In the original article, there were errors. The descriptions of these sentences were not sufficiently clear.
(1) A correction has been made to **Introductionsection, Paragraph one, the first sentence**:
The original sentence read: “To balance between what is best for individuals and what is best for the collective ones has long been central to sociology and other social sciences (Simpson and Willer, 2015).” The corrected sentence is below:
Research on the balance between what is best for individuals and what is best for the collective ones has long been central to sociology and other social sciences (Simpson and Willer, 2015).
(2) A correction has been made to **Introductionsection, Paragraph two, the fifth sentence**. The original sentence read: “The importance of win-win cooperation is also reflected in “if two people reach an agreement, they can overcome all difficulties” in The Book of Changes (Tze, 2011) and “one is liable to fail, and if there are many, it is hard to be defeated” in History as a Mirror (Sima, 1956).” The corrected sentence is below:
The importance of win-win cooperation is also reflected in “if two people reach an agreement, they can overcome all difficulties” inThe Book of Changes (Tze, 2011) and “one is liable to fail, and if there are many people, it is hard to be defeated” inHistory as a Mirror (Sima, 1956).
(3) A correction has been made to **Study1, Method, Participants, Paragraph one, the third sentence**. The original sentence read: “In terms of education, 48 participants had master's degrees or above, 223 participants had bachelor's degrees, 35 participants had associate bachelor's degrees, nine participants had high school degrees, and five participants had a junior middle school degrees or below.” The corrected sentence is below:
In terms of education, 48 participants had master's degrees or above, 223 participants had bachelor's degrees, 35 participants had associate bachelor's degrees, nine participants had high school degrees, and five participants had junior middle school degrees or below.
(4) A correction has been made to **Study1, Results, Item Analysis, Paragraph four, the last sentence**. The original sentence read: “Therefore, there was a difference between what we wanted to measure and measured, so these items were deleted.” The corrected sentence is below:
Therefore, these items were deleted.
(5) A correction has been made to **Discussionsection, Paragraph one, the eighth sentence**. The original sentence read: “The reliability and validity of our scale caught the criteria.” The corrected sentence is below:
The reliability and validity of our scale met the criteria.
The authors apologize for these errors and state that they do not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher's Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
SimaG. (1956). History as a Mirror. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company Press.
2
SimpsonB.WillerR. (2015). Beyond altruism: sociological foundations of cooperation and prosocial behavior. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 41, 10.1–10.21. 10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112242
3
TzeL. (2011). The I Ching: The Book of Changes. Rockwell: Wildside Press.
Summary
Keywords
win-win, scale development, factor analysis, reliability, validity
Citation
Zhang S, Zang X and Zhang F (2021) Corrigendum: Development and Validation of the Win-Win Scale. Front. Psychol. 12:719890. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.719890
Received
03 June 2021
Accepted
02 August 2021
Published
23 August 2021
Approved by
Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Volume
12 - 2021
Updates
Copyright
© 2021 Zhang, Zang and Zhang.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Feng Zhang zgfzhang@hotmail.com
This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.