دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی شماره 34166
عنوان فارسی مقاله

رابطه پنج عامل بزرگ برای داده های زیستی و جنبه های خود

کد مقاله سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی ترجمه فارسی تعداد کلمات
34166 2000 19 صفحه PDF سفارش دهید محاسبه نشده
خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.
عنوان انگلیسی
Relation of the Big Five to Biodata and aspects of the self
منبع

Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)

Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 28, Issue 6, 1 June 2000, Pages 1017–1035

کلمات کلیدی
- رابطه - پنج عامل بزرگ - داده های زیستی - جنبه ها - خود -
پیش نمایش مقاله
پیش نمایش مقاله رابطه پنج عامل بزرگ برای داده های زیستی و جنبه های خود

چکیده انگلیسی

Two studies examined McCrae and Costa’s system model of personality. Their model suggests the Big Five should have relatively strong associations with life history (measured in Study 1 by Biodata) and with Self-Concept (measured in Study 2 by various Self questionnaires). Study 1—210 participants (143 females) completed Bipolar Big Five Markers and a Biodata inventory. Factor Analyses confirmed the Big Five and revealed seven viable Biodata factors. Multiple regression revealed that most Biodata factors were predicted well by 2 or more Big Five traits. Study 2—199 participants (125 females) completed Bipolar Big Five Markers and an omnibus Self inventory consisting of six previously developed scales. Factor Analyses confirmed the Big Five and revealed eight viable Self factors. Multiple regression revealed that the Self factors were also predicted fairly well by two or more Big Five traits. Both studies found relatively strong associations between the Big Five and the Biodata and Self factors, which lends support to McCrae and Costa’s system model of personality. A consistent pattern of both a primary and secondary trait as joint predictors of Biodata and Self factors suggests that these areas are systematically influenced by multiple traits rather than only single traits.

مقدمه انگلیسی

McCrae and Costa (1996) have suggested a meta-theoretical framework for organizing many of the recurring issues that any theory of personality must face. Their framework consists of six major elements: Basic Tendencies, Characteristic Adaptations, Self-Concept, Objective Biography, External Influences, and Dynamic Processes. The first five elements refer to domains of variables which personality theories should address. The last element, Dynamic Processes, specifies the nature and types of interactions between these variables. Basic Tendencies are inherent dispositions and abilities of individuals. External Influences are the ‘psychological environment’ which an individual interacts with. Characteristic Adaptations are concrete manifestations of an individual’s Basic Tendencies produced by the interaction of Basic Tendencies and External Influences. Self-Concept is a special subcategory of Characteristic Adaptations which consists of knowledge, views and evaluations of the Self. Objective Biography consists of all the behavior in which people engage, the life course that people experience, and the life structure they build during their lives. In their framework McCrae and Costa tentatively identify ‘personality’ with Basic Tendencies and the Dynamic Processes by which they affect other elements. Personality traits are one important component of Basic Tendencies. Many traits can be accounted for by five major factors. These five factors are the traits Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Factor V. Good arguments have been made for distinguishing the ‘Big Five’, which is derived from the lexical hypothesis, from the ‘Five Factor Model’ which is derived from phrase based questionnaires. The most important distinction between these two potentially different versions of ‘the five factors’ involves the nature of Factor V, which is characterized as Intellect by the Big Five, and as Openness to Experience by the Five Factor Model. There is not enough research to draw any strong conclusions about the differential validity of these two conceptualizations at this time. However, across a variety of tests and scales, whether rated by individuals or observers, whether the scale is lexical or phrase based, a researcher can usually find a five factor solution that generally resembles other five factor solutions. This five factor system has been remarkably successful in assimilating a wide variety of personality tests and scales (Costa and McCrae, 1992 and McCrae, 1989). Many personality scales in previously proposed trait systems have been ‘located’ as a subdimension, combination of, or parallel to one of these five factors. One major conclusion from this body of research is that five factors serve as an adequate, although perhaps not a complete, taxonomy of traits. McCrae and Costa’s meta-theoretical framework suggests that one important task is to determine how basic tendencies, such as traits, are associated with the other elements of their framework. Two exploratory studies were conducted to examine the relation of the five factors (simply called the Big Five hereafter) to Self-Concept and Objective Biography. These domains were approximated by using self-report inventories which focus on past events and self-evaluations. Biographical data, commonly called Biodata, was selected as a criteria representative of Objective Biography. Various measures of the Self and Identity were selected as a criteria representative of Self-Concept. The general research question pursued in these two studies is the extent to which factors derived from questionnaires measuring Biodata and the Self are associated with the Big Five. 1.1. Biodata Assessing a person’s life history may be done in many ways, such as interviews, background investigations or questionnaires. Among industrial and organizational psychologists the most common form of Biodata assessment has been self-report inventories. Typically an individual is asked to recall and report specific behaviors and experiences during situations occurring earlier in their lives (Nickels, 1994). Common domains assessed for Biodata include interests and attitudes, drug use, educational achievement and involvement, criminal history, organizational membership, parental relationships and family experiences, recreational pursuits, and the all-too-familiar credit history. Applied psychologists have found that Biodata is an effective predictor for a variety of criteria (Owens, 1983 and Owens and Schoenfelt, 1979). The use of Biodata inventories tends to be closely dependent on particular predictive tasks. Standardized inventories are rarely available and most investigators construct their own items. Furthermore, empirical selection is almost always used to develop custom scales for prediction. However, factor analyses has shown recurrent factors emerging from Biodata inventories. The Mumford and Owens (1987) review found 26 recurrent factors in a review of 21 studies which factor analyzed Biodata inventories. Mumford, Snell and Reiter-Palmon (1994) have suggested that many of these Biodata factors resemble personality traits. In a personnel selection study Kilcullen, White, Mumford and Mack (1995) concluded that Biodata scales derived from factor analysis resemble personality traits and that Biodata may be more subtle and have lower social desirability contamination than personality tests because it asks about more concrete past behavior and life events. Cozier and Comrey (cited in the Comrey Personality Scales Handbook, Comrey (1994)) and Comrey and Backer (1970) used objective biographical inventories to examine the construct validity of the Comrey Personality Scales. They found many correlates between the Comrey Personality Scales and past life experiences. However, these studies did not factor analyze the Biodata items and only presented correlations between specific items and specific Personality Scales rather than attempting to predict Biodata items (or factors) from all the Comrey Personality Scales. Tenopyr (1994) presented a number of hypotheses about the relation between Biodata and the Big Five, but did not test them empirically. Based on her suggestions and the factors reviewed in Mumford and Owens (1987) it is hypothesized that Openness should be associated with Biodata factors such as Creativity, Intellectual and Cultural Pursuits; Conscientiousness with Biodata factors such as Academic Achievement, Achievement Motivation, Financial and Work Habits; Extraversion with Biodata factors such as Social Activities and Leadership; Agreeableness with Biodata factors such as Tolerance, Aggression and Social Activism; and Neuroticism with Biodata factors such as Psychological Adjustment and Well-Being. 1.2. The Self The Self is one of the canonical constructs of Personality addressed by almost every ‘grand theory’ of personality. In an informal survey of 22 research-topic based Personality textbooks, I found that nine of them devoted an entire chapter to the Self; only personality assessment and motivation were equally frequent topics. Hampson (1988) has suggested that the Self is an important perspective on personality because it is concerned with the theories people have about their own personalities. This perspective approaches personality from the ‘inside’ in that it seeks to understand how people construe and understand themselves. The Self seems to represent personality from the standpoint of the actor while the Big Five seems to represent personality from the standpoint of the observer. McAdams (1992) has characterized the Big Five as the ‘psychology of the stranger’, in that it is a description of personality from the observers point of view. This is consistent with one of the fundamental premises of the lexical hypothesis, namely that trait terms become encoded in languages in order to provide short hand notations for important individual differences. It seems unlikely that actor and observer perspectives are mutually exclusive. Bromley, 1977a and Bromley, 1977b) has argued that self-description and other description is the same because our descriptions of both are based on a shared framework of commonsense ideas about human nature expressed in the ordinary language of everyday life. Bromley seems to imply that the primary difference between self and other description lies in that when we are describing others we tend to be evaluative, whereas when we describe ourselves we tend to be explanatory. For example, in giving a self-description most of our statements will deal with psychological processes such as motives and attitudes, while descriptions of others may rely on trait terms which tend to be much more evaluative in terms of social desirability. To the extent that Bromely’s hypothesis that we use a single language to describe both ourselves and others is true, then trait term self-description should be associated with an individual’s Self-Concept. There have been a vast number of scales developed to assess different aspects of the Self. Given the multitude of scales to choose from the primary selection criteria was an informal assessment of the frequency with which a construct appeared to be used in personality research. The questionnaires selected for this study included Self-Concept, Self-Efficacy, Self-Monitoring, Self-Consciousness, and Identity (awareness and importance of aspects of the Self respectively). Additionally, a more recent area of investigation has concerned the role which Material Possessions play in people’s Self-Concept (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981 and Dittmar, 1990). Dittmar’s items were selected as representative of this aspect of the Self. One of Wylie’s (1974) primary conclusions in her review of scales assessing the Self was that most scales required substantial improvement. When possible, the extent to which a particular scale was developed using standard psychometric procedures was used to choose between scales of the same construct. A number of exploratory hypotheses suggest links between Self-Concept and the Big Five. The classic Jungian interpretation of Extraversion versus Introversion as an orientation toward the ‘outer’ or ‘inner’ world would predict that Personal Identity is associated with Introversion while Social Identity is associated with Extraversion. Self-Monitoring should be related to both Extraversion (the ability to modify Self-presentation) and Agreeableness (sensitivity to others). Based on the long standing association of Extroversion with Positive Affect and Neuroticism with Negative Affect, it is probable that both should be associated with Self-Concept since it is primarily an affective evaluation of the Self. It also seems likely that Self-Consciousness is associated with Neuroticism.

خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.