Stress, Coping And Personality In Aging Men And Women

人格的起源、普遍性和发展是人格研究的基础，对人格结构的描述是人格研究的基础。特质的组织为特质心理学各个方面的系统研究提供了一个框架。虽然人格的五因素模型被广泛认为是提供了一个必要的和合理的足够的特质分类，但一些研究人员认为，这五个因素本身是由一个更高的两因素模型组织的，其中外向性和开放性形成一个因素，而易相处性和尽责性与神经质定义了另一个因素。这种结构在自我报告研究中广泛存在，包括我们对12至13岁儿童的性格研究。但是，当对单个个体使用单一的测量方法时，不可能确定双因素结构是否代表了性状的真实的协变（实质）或仅仅是测量中的偏差（人为因素）。在一项研究双胞胎性格的合作研究中，我们同时使用了自我报告和线人评级，发现了更一致的证据来解释人为因素。看来，五因素模型反映了最高水平的特质结构;更高的水平是由于测量中的偏差。 本实验室以前的研究已经审查了民族性格定型观念的起源和准确性。最近的一项研究审查了全球领导力和组织行为有效性（地球仪）量表，以进一步实现解释民族性格标准型的目标。 全球领导力和组织行为有效性（地球仪）研究计划是一项大规模的文化背景下的组织领导力研究。在62个国家收集的部分调查旨在从典型做法和价值观的角度来描述整个文化。九个社会实践量表中有四个似乎直接或间接地评估了人格特征。这些地球仪量表要求描述典型的人格特征，这些特征可能被解释为对民族性格的判断。对民族性格的评价反映了文化身份和社会动态，但先前的研究表明，它们与文化成员的平均性格特征无关。在文化水平上比较地球仪量表与总体评估的人格特质（n = 34）和感知的民族性格（n = 33）的措施的分析表明，这些地球仪量表更好地解释为毫无根据的刻板印象比作为社会成员的人格特质的实际解释。 在进一步的研究中，我们考虑了其他国家对美国人的看法的预测。与评估性假设相反，该假设假设认为友好国家将理想的特征归因于美国人，而敌对国家将不受欢迎的特征归因于美国人，我们发现大多数国家的公民都将理想和不受欢迎的特征归因于美国人。一项新的多国研究包括对年龄组和性别以及国家的陈规定型观念的评估。初步分析表明，（a）在决定对一个群体的看法方面，年龄比性别或文化更重要;（B）年龄定型观念一般在年龄变化的方向上是准确的，但在时间上是不准确的;（c）对典型文化成员的定型观念可以通过将按年龄和性别划分的民族定型观念相加来近似。这些分析将提供新的重要信息，说明在何种情况下定型观念是准确的，或不准确的。 跨文化的人格特征比较为总体或平均人格分数的准确性提供了一些最有力的证据。但是有许多不同的度量标准可以用来评估配置文件的一致性。在一项使用532名个体的自我报告和观察者评级的研究中，几种不同的个人资料一致性统计数据区分匹配（即，自我报告和观察者评级涉及同一个体）。组内相关性被证明是最好的，简单皮尔逊相关性紧随其后。在比较不同文化的人格特征时，组内相关性似乎是选择的度量标准。

The basis of all studies of personality, including its origins, universality, and development, lies in the description of personality structure. The organization of traits provides a framework for systematic research on all aspects of trait psychology. Although the Five-Factor Model of personality is widely recognized as providing a necessary and reasonably sufficient classification of traits, some researchers have argued that the five factors are themselves organized by a higher, two-factor model, in which Extraversion and Openness form one factor, and Agreeableness and Conscientiousness vs. Neuroticism define the other. Such a structure is widely found in self-report studies, including our study of personality in 12- to 13-year-olds. But when a single method of measurement is used in single individuals, it is impossible to determine whether the two-factor structure represents the real covariation of traits (substance) or simply biases in measurement (artifact). In a collaborative study examining personality in twins and using both self-reports and informant ratings, we found much more consistent evidence for the artifact interpretation. It appears that the Five-Factor Model reflects the highest level of trait structure; higher levels are due to biases in measurement. Previous research in this Laboratory has examined the origins and accuracy of national character stereotypes. A recent study examined the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE)scales to further the goals of interpretation of national character sterotypes. The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Research Program is a large-scale study of organizational leadership in cultural context. Parts of the survey gathered in 62 nations were intended to characterize the culture as a whole in terms of typical practices and values. Four of the nine Societal Practices scales seem, directly or indirectly, to assess features of personality. These GLOBE scales ask for descriptions of typical personality traits that might be interpreted as judgments of national character. Ratings of national character reflect cultural identities and social dynamics, but previous research suggests that they are unrelated to the mean personality traits of the culture's members. Analyses at the culture level comparing GLOBE scales with aggregate assessed personality traits (n = 34) and with measures of perceived national character (n = 33) showed that these GLOBE scales are better construed as unfounded stereotypes than as actual depictions of the society members' personality traits. In a further study, we considered the prediction of other nations' views of Americans. Contrary to the evaluative hypothesis, which assumes that desirable traits will be attributed to Americans by friendly nations and undesirable traits by hostile nations, we found that both desirable and undesirable traits were attributed to Americans by citizens of most countries. A new multinational study includes assessments of stereotypes of age groups and genders as well as nations. Preliminary analyses suggest that (a) age is more important that gender or culture in determining perceptions of a group; (b) age stereotypes are generally accurate in the direction of age changes, but not the timing; and (c) the stereotype of the typical culture member can be approximated by summing across age- and gender-specific national stereotypes. These analyses will provide important new information on the conditions under which stereotypes are, or are not, accurate. Comparisons of personality profiles across cultures provide some of the strongest evidence of the accuracy of aggregate, or average, personality scores. But there are a number of different metrics by which profile agreement can be assessed. In a study using self-reports and observer ratings of 532 individuals, the ability of several different profile agreement statistics to distinguish matched (i.e., the self-report and observer rating concerned the same individual) from mismatched pairs of self-reports and observer ratings was assessed. Intraclass correlations proved the best, with simple Pearson correlations a close second. In comparing personality profiles across cultures, intraclass correlations appear to be the metric of choice.