AI帮你理解科学

AI 生成解读视频

AI抽取解析论文重点内容自动生成视频


pub
生成解读视频

AI 溯源

AI解析本论文相关学术脉络


Master Reading Tree
生成 溯源树

AI 精读

AI抽取本论文的概要总结


微博一下
"factor," as McDougall used the term, is closer to "topic" than to contemporary usage of the term, the suggestion was an uncanny anticipation of the results of half a century of work to organize the language of personality into a coherent structure

Personality Structure: Emergence Of The 5-Factor Model

Annual Review of Psychology, no. 1 (1990): 417-440

被引用528|浏览18
下载 PDF 全文
引用
微博一下

代码

数据

0
简介
  • William McDougall (1932), writing in the first issue of Character and Personality, discussed at length the special meanings of "character" and "personality" for the two languages in which the new journal was to be published.
  • Norman (1963), knew of the report and replicated the five-factor structure, offering the trait dimensions as steps "toward an adequate taxon­ omy of personality attributes." Other studies corroborating the work of Fiske and Tupes & Christal were those of Borgatta (1964) and Smith (1967).
重点内容
  • William McDougall (1932), writing in the first issue of Character and Personality, discussed at length the special meanings of "character" and "personality" for the two languages in which the new journal was to be published
  • "factor," as McDougall used the term, is closer to "topic" than to contemporary usage of the term, the suggestion was an uncanny anticipation of the results of half a century of work to organize the language of personality into a coherent structure
  • Norman (1963), knew of the report and replicated the five-factor structure, offering the trait dimensions as steps "toward an adequate taxon­ omy of personality attributes." Other studies corroborating the work of Fiske and Tupes & Christal were those of Borgatta (1964) and Smith (1967)
  • In a series of studies Costa & McCrae have developed an inventory (Costa & McCrae 1985) to assess the five trait dimensions implied by the five robust factors of the rating domain, but have used the model and inventory in a series of studies that have demonstrated the Ubiquity of the Big Five
  • Using Jackson's Personality Research Form (PRF; Jackson 1974) two in­ dependent studies (Borkenau & Ostendorf 1989; Costa & McCrae 1988) came to similar conclusions: The five broad dimensions of personality commonly noted in the rating field and increasingly noted in omnibus personality in­ ventories subsume the many scales of the Personality Research Form
  • Aggregat­ ing teachers' ratings across several scales believed to be related to Trait Dimension III and across four teachers in four different elementary and intermediate school years, I obtained a robust multiple correlation of .70 with subsequent high school grade average
结果
  • Goldberg noted that the scores obtained correlated highly with the five trait scores of the Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) (Costa & McCrae 1985), an inventory tailored along the lines of the Five-Factor Model.
  • In a series of studies Costa & McCrae have developed an inventory (Costa & McCrae 1985) to assess the five trait dimensions implied by the five robust factors of the rating domain, but have used the model and inventory in a series of studies that have demonstrated the Ubiquity of the Big Five.
  • Analysis of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI; Hathaway & McKinley 1951) by Costa et al (1986) in the context of the NEO-PI found four of the Big Five factors-Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness (Friendli­ ness), and Openness (Intellect)-well represented.
  • The "Big Two" initial dimensions of Eysenck, Neuroticism and Extraversion/ Introversion, have appeared routinely in many factor studies of personality characteristics.
  • Noting that Guilford, like Eysenck, always viewed intellect as a domain separate from temperament, the four second-order factors suggested by Guil­ ford (1975) appear to be supported by research (Amelang & Borkenau 1982) and to fit the four non-intellect factors of the five-factor model reasonably well.
  • Using Jackson's Personality Research Form (PRF; Jackson 1974) two in­ dependent studies (Borkenau & Ostendorf 1989; Costa & McCrae 1988) came to similar conclusions: The five broad dimensions of personality commonly noted in the rating field and increasingly noted in omnibus personality in­ ventories subsume the many scales of the PRF.
结论
  • The Borkenau & Ostendorf study, like the earlier Amelang & Borkenau report, both based on a large number of different inventories, confirm what has been suspected (Goldberg 1981): the five-factor model is robust, across different studies and languages in the rating field, but across languages and different inventories, as well.
  • Aggregat­ ing teachers' ratings across several scales believed to be related to Trait Dimension III and across four teachers in four different elementary and intermediate school years, the author obtained a robust multiple correlation of .70 with subsequent high school grade average.
表格
  • Table1: The five robust dimensions of personality from <a class="ref-link" id="cFiske_1949_a" href="#rFiske_1949_a">Fiske (1949</a>) to the present
Download tables as Excel
引用论文
  • Allport, G. W., O dbert, H. S. 1936. Trait names: a psycho-lexical study. Psychol.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Amelang, M., Borkenau, P. 198Uber die factorie llc Struktur un d externe Vali ditat einiger Fragebogen-skalen zur Erfassung von Dimensionen der Extraversion un d emotionalen Labilitat. Z. Diff. Diagnost. Psychol. 3: 1 1 9-46
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Banks, C. 1948. Primary personality factors in women: a reanalysis, 1948. Br. J. Psycho/. Statist. Sect. 1: 204- 1 8
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Baumgarten, F. 1933. Die Charaktereigen­ shaften. Beitrage zur Charakter- und Per­ sonlichkeitsforschung: Monogr. 1. Bern: A.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Manual. Palo Alto, CA: ConSUlting Psychologists Press Birenbaum, M., Montag, I. 1986. On the lo cation of the sensation seeking construct in the personality domain. Mult. Behav. Res. 2 1:357-73 Blo ck, J. 1 96 1. The Q-Sort Method in Per­ sonality Assessment and Psychiatric Re­ search. Springfield, IL: Thomas B lo ck, J. 1 97 1. Lives Through Time. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft Books Block, J. 1977. The Eysencks and psy choti cism. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 86:65354 B lo ck, J. 1989. Critique of the a ct frequen cy approach to personality. J. Pers. Soc. Psy­ chol. 50:234-45
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Borgatta, E. F. 1964. The structure of person­ ality characteristics. Behav. Sci. 12:8-17
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Borkenau, P. 1988. The multiple classification of acts and the big five factors of personality. J. Res. Pers. 22:337-52
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Borkenau, P., Ostendorf, F. 1 989. A confirmatory factor analysis of the five-factor model of personality. Mult. Behav. Res. In press
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Botwin, M. D., Buss, D. M. 198The structure of act report data: Is the five factor model of personality recaptured? J. Pers. Soc. Psycho!. 56:988-1001
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Brand, C. R. 1984. Personality dimensions: an overview of modern trait psychology. In Psychology Survey 5, ed. J. Nicholson, H. Beloff. Leicester, UK: Br. Psychol.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Soc. Buss, D. M., Craik, K. H. 1980. The frequency concept of disposition. J. Pers. 48:379-
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Buss, D. M., Craik, K. H. 1985. Why not measure that trait? Alternative criteria for identifying important dispositions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48:934-46
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • 1 2: 3-52 Carson, R. C. 1989. Personality. Ann. Rev.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Cattell, R. B. 1943. The description of personality: basic traits resolved into clusters.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Cattell, R. B. 1947. Confirmation and clarification of primary personality factors. Psychometrika 1 2: 1 97-220
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Cattell, R. B. 1948. The primary personality factors in women compared with those in men. Br. J. Psychol. 1: 1 14-30
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Cattell, R. B. 1956. Second-order personality factors. J. Consult. Psychol. 20:4 1 1 - 1 8 Cattell, R. B. 1957. Personality and Motivation Structure and Measurement. New
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • York: World Book Cattell, R. B. 1965. The Scientific Analysis of
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Conley, J. J. 1984. Longitudinal consistency of adult personality: Self-reported psychological characteristics across 45 years. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37: 1 325-33
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Costa, P. T. Jr., Busch, C. M., Zonderman, A. B., McCrae, R. R. 1986. Correlations of
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Costa, P. T. Jr., McCrae, R. R. 1976. Age differences in personality structure: a cluster analytic approach. J. Gerontol. 3 1:564-70
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Costa, P. T. Jr., McCrae, R. R. 1985. NEO Personality Inventory. Odessa, The
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Costa, P. T. Jr., McCrae, R. R. 1988. From catalog to classification: Murray' s needs and the five factor model. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 55:258-65
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • D' Andrade, R. G. 1965. Trait psychology and componential analysis. Am. Anthropol. 67: 2 1 5-28
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Darley, J. M., Latane, B. 1968. Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 8: 377-83
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Annu. Meet. Soc. Mult. Exp. Psychol., 19th, Los Angeles Digman, J. M. 1988. Classical theories of trait organization and the Big Five Factors of personality. Presented at Annu. Meet.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Digman, J. M., Inouye, J. 1986. Further specification of the five robust factors of personality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 1 16-
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Epstein, S. 1986. Does aggregation produce
    Google ScholarFindings
  • 1210 Eriksen, C. W. 1957. Personality. Annu. Rev.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Psychol. 8: 1 85-2 1 0 Eysenck, H. J. 1947. Dimensions ofPersonality. New York: Praeger Eysenck, H. J. 1970. The Structure ofHuman
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Fiske, D. W. 1949. Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Funder, D. C., Ozer, D. J. 1983. Behavior as a function of the situation.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Wheeler, 2: 1 4 1"'{)5. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Goldberg, L. R. 1983. The magical number five, plus or minus two: some conjectures on the dimensionality of personality de­ scriptors. Paper presented at a Res. Seminar, Geronto!. Res. Cent., Baltimore City
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Hospitals Gough, H. G., Heilbrun, A. B. Jr. 1980. The
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Guilford, J. P. 1975. Factors and factors of personality. Psychol. Bull. 82:802- 1 4
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Guilford, J. P., Zimmerman, W. S. 1949. The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Guthrie, G. M., Bennett, A. B. 1970. Cultural differences in implicit personality theory.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Int. 1. Psychol. 6:305-1 2 Hampson, S. E. 1988. The Construction of
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Hogan, R. 1 983. Socioanalytic theory of personality. In 1982 Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Personality-Current Theory and Research, ed. M. M. Page, pp. 55-89.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Lincoln, NE: Univ. Nebraska Press Hogan, R. 1 986. Hogan Personality Inventory. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems Homey, K. 1937. The Neurotic Personality of
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Howarth, E. 1976. Were Cattell's 'personality sphere' factors correctly identified in the first instance? Br. 1. Psychol. 67:21 3-30 Jackson, D. N. 1974. Personality Research
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Form Manual. Port Huron: Research Psychologists Press. Rev. ed. Jensen, A. R. 1958. Personality. Annu. Rev.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • 1 988. The lexical approach to personality: a historical review of trait taxonomic research. Eur. 1. Pers. 2: 1 7 1-205 Joreskog, K. C., Sorbom, D. 1984. USREL
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Kendrick, D. T., Funder, D. C. 1988. Profiting from controversy: lessons from the per­ son-situation debate. Am. Psychol. 43:23-
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • 34 Klages, L. 1926. The Science of Character.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • (Trans!. 1932). London: Allen & Unwin Leary, T. 1957. Interpersonal Diagnosis of
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Livneh, H., Livneh, C. 1989. The five-factor model of personality: Is evidence for its cross-media premature? Pers. Ind. Diff.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • 10:75-80 Lorr, M. 1986. Interpersonal Style Inventory: Manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Lorr, M., Manning, T. T. 1978. Higher order factors of the lSI. Mult. Behav. Res. 1 3: 3-7
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Lorr, M., Nerviano, V. J. 1985. Factors common to the lSI and the 1 6PF inventories. 1. Clin. Psychol. 4 1:773-77
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • 37: 1 65-73 Maddi, S. R. 1989. Personality Theories: A
    Google ScholarFindings
  • McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr. 1985a. Comparison of EPI and psychoticism scales with measures of the five-factor theory of per­ sonality. Pers. Ind. Diff. 6:587-97
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr. 1985b. Updating Norman' s "adequate taxonomy": intelligence and personality dimensions in natural languages and questionnaires. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 49:710-21
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr. 1988. Recalled parent-child relationships and adult personality. J. Pers. 56:417-34
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr. 1989.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • McDougall, W. 1932. Of the words character and personality. Character Pers. 1:3-16
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Milgram, S. 1963. Behavioral study of obedience. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67:371-78 Mischel, W. 1968. Personality and Assessment. New York: Wiley
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Mischel, W., Peake, P. K. 1982. Beyond deja vu in the search for cross-situational con­ sistency. Psychol. Rev. 89:730-55 Myers, I. B., McCauley, M. H. 1985. Man­ ual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Noller, P., Law, H., Comrey, A. 1987.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Norman, W. T. 1963. Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psy­ chol. 66:574-83
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Osgood, C. E., May, W. H., Miron, M. S. 1975. Cross-Cultural Universals of Affec­ tive Meaning. Champaign, IL: Univ. Illinois
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., Tannenbaum, P. H. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Peabody, D. 1984. Personality dimensions through trait inferences. J. Pers. Soc. Psy­ chol. 46:384-403
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Peabody, D., Goldberg, L. R. 1 989. Some determinants of factor representations of trait adjectives. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. In press
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Peterson, D. R. 1960. The age generality of personality factors derived from ratings. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20:461-74
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Plomin, R., Daniels, D. 1987. Why are chil­ dren in the same family so different from one another? Behav. Brain Sci. 1 0: 1 - 1 6
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Revelle, W. 1987. Personality and motivation: sources of inefficiency in cognitive performance. J. Res. Pers. 2 1:436-5- 2
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D., Boyes-Braem, P. 1976. Basic ob­ jects in natural categories. Cogn. Psychol.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Rushton, J. P., Fulker, D. W., Neale, M. C., Nias, D. K. B., Eysenck, H. J. 1986. Altruism and aggression: the heritability of individual differences. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Shweder, R. A. 1975. How relevant is an individual difference theory of personality?
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Small, S. A., Zeldin, R. S., Savin-Williams, R. C. 1983. In search of personality traits: A multimethod analysis of naturally occurring prosocial and dominance behavior. J. Pers. 5 1: 1 - 1 6
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Smith, G. M. 1967. Usefulness o f peer ratings of personality in educational research. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 27:967-84 Sullivan, H. S. 1953. The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: Norton
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Tellegen, A. 1985. Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety with an emphasis on self-report. In Anxiety and the Anxiety Disorders, ed. A.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Tellegen, A., Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, T. J., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N. L., Rich, S. 1988.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Tupes, E. C. 1957. Personality traits related to effectiveness of junior and senior Air Force officers. USAF Personnel Training Res. Cent. Res. Rep. No. 57-125
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Tupes, E. C., Christal, R. E. 1 96 1. Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. USAF ASD Tech. Rep. 6 1 -97 Ullmann, L. P., Krasner, L. 1975. A Psycho­ logical Approach to Abnormal Behavior.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Waller, N. G., Ben-Porath, Y. 1987. Is it time for clinical psychology to embrace the five­ factor model of personality? Am. Psychol.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Br. J. Psychol. Monogr. Ser. 1 (3) Wegner, D. M., Vallacher, R. R. 1977. Implicit Psychology: An Introduction to Social Cognition. New York: Oxford
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Wiggins, J. S. 1968. Personality structure. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 19:293--350
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Wiggins, J. S. 19Circumplex models of
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Wiggins, J. S., Broughton, R. 1985. The interpersonal Circle: a structural model for the integration of personality research. In Per­ spectives in Personality, ed. R. Hogan, W.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • 1989. Circular reasoning about interpersonal behavior: evidence concerning some un­ tested assumptions underlying diagnostic classification. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52: 296-306 Wiggins, J. S., Trapnell, P., Phillips, N.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • 1988. Psychometric and geometric characteristics of the revised Interpersonal Adjec­ tive Scales (lAS-R). Mult. Behav. Res.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Zuckerman, M., Kolin, E. A., Price, L., Zoob, I. 1964. Development of a sensation­ seeking scale. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
作者
您的评分 :
0

 

标签
评论
数据免责声明
页面数据均来自互联网公开来源、合作出版商和通过AI技术自动分析结果,我们不对页面数据的有效性、准确性、正确性、可靠性、完整性和及时性做出任何承诺和保证。若有疑问,可以通过电子邮件方式联系我们:report@aminer.cn
小科