Modele selekcji deskryptorów osobowych w badaniach psycholeksykalnych −podejście klasyczne i nierestrykcyjne

• Authors: Misiuro Tomasz

Title variants

EN

The models of personality descriptors selection in psycholexical studies − a classic and nonrestrictive approach

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

PL

Głównym celem niniejszego artykułu jest próba przedstawienia dwóch podejść do problemu selekcji deskryptorów osobowych w badaniach psycholeksykalnych: podejścia klasycznego, restrykcyjnego oraz powstałego na bazie jego krytyki podejścia nierestrykcyjnego. Podstawową cechą różnicującą oba modele jest zakres materiału słownego uwzględnianego w trakcie analiz leksykalnych. W klasycznym modelu analiz liczba deskryptorów osobowych jest zawężana do słów opisujących wyłącznie stałe dyspozycje. Zwolennicy podejścia nierestrykcyjnego, odwołując się do podstawowych założeń badań leksykalnych, postulują prowadzenie analiz z zastosowaniem pełnego spectrum deskryptorów osobowych, bez pomijania żadnej kategorii leksykalnej. Niniejszy artykuł przedstawia wady i zalety obu podejść oraz ogólne omówienie wyników badań uzyskanych w każdym z nich.

EN

The main purpose of this article is to outline two models of selection of personal descriptors in psycholexical studies: the classic (restrictive) and the nonrestrictive approach. The basic distinguishing feature of both models is the range of word material taken into account during lexical analyzes. In the classic model of analysis, the number of personal descriptors is narrowed down to words that describe only stable dispositions. The unrestricted approach, referring to the basic assumptions of lexical research, postulate the using of a full spectrum of personality descriptors without omitting any lexical category. This article presents the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches and a general discussion of the results of the research in each of them.

Keywords

PL

badania psycholeksykalne; podejście restrykcyjne; podejście nierestrykcyjne; deskryptory osobowe

EN

psycholexical study; restrictive approach; nonrestrictive approach; personality descriptors

• Publisher: Oficyna Wydawnicza Uniwersytetu Zielonogórskiego
• Journal: Psychologiczne Zeszyty Naukowe
• Year: 2017
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 163-178

Contributors

author

Misiuro Tomasz

• Uniwersytet Zielonogórski

References

• Allport, G.W., Odbert, H.S. (1936). Trait names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs,47(211).
• Almagor, M., Tellegen, A., Waller, N.G. (1995). The Big Seven model: A cross-cultural replication and further exploration of the basic dimensions of natural language trait descriptors. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 300–307.
• Angleitner, A., Ostendorf, F., John, O.P. (1990). Towards a taxonomy of personality descriptors in German: A psycho-lexical study. European Journal of Personality, 4, 89–118.
• Ashton, M.C., Lee, K. (2001). A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality, 15, 327–353.
• Ashton, M.C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R.E., Di Blas, L., Boies, K., De Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 356–366.
• Barelds, D.P.H., De Raad, B. (2015). The role of word-categories in trait-taxonomy: evidence from Dutch personality taxonomy. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 1(1), 15–25.
• Benet, V., Waller, N.(1995). The Big Seven factor model of personality description: Evidence for its cross-cultural generality in a Spanish sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4),701–718.
• Benet-Martínez, V., Waller, N. (1997). Further Evidence for the Cross&Cultural Generality of the Big Seven Factor Model: Indigenous and Imported Spanish Personality Constructs. Journal of Personality, 63(3), 567–598.
• Boies, K., Lee, K., Ashton, M.C., Pascal, S., Nicol, A.A. (2001). The structure of the French personality lexicon. European Journal of Personality, 15(4), 277–295.
• Brokken, F.B. (1978). The language of personality (nieopublikowana rozprawa doktorska). Holandia: Uniwersytet w Groningen.
• Caprara, G.V., Perugini, M. (1994). Personality described by adjectives: The generalizability of the Big Five to the Italian lexical context. European Journal of Personality, 8(5), 357–369.
• Church, A.T., Katigbak, M.S., Reyes, J.A.S. (1998). Further exploration of Filipino personality structure using the lexical approach: do the big-five or big-seven dimensions emerge? European Journal of Personality, 12(4), 249–269.
• De Raad, B. (1992). The replicability of the Big Five personality dimensions in three word-classes of the Dutch language. European Journal of Personality, 6(1), 15–29.
• De Raad, B., Barelds, D.P.H. (2008). A new taxonomy of Dutch personality traits based on a comprehensive and unrestricted list of descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 347–364.
• De Raad, B., Barelds, D.P.H., Levert, E., Ostendorf, F., Mlačic, B., Di Blas, L., Hrebickova, M., Szirmak,Z., Szarota, P., Perugini, M., Church, A.T., Katigbak, M.S. (2010). Only three factors of personality description are fully replicable across languages: A comparison of 14 trait taxonomies. Journal of
• Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 160–173.
• De Raad, B., Barelds, D.P.H., Timmerman, M., De Roover, K., Mlacic, B., Church, A.T. (2014). Towards a Pan-cultural Personality Structure: Input from 11 Psycholexical Studies. European Journal of Personality, 28(5), 497–510.
• De Raad, B., Hoskens, M. (1990). Personality-descriptive nouns. European Journal of Personality, 4,131–146.
• De Raad, B., Mlacic, B. (2017). Psycholexical Studies of Personality Structure across Cultures. The Praeger Handbook of Personality Across Cultures, 3, 161–192.
• De Raad, B., Mulder, E., Kloosterman, K., Hofstee, W.K.B. (1988). Personality-descriptive verbs. European Journal of Personality, 2, 81–96.
• De Raad, B., Szirmak, Z. (1994). The Hungarian Trait Structure and Its Relationship to the EPQ and the PTS. European Review of Applied Psychology, 44(1), 17–24.
• Di Blas, L. (2005). Personality-relevant attribute-nouns: A taxonomic study in the Italian language.European Journal of Personality, 19, 537–557.
• Farahani, M.N., De Raad, B., Farzad, V., Fotoohie, M. (2016). Taxonomy and structure of Persian personality-descriptive trait terms. International Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 139–149.
• Galton, F. (1884). Measurement of character. Fortnightly Review, 36, 179–185.
• Goldberg, L.R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: the big-five factor structure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 59(6), 1216.
• Goldberg, L.R. (1982). From ace to zombie: Some explorations in the language of personality. W: C.D.Spielberger, J.N. Butcher (eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment, 1, Hillsdale: NJ: Erlbaum, 203–234.
• Goldberg, L.R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 141–165.
• Gorbaniuk, O., Budzińska, A., Owczarek, M., Bożek, E., Juros, K. (2013). The Factor Structure of Polish Personality-Descriptive Adjectives: An Alternative Psycho-lexical Study. European Journal of Personality, 27(3), 304–318.
• Gorbaniuk, O., Czarnecka, E., Chmurzyńska, M. (2011). Taxonomy of Person-Descriptive Terms in Polish: A Psycho-Lexical Study. Current Problems in Psychiatry, 12(1), 100–106.
• Gorbaniuk, O., Kulewicz, P., Gorbaniuk, J., Kordon, A., Leoszko, W., Ivanova, A., Suchomska, M.(2014). Taksonomia psycholeksykalna języka białoruskiego. Current Problems in Psychiatry,15(2), 89–95.
• Hahn, D.W., Lee, K., Ashton, M.C. (1999). A factor analysis of the most frequently used Korean personality trait adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 13, 261–282.
• Henss, R. (1998). Type nouns and the five-factor model of personality description. European Journal of Personality, 12, 57–71.
• Hrebickova, M., Ostendorf, F., Osecka, L., Cermak, I. (1999). Taxonomy and structure of Czech personality-relevant verb. Personality Psychology in Europe, [brak numeru], 51–65.
• Kohnstamm, G.A., Halverson, C.F., Jr., Mervielde, I., Havill, V.L. (1998). Analyzing parental free descriptions of child personality. W: G.A. Kohnstamm, C.F. Halverson Jr., I. Mervielde, V.L. Havill (eds.), Parental descriptions of child personality: Developmental ante-cedents of the Big Five? NewYork: Erlbaum, 1–9.
• Lee, K., Ashton, M.C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329–358.
• Lee, K., Ashton, M.C. (2008). The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. Journal of Personality, 76, 1001–1053.
• Livaniene, V., De Raad, B. (w druku). The factor structure of Lithuanian personality-descriptive adjectives of the highest frequency of use. International Journal of Psychology. doi: 10.1002/ijop. 12247.
• Mai, N.T.Q. (2014). Exploring the indigenous structure of Vietnamese personality: A lexical approach (nieopublikowana rozprawa doktorska). Washington: Washington State University.
• McCrae, R.R., John, O.P. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175 Washington 215.
• Mlacic, B., Ostendorf, F. (2005). Taxonomy and structure of Croatian personality-descriptive adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 19, 117–152.
• Norman, W.T. (1967). 2800 personality trait descriptors: Normative operating characteristics for a university population. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Department of Psychology.
• Peabody, D., De Raad, B. (2002). The substantive nature of psycholexical personality factors: A comparison across languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 983–997.
• Saucier, G. (1997). Effects of variable selection on the factor structure of person descriptors. Journal of personality and social psychology, 73(6), 1296.
• Saucier, G. (2003). Factor structure of English-language person-ality type-nouns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 695–708.
• Saucier, G. (2009). Recurrent personality dimensions in inclusive lexical studies: Indications for a Big Six structure. Journal of personality, 77(5), 1577–1614.
• Saucier, G., Georgiades, S., Tsaousis, I., Goldberg, L.R. (2005). The factor structure of Greek personality adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 856.
• Saucier, G., Goldberg, L. (2001). Lexical studies of indigenous personality factors: Premises, products, and prospects. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 847–879.
• Saucier, G., Srivastava, S. (2015). What Makes a Good Structural Model of Personality? Evaluating the Big Five and Alternatives. W: M. Mikulincer, P.R. Shaver (eds.), APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology: Vol. 4. Personality Processes and Individual Differences, 283–305.
• Singh, J.K., Misra, G., De Raad, B. (2013). Personality structure in the trait lexicon of Hindi, a major language spoken in India. European Journal of Personality, 27(6), 605–620.
• Somer, O., Goldberg, L.R. (1999). The structure of Turkish trait-descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 431.
• Szarota, P. (1996). Perspektywy badań leksykalnych nad osobowością. Psychologia Wychowawcza, 5, 443–448.
• Szarota, P. (2008). Wielka Piątka. Stare problemy, nowe wątpliwości. Roczniki Psychologiczne, 11(1), 127–138.
• Szarota, P., Ashton, M., Lee, K. (2007). Taxonomy and structure of the Polish personality lexicon.European Journal of Personality, 21, 823–852.
• Tellegen, A., Waller, N.G. (1987). Re-examining basic di-mensions of natural language trait descriptors.Paper presented at the 95th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association,New York.
• Zhou, X., Saucier, G., Gao, D., Liu, J. (2009). The factor structure of Chinese personality terms. Journalof personality, 77(2), 363–400.