人格心理学的学科架构初探

人格心理学作为心理学体系中的重要分支之一,自创立以来却一直缺乏一个完整统一的学科架构。这种状况极大地限制了该学科的发展。文章回顾了人格心理学的起源和发展,探讨了学科发展的趋势,呈现了当下几种主要的学科架构。在综合比较的基础上,对其中有代表性的Clonlinger人格“描述—动力—发展”的“3D”模型进行了修正：（1）增加了人格理论;（2）把第一个“D”由“人格描述”改为“人格表现”;（3）对原有“3D”的内容进行补充和完善。得出了对人格心理学学科架构的“3D”修正模型：即理论加“3D”     

A general factor of personality: Evidence for the Big One in the five-factor model

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses using different personality measures in three samples confirmed the existence of general factor of personality (The Big One) within the five-factor model. The Big One is characterized by high versus low Emotional Stability, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Extraversion, and Openness, and by high versus low higher-order factors of personality, Stability, and Plasticity. A comprehensive theoretical model of personality structure was therefore proposed with the Big One at the highest level of the hierarchy. The Big One was interpreted as a basic personality disposition that integrates the most general non-cognitive dimensions of personality. It is associated with social desirability, emotionality, motivation, well-being, satisfaction with life, and self-esteem. It also may have deep biological roots, evolutionary, genetic, and neurophysiological.     

The genetics and evolution of the general factor of personality

Three studies tested the hypothesis that a general factor of personality (GFP) underlies diverse individual differences including altruism, the Big Five factors of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability, and the EAS temperament traits of Emotional Stability, Activity, and Sociability. In Study 1, 214 university students completed 36 personality scales. In Study 2, 322 pairs of monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins completed 29 5-point rating scales plus questionnaires. In Study 3, 575 pairs of 2- to 9-year-old Korean twins were rated by their mothers on 25 temperament scales. Factor analyses revealed a hierarchical organization with GFP at the apex and the Big Five and/or EAS temperament scales intermediate. The twin data show GFP has an early age of onset with 50% of the variance attributable to non-additive (dominance) genetic influence and 50% to unique, non-shared environmental influence. We discuss a life history matrix encompassing brain size, maturational speed, and longevity, plus emotional intelligence and the personality disorders, and suggest natural selection acted directionally to endow people with more cooperative and less contentious personalities than their archaic ancestors, or nearest living relatives, the chimpanzees.     

The General Factor of Personality and general intelligence: Testing hypotheses from Differential-K,Life History Theory,and strategic differentiation–integration effort

Life history as applied to human psychology has progressed on different levels of analysis including between racial groups (Differential-K) and between individuals (Life History Theory). While the approaches at each level have garnered significant research support, some findings at the level of individual differences are inconsistent with findings from the level of group differences. The association between the General Factor of Personality and general intelligence was examined across and within racial groups to investigate the inconsistency. The results were in line with predictions derived from strategic differentiation–integration effort (SD–IE), the proposition that aggregation amongst variables decreases as life history strategy slows. The results suggest SD–IE may be a useful tool in reconciling the apparent contradictions across the levels of analysis.     

Relating the Spherical representation of vocational interests to the HEXACO personality model

The present study extends previous research on interests–personality relations by comparing recent models of vocational interests (using the Personal Globe Inventory; PGI, Tracey, 2002) and personality (using the HEXACO-PI-R; Ashton, Lee, & de Vries, 2014) with each other. First, the structure of the Spherical representation was adequately replicated in a Dutch sample (N = 656). Second, in so far as comparisons were possible, the relations between interests and personality were found to be congruent with previous findings. Third, Prestige interests, the defining feature of the Spherical representation, were related, albeit weakly, to Openness to Experience and to Extraversion. Last of all, Honesty–Humility and Openness to Experience were related to profile elevation in interest scores. All results were obtained for normative and ipsatized scales, revealing several meaningful differences in interests–personality relations depending on the type of interest scoring procedure.     

The General Factor of Psychosocial Development and its relation to the General Factor of Personality and Life History strategy

It was hypothesized that the eight Eriksonian psychosocial stages form a single latent variable or General Factor of Psychosocial Development (GFPD) and that this latent factor is associated with the General Factor of Personality (GFP) and Life History (LH) strategy to the extent that the variables form a higher order Super-K factor. Correlational analyses and confirmatory factor analyses each supported the hypothesized GFPD. Additionally, correlational and confirmatory factor analyses supported the hypothesis that the three variables form a single Super-K factor. The results of Study 3 suggest that the relationship between the psychosocial stages and between the GFPD, GFP, and LH strategy remained after controlling for social desirable response biases.     

General causality orientations are distinct from but related to dispositional traits

This study examines overlaps and distinctions between concepts of individual differences in the five-factor model and self-determination theory. Participants were 223 Danish adults (age M = 43.74; 60.09% women) originating in a national probability sample. Participants completed questionnaires of personality traits (NEO-FFI) and general causality orientations (GCOS). Distinct and overlapping latent models were tested using structural equation modeling, statistical re-sampling, and confirmatory factor analysis. Results indicate that all three causality orientations are distinct from but related to traits. From a perspective of integrative personality psychology, general causality orientations can be conceived of as characteristic adaptations.     

Recycling, evolution and the structure of human personality

Concomitant with the recent surge in environmental awareness of the industrialized world, social scientists have begun searching for the determinants of recycling behavior. Although the efforts of these scientists – most notably, environmental psychologists – are commendable, they have as yet not isolated the strategies by which long-term recycling can be effectively encouraged. In this article, I comment that by giving proper attention to the evolved structure of human personality, the emerging paradigm of evolutionary psychology may have something to offer those wishing to encourage durable and generalizable recycling behavior.     

A putatively general factor of personality (GFP) is not so general: A demonstration with the NEO PI-R

Recent research suggests that a general factor of personality (GFP) represents the zenith of a hierarchy of personality structure. For a roommate sample of 602 students, we evaluate the presence and validity of a general factor of personality in a Big Five measure. Findings indicate that a first factor, similar to what has been putatively labeled a GFP, can be extracted from self-report and observer-report, that this self-report first factor has validity for predicting an alleged observer-report GFP, and that this validity is not attributable to socially desirable responding. However, despite the existence of a valid first factor, it is not a general factor of personality because it fails to summarize adequately the complete systematic variance in the structure of personality.     

Relative and longitudinal evidence for the importance of the General Factor of Psychosocial Development in predicting well-being

The relationship between the General Factor of Psychosocial Development (GFPD) and well-being was examined. Support for three hypotheses was found. First, the GFPD accounted for more variance in well-being than the shared unique variance of the individual psychosocial stages. In fact, a number of the stages were negatively associated with well-being when controlling for the GFPD. Second, the GFPD accounted for a significant amount of variance in well-being when controlling for the General Factor of Personality. Third, the GFPD partially mediated the relationship between well-being at two points in time.     

儒家的人格结构及心理学扩展

人生儒学的核心是"成人"。"成人"的构成的因素和结构如何?这是理解儒家学理、中国人精神面貌的重要方面。文章从儒家典籍入手,归纳出其人格结构因素为"仁"、"礼"、"知"三因素。"仁"、"礼"、"知"体现出"德"属性,互动决定了儒家人格结构的"仁道"终极目标和"知命"社会功能——"命"可行时,外在事功,实现"外王";"命"不可行时,内在超越,完善心灵。"仁"、"礼"、"知"的充分发展并"知命",即为圣人、君子;不完全发展,即为民;缺乏则为小人。文章进而尝试从儒家的人格结构拓展出现代心理学意义的人格结构理论。     

Concurrent and incremental validity of three trait emotional intelligence measures

This study explored concurrent and incremental validity of three trait emotional intelligence measures: the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale, Multidimensional Emotional Intelligence Assessment, and Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. A total of 307 participants were drawn predominantly from community and student populations. Concurrent criterion validity of the measures varied depending on whether emotional intelligence (EI) was assessed as a lower, middle or higher level construct, with validity coefficients being larger for the former. In all cases, the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire was the superior predictor of multiple psychological criteria. At the higher level of assessment, incremental validity beyond (a) age, gender and the Big Five, and (b) the remaining two EI measures, was also superior.     

Personality, intelligence and proof-reading

Two studies sought to determine personality and cognitive ability correlates of proof-reading. In both studies candidates were given 5 min to identify up to 55 errors in a 920 word, two page document. In Study 1, which tested 240 school children, fluid intelligence (as measured by the Baddeley Reasoning Test) was the highest correlate of proof-reading (r = .30). Eleven percent of the variance in total attempted scores was accounted for by intelligence, Introversion and low Conscientiousness. In the second study 70 undergraduates completed the same proof-reading test along with two intelligence tests (Baddeley Reasoning Test; Wonderlic Personnel Test) and a more robust personality measure (NEO-FFI). Proof-reading was correlated with both intelligence tests (Baddeley r = .45; Wonderlic r = .40). More of the variance was accounted for in the total attempted-score of errors than for a correct errors-detected score. When the two intelligence and five personality trait scores were regressed on to the proof-reading test score over a quarter of the variance (Adj R² = .28) was accounted for, but only the Baddeley test was a significant predictor (Beta = .39).     

Integrating the most unintuitive empirical observations of 2007 in the domain of personality and social psychology into a unified framework

Two obstacles impede the development of productive theories in personality, social, and organizational psychology. First, the distinct frameworks are seldom integrated; the various theories sometimes yield incompatible implications. Second, because many findings in these fields seem intuitive, these observations do not augment the validity of these theories. To override these issues, this paper integrates the 70 most unintuitive findings of 2007 into a unified framework, derived from personality systems interaction theory. Specifically, 10 participants extracted the most unintuitive observations from 17 scholarly journals. These findings were reconciled within a single framework that generates 41 testable propositions. The framework assumes that an associative self system, underpinned by a vast network of schemas, governs behavior as well as enhances intuition, engagement, creativity, and cooperation. When individuals experience a threat, this system is inhibited, unless the requisite defense mechanisms to accommodate potential hazards have been developed. Furthermore, individuals attempt to distance themselves from unassailable threats, which activate an analytical system that formulates plans that could accommodate future contingencies. These plans are retained in memory or executed if individuals have acquired sufficient confidence.