CLASSIFYING TRAITS (II): THE BIG FIVE DEVELOPMENT OF
CLASSIFYING TRAITS (II): THE BIG FIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BIG 5 TAXONOMY: LEXICAL APPROACH FACTOR ANALYSIS BIG 5: FORMAL DEFINITIONS & EXAMPLES OF TRAITS 1 ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE BIG FIVE SEARCH FOR THE BASIC UNITS OF PERSONALITY What are the most basic dimensions of personality? Is this basic structure universal? --->Long-lasting debate over the number and nature of the fundamental dimensions of personality
possible solution? LEXICAL APPROACH Fundamental Lexical Hypothesis Those personality traits that are most salient and socially relevant in peoples lives have become encoded into their language; the more important such a trait, the more likely is it to become expressed as a single word (Goldberg, 1982, p.204) -> DICTIONNARY: ideal point of departure to develop a 2 FACTOR ANALYSIS Statistical tool that looks at the correlations among many variables (e.g., trait descriptors) and groups these variables in clusters (called
factors or dimensions). Each factor (or dimension) includes all the variables that correlate (i.e., covariate) highly with each other (ie., co-exist in people). Each dimension is interpreted as a psychological disposition or trait. 3 Example: Correlations among 6 traits OUTGO. OUTGOING LAUGHS PARTIER INSECURE ANXIOUS TENSE
1.0 INSE LAUG. PART. .70 .84 .10 .05 .10
.75 .15 .10 .05 .10 .06 .05 .76
.80 1.0 1.0 1.0 ANXI. 1.0 TENS. .75 1.0
4 Factors obtained from these correlations: Ext rav e rs io n .7 Ne urot ic is m .7 .8 .7
O L P Outgo ing La ug hs Party Ins .8 Ax
Insecure A nx io us .9 T T e nse 5 HISTORY OF LEXICAL PERSONALITY RESEARCH Allport & Odbert (1936) Websters II unabridged Traits 4,504
States 4,541 Evaluations 5,226 Doubtful 3,682 Cattell (1943) Norman (1963) FIRST FACTOR ANALYSIS EFFORTS: 5 Factors !! Norman (1967) Websters III
Traits 2,800 States 2,638 Social Roles 1,476 Evaluative 761 Goldberg (1990, 1992) John (1984, 1989) Costa & McCrae (1985) MORE FACTOR ANALYSES
Physical 882 Ambiguous 4,796 Obscure 3607 FIVE FACTORS ! REPLICATED IN DIFFERENT SAMPLES, LANGUAGES, AGES, ETC. 6 Big Five:
OCEAN 7 How about Vanilla ice-cream! Openness to Experience --------- Conventionality 8 I will do it tomorrow ! Laziness is warm. Laziness is comfort. Laziness is the promise of sleep. The promise of rest. Laziness demands a new day. A new day to do what you didn't do today. Conscientiousness----------- Unreliability
9 Extraversion ---------------- Introversion 10 Agreeableness ---------------- Hostility 11 Neuroticism ----------- Emotional Stability 12 TAXONOMIES Big Five Taxonomy = 5 Groups of traits 13
FORMAL DEFINITIONS OF BIG 5 DIMENSIONS & EXAMPLES OF TRAITS WITHIN EACH DIMENSION 14 15 BIG 5 DIMENSIONS: BASIC BROAD CATEGORIES OF CO-OCCURRING TRAITS HIERARCHICAL ORGANIZATION (EACH DIMENSION INCLUDES MANY SUB-TRAITS WHICH IN TURN CONTAIN NARROWER TRAITS) 16
ENGLISH NATURAL LANGUAGE FACTORS O C FACETS O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 E E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 TRAITS
A N N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 17 BIG 5 DIMENSIONS: BASIC BROAD CATEGORIES OF CO-OCCURRING TRAITS HIERARCHICAL ORGANIZATION (EACH DIMENSION INCLUDES MANY SUB-TRAITS WHICH IN TURN CONTAIN NARROWER TRAITS) 18
USEFUL METAPHOR BIG 5 DIMENSIONS = The five continents of personality (ie., five basic domains that reliably organize the huge existing universe of personality traits) 19 PHYSICAL CRITERIA : BY CONTINENT 20 POLITICAL CRITERIA: BY NATION 21 ECONOMY CRITERIA: BY GDP 22
VERONICAS CRITERIA: BY WHERE THE GOOD WINE IS ! 23 THE BIG FIVE (continuation) EVALUATION OF THE BIG 5 Advantages and disadvantages Alternative # factors? Big Seven CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF THE BIG 5 Agreement between self- and 24 observer-reports on the Big 5? (John EVALUATION OF THE BIG FIVE
Strenghts of the 'Big Five' Model: Broad-level, representation of major dimensions of personality allows economical, parsimonious descriptions of personality Conceptual framework (taxonomy) to organize and summarize personality findings from other studies high heuristic value 25 Big 5 = economical and parsimonious sketch of someones personality (e.g. Ana is E+ N26 C- A+ O+) lly = super-detailed, in-depth portrait of personality (expens 27 In reality = many personality theories/instruments have provided detailed but incomplete personality portraits based
on theorists domain preferences (e.g., psychoanalytic 28 measures provide a lot of info about N and C) again .. Big 5 = sketchy but parsimonious description of someones personality 29 Example of how the Big 5 can help organize and summarize personality findings from other studies: 30 Remember York & John four personality types ?
31 TYPES Integration of typologies and taxonomies 32 EVALUATION OF THE BIG FIVE Limitations of the Big Five: Primarily descriptive (rather than explanatory) Focuses on variables, ie. nomothetic (rather than on individuals) Global, molar level of description (rather than narrow level) Are five enough? 33 Objection to theBigFive:
Listing of terms from which the Big Five originated had excluded evaluativeand many state-mood descriptors ....... (see next slide) -->Do the Big Five fullyrepresent the domain of personality? Tellegen & Wallers(1987) Re-Examination of theEnglish Personality Lexicon: Method: No a-priori excluding criteria is used in the selection of personality descriptors from the dictionary Stratified sampling of personality descriptors (1 term from every 4-pages). Results: Representative (rather than exhaustive) sample of 299 personality descriptors Seven-Factors!! 34
HISTORY OF LEXICAL PERSONALITY RESEARCH Allport & Odbert (1936) Websters II unabridged Traits 4,504 States 4,541 Evaluations 5,226 Doubtful 3,682
Cattell (1943) Norman (1963) FIRST FACTOR ANALYSIS EFFORTS: 5 Factors !! Norman (1967) Websters III Traits 2,800 States 2,638 Social Roles 1,476
Evaluative 761 Goldberg (1990, 1992) John (1984, 1989) Costa & McCrae (1985) MORE FACTOR ANALYSES Physical 882 Ambiguous 4,796 Obscure 3607
FIVE FACTORS ! REPLICATED IN DIFFERENT SAMPLES, LANGUAGES, AGES, ETC. 35 What happens if you dont exclude evaluations, states, and social roles? 36 THE BIG SEVEN FACTORS OF PERSONALITY (BigFiveplustwo evaluativedimensions) Examplesof marker items(abbreviated)
PROGRESSIVE CURIOUS ODD UNUSUAL 37 BIG SEVEN : Big Five plus two independent evaluative dimensions POSITIVE VALENCE Outstanding Ordinary Impressive Average Excellent
Not exceptional Exceptional Admirable Important POWER ESTEEM NEGATIVE VALENCE Wicked Awful Dangerous Disgusting Vicious Treacherous
MORALITY (Tellegen & Waller, 1987; Benet-Martinez & Waller, 1995) 38 TheBigSeven Factor Model: (1) Is an independent replication of the Big Five(PE, NE, C, A, O) (2) Broadens thelexically-informed personality domain by adding: Two evaluativedimensions (Positive and Negative Valence) tapping esteem Emotional component of E and N (state terms now mixed with trait terms) Conventionality component of O (evaluativeterms now in Openness)
39 CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF THE BIG 5 Construct validity = demonstration that a particular psychological concept (or trait) really exists and definition of what it is and what is not (how similar/different to other constructs is) Construct-validation techniques: correlate self-reports with observer-reports correlate measures of construct of interest with other measures of similar or related constructs (convergent correlations) correlate measures of construct of interest with other measures of different and unrelated constructs (discriminant correlations) 40
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF THE BIG 5 Agreement between self- and observer-reports on the Big 5 and Big 7? 41 Correlations Between Self-Reports and Observer-Ratings on the Big Seven Observer-Ratings Self-Reports PV NV
Note. N = 321 American college students. Cross-observer validity coefficients are in bold. Each participant was rated by one close person (friend, romantic partner, parent, or sibling). 42 MAIN CONCLUSION : Agreement between self- and other- views on traits depends on personality domain (which Big 5 trait) As previous slide indicates: Higher for E, O, C Lower for N, PV, NV 43 More specific information about this issue
John & Robins (1993) study 4 MORE CONCLUSIONS ABOUT DETERMINANTS OF SELF-PEER AGREEMENT: SELF-PEER < PEER-PEER LOW OBSERVABILITY (e.g., introspective) < HIGH OBSERVABILITY (e.g., loud) HIGH EVALUATIVENESS < LOW EVALUATIVENESS (e.g., hostile, weird) (e.g., frank, open) HIGH/LOW DESIRABILITY < MEDIUM DESIRABILITY (e.g., sexy, evil) (e.g., organized, energetic ) 44
AVID's mission is to close the achievement gap by preparing all students for college readiness and success in a global society. ... Agenda/Reflection Log. Grade Checks (Every Other Week) Social and Emotional Skill Building (Second Step) ... Assignment Calendar. Learning...
Times MS Pゴシック Arial Arial Black Times New Roman Wingdings Apple Chancery Stone Sans ITC TT-Semi Pixel 1_Pixel Microsoft Word Document Overview of Child Development Child Development Domains of Development Theories Origins of Child Development Theories 6th - 15th centuries...
Characteristics of a Tragic Hero. The tragic hero is a character of noble stature and has greatness. The character must occupy a "high" status position but must ALSO embody nobility and virtue as part of his/her innate character. The character...
The goal is not to produce a dense and often useless business plan born to never met, but a simple document containing all the key and interrelated elements of the new business. of 70 Business Entity-Relationship Model: For Innovation, Entrepreneurship...
Canada has 10 provinces ... Forests in Canada are a major natural resource with an abundance of timber, which is harvested in Canada to be used by its own people as well as traded with other countries around the world....
對於 IBE 之可靠性的質疑 (1): Hungerford's objection. ... Nancy Cartwright (1983). How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford University Press. pp.88-91. Peter Lipton (2004). Inference to the Best Explanation. Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.依據著作權法第46、52、65條合理使用
Ready to download the document? Go ahead and hit continue!