factors. What were these changes exactly? I’d like to see more about the integration of items that didn’t fit into the five-factor model. This also works well in the context of the debate between the two models.

An expanded version of this section might need to be renamed “History and Controversy”, though that will depend on the topic’s final treatment. In the section “Relation to the Big 5 and Five Factor Models”, the first sentence is confusing. First it says that Honesty-humility is only moderately correlated with the Big Five and then it says that it is highly correlated with Agreeableness in the NEO-PI-R. So it is only moderately correlated with the other four factors. This should be made clear. Social Adroitness and Self-Monitoring should be explained or wiki-linked. “Right-wing activism” doesn’t sound neutral. “Conservative” maybe?

I could be wrong, but I think that all of the places where you say “significantly positively/negatively correlated with” should be changed to “positively/negatively associated with” in the interest of “writing for the lay-person”.

In the second to last paragraph you reference “this study”. I’m not sure what study you’re talking about.

In general, this was quite informative. I'm interested to read more about the HEXACO model now! Armsbf11 (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Essay-like clean up tag seems unjustified

The article was recently tagged as "essay-like" by an editor who seems to be in the habit of adding clean up tags without providing reasons on the talk pages. (I know of at least 8 different articles recently tagged by this person with no reasons given.) The WP guidelines on this matter state that a personal reflection or essay describes someone's personal feelings or views about a topic rather than the opinions of experts.[1] I don't see how this is an issue for the present article as it appears to be well-referenced and researched. I have a degree of familiarity with this topic and can say confidently that the statements in this article concur with the research literature and are not just some editor's personal opinions. (I am not the author of this article by the way.) Placing unnecessary clean up tags like this can be disruptive as it may convey the impression (whether intentional or not) that an article is lacking credibility and is therefore contrary to WP policy on tag bombing.[2] --Smcg8374 (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the version that was tagged. "Logically, Honesty-Humility is also strongly negatively correlated with workplace deliquency...", and the use of the lede as an introduction as one would in an essay. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do need to apologise, for some reason I thought the essay-like tag was added by another editor who has been adding lots of tags to many articles, and not always with good reason. I can see that the older version had problems. I'll be more diligent in checking the history pages next time.--Smcg8374 (talk) 09:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No biggy, histories are a daunting read for anyone. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Impact of recent student edits

This article has recently been edited by students as part of their course work for a university course. As part of the quality metrics for the education program, we would like to determine what level of burden is placed on Wikipedia's editors by student coursework.

If you are an editor of this article who spent time correcting edits to it made by the students, please tell us how much time you spent on cleaning up the article. Please note that we are asking you to estimate only the negative effects of the students' work. If the students added good material but you spent time formatting it or making it conform to the manual of style, or copyediting it, then the material added was still a net benefit, and the work you did improved it further. If on the other hand the students added material that had to be removed, or removed good material which you had to replace, please let us know how much time you had to spend making those corrections. This includes time you may have spent posting to the students' talk pages, or to Wikipedia noticeboards, or working with them on IRC, or any other time you spent which was required to fix problems created by the students' edits. Any work you did as a Wikipedia Ambassador for that student's class should not be counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:

0 -No unproductive work to clean up
1 - A few minutes of work needed
2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 21:00, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger with HEXACO - opposed

It has been proposed that this article be merged with the one on the HEXACO because this personality trait is part of that model. The reason given is not a proper justification for a merger. A merger would be justified if the subject of the article was not notable enough in its own right to warrant its own article. On the contrary, there is a substantial body of research on Honesty-Humility, indicating that the subject is notable in its own right. Additionally, there are plenty of articles on specific personality traits, for the same reason that there are considerable bodies of literature on these traits, not just on the models that they are components of, and this makes them notable. Merging them all into articles about models would make the latter articles unwieldy. Having an article on this specific subject is useful to people who want to review the research that is specific to Honesty-Humility in some depth.--Smcg8374 (talk) 07:09, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This passage makes no sense

2602:306:CDB2:4860:505C:27D:6DEA:4458 (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)"...only moderately correlated with the Big Five model of personality, but is highly correlated with the Agreeableness factor of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R),"[reply]

I don't know how to fix this, because I don't know what it is supposed to mean. This assertion is not supported by a citation.

"the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)," is the best single test for measuring the five factors and their facets, so it just doesn't make sense that HEXACO is moderately correlated with the Big Five model, but highly correlated with the Agreeableness factor, etc.

Editing this page

Some edits that I have for this article is to find sources that explain what Honesty-humility is in the factor of the HEXACO model of personality. There is no citation in the description or definition of honesty-humility. Another addition that would be needed is adding in citations for the subscales, there are no cited sources in that whole section. For the history section, I think this is pretty good but could use more explanation on the honesty-humility portion if there is any information on its history specifically and maybe some better links to the HEXOACO model for the history of this inventory. In the section Honesty-Humility as a predictor for other aspects of personality," there is no citation that shows the proof of the statement made. It seems like this whole article needs a lot more citations added overall. Some further research in this area could help show more information about honesty-humility and we could cite the sources on this besides just making a statement about this. There is just a lot of very minimal explanations in this article and could use further explanation on honesty-humility with more sources that can prove these statements. The content gap that is here is that they don't go into high versus low honesty-humility. They kind of gloss over just some basic definitions but nothing about what happens if these are low are high in certain people and the outcomes of this. Like how these can show a positive correlation with comment crime and unethical behavior. They could talk more about how this correlates with other parts of an inventory and cite it. ^[1] Keagan M (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00134.x?casa_token=grCOg6nabvwAAAAA%3AFIwwER7VvxYkGKh6tcjlxSbyjTaA-WeZEsROtY4P3rbzd_zeq3XG21u3jrchPRjaYRMDpuU_fF93hAo

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Wake Forest University supported by WikiProject Psychology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00134.x?casa_token=grCOg6nabvwAAAAA%3AFIwwER7VvxYkGKh6tcjlxSbyjTaA-WeZEsROtY4P3rbzd_zeq3XG21u3jrchPRjaYRMDpuU_fF93hAo

[1]