Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- General Introduction
- Part I Foundational Issues: History and Approaches to Personality
- Part II Description and Measurement: How Personality Is Studied
- 7 Personality Assessment Methods
- 8 Models of Personality Structure
- 9 The Five-Factor Model of Personality: Consensus and Controversy
- 10 Personality and Intelligence
- Part III Development, Health and Change: Life Span and Health Outcomes
- Part IV Biological Perspectives: Evolution, Genetics and Neuroscience of Personality
- Part V Cognitive and Motivational Perspectives: Dynamic Processes of Personality
- Part VI Social and Cultural Processes: Personality at the Intersection of Society
- Part VII Applications of Personality Psychology: Personality Traits and Processes in Action
- Addendum: Statistical Analyses and Computer Programming in Personality
- Index
- References
8 - Models of Personality Structure
from Part II - Description and Measurement: How Personality Is Studied
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 September 2020
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- General Introduction
- Part I Foundational Issues: History and Approaches to Personality
- Part II Description and Measurement: How Personality Is Studied
- 7 Personality Assessment Methods
- 8 Models of Personality Structure
- 9 The Five-Factor Model of Personality: Consensus and Controversy
- 10 Personality and Intelligence
- Part III Development, Health and Change: Life Span and Health Outcomes
- Part IV Biological Perspectives: Evolution, Genetics and Neuroscience of Personality
- Part V Cognitive and Motivational Perspectives: Dynamic Processes of Personality
- Part VI Social and Cultural Processes: Personality at the Intersection of Society
- Part VII Applications of Personality Psychology: Personality Traits and Processes in Action
- Addendum: Statistical Analyses and Computer Programming in Personality
- Index
- References
Summary
In the present chapter, models of personality structure are discussed. With the term “personality structure” we refer to the organization of the various features of personality as based in theory or in empirical findings. By adding the term “models,” the structure quality seems a bit tautological because a model is usually recognized by its typical form or its organization. Most of the ambiguity in the expression “models of personality structure,” is, however, in the term “model” (from the Latin modulus, diminutive of measure or standard), as the term has accrued a variety of functions which can appear at different levels of abstraction.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology , pp. 115 - 128Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47 (Whole No. 211).Google Scholar
Almagor, M., Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. (1995). The Big Seven Model: A cross-cultural replication and further exploration of the basic dimensions of natural language of trait descriptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 300–307.Google Scholar
Aluja, A., Kuhlman, M., & Zuckerman, M. (2010). Development of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-P): A factor/facet version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ). Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 416–431.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2001). A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality, 15, 327–353.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2004). A hierarchical analysis of 1,710 English personality-descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 707–721.Google Scholar
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, 356–366.Google Scholar
Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: Isolation and communion in Western man. Boston, MA: Beacon.Google Scholar
Benet-Martinez, V., & Waller, N. G. (1997). Further evidence for the cross-cultural generality of the Big Seven model: Indigenous and imported Spanish personality constructs. Journal of Personality, 65, 567–598.Google Scholar
Bertels, K., & Nauta, D. (1969). Inleiding tot het modelbegrip [Introduction to the model concept]. Amsterdam: Wetenschappelijke Uitgeverij B.V.Google Scholar
Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality disorder. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187–215.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The description of personality: Basic traits resolved into clusters. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 476–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1945). The description of personality: Principles and findings in a factor analysis. The American Journal of Psychology, 58, 69–90.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1950). Personality: A systematic theoretical and factual study. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1994). Constancy of global, second-order personality factors over a twenty-year-plus period. Psychological Reports, 75, 3–9.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1995). The fallacy of five factors in the personality sphere. The Psychologist, May, 207–208.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). The handbook for the sixteen personality factor (16PF) questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.Google Scholar
Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., & Reyes, J. A. S. (1996). Toward a taxonomy of trait adjectives in Filipino: Comparing personality lexicons across cultures. European Journal of Personality, 10, 3–24.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1976). Age differences in personality structure: A cluster analytic approach. Journal of Gerontology, 31, 564–570.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., & Barelds, D. P. H. (2008). A new taxonomy of Dutch personality traits base on a comprehensive and unrestricted list of descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 347–364.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P. H., Levert, E., Ostendorf, F., Mlačić, B., Di Blas, L., … 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.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P. H., Timmerman, M. E., De Roover, K., Mlačić, B., & Church, A. T. (2014). Towards a pan-cultural personality structure: Input from 11 psycho-lexical studies. European Journal of Personality, 28, 497–510.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Hendriks, A. A. J., & Hofstee, W. K. B. (1992). Towards a refined structure of personality traits. European Journal of Personality, 6, 301–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Raad, B., & Hofstee, W. K. B. (1993). A circumplex approach to the five factor model: A facet structure of trait adjectives supplemented by trait verbs. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 493–505.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Mulder, E., Kloosterman, K., & Hofstee, W. K. B. (1988). Personality-descriptive verbs. European Journal of Personality, 2, 81–96.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., & Peabody, D. (2005). Cross-culturally recurrent personality factors: Analyses of three factors. European Journal of Personality, 19, 451–474.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., & Perugini, M. (2002). Big Five Assessment. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Perugini, M., & Szirmák, Z. (1997). In pursuit of a cross-lingual reference structure of personality traits: Comparisons among five languages. European Journal of Personality, 11, 167–185.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Perugini, M., Hrébicková, M., & Szarota, P. (1998). Lingua franca of personality: Taxonomies and structures based on the psycholexical approach. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 212–232.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., & Szirmák, Z. (1994). The search for the “Big Five” in a non-Indo-European language: The Hungarian trait structure and its relationship to the EPQ and the PTS. European Review of Applied Psychology, 44, 17–24.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., Barelds, D., Mlačić, B., Di Blas, L., Hřebičková, M., Ostendorf, F., Szirmák, Z., & Szarota, P. (2018). Take 2 personality factors: A study of two fundamental ways of trait differentiation in eleven trait taxonomies. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 4, 39–55.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151.Google Scholar
Di Blas, L., & Forzi, M. (1999). Refining a descriptive structure of personality attributes in the Italian language: The abridged Big Three circumplex structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 451–481.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1952). The scientific study of personality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1959). Manual for the Maudsley Personality Inventory. London: University of London Press.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1964). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Inventory. London: University of London Press.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1991). Dimensions of personality: 16-, 5- or 3- criteria for a taxonomic paradigm. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 773–790.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Biological dimensions of personality. In Pervin, L. A. (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 244–276). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 329–344.Google Scholar
Foa, U. G., & Foa, E. B. (1974). Societal structures of the mind. Springfield, IL: Thomas.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In Wheeler, L. (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 141–165). Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative description of personality: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of personality traits: Vertical and horizontal aspects. In Funder, D. C., Parke, R. D., Tomlinson-Keasey, C. & Widaman, K. (Eds.), Studying lives through time: Personality and development (pp. 169–188). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (2006). Doing it all bass-ackwards: The development of hierarchical factor structures from the top down. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 347–358.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R., & Rosolack, T. K. (1994). The Big Five factor structure as an integrative framework: An empirical comparison with Eysenck’s P-E-N model. In Halverson, C. F. Jr., Kohnstamm, G. A. & Martin, R. P. (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 7–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. (1970). The psychophysiological basis of introversion–extraversion. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 8, 249–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gray, J. A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck’s theory of personality. In Eysenck, H. J. (Ed.), A model for personality (pp. 246–277). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1975). Factors and factors of personality. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 802–814.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P., & Guilford, R. B. (1936). Personality factors S, E, and M, and their measurement. The Journal of Psychology, 2, 109–127.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P., & Zimmerman, W. S. (1949). The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey: Manual. Beverly Hills, CA: Sheridan Supply.Google Scholar
Hampson, S. E., John, O. P., & Goldberg, L. R. (1986). Category breadth and hierarchical structure in personality: Studies of asymmetries in judgments of trait implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 37–54.Google Scholar
Hofer, S. M., & Eber, H. W. (2002). Second-order factor structure of the Cattell Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. In De Raad, B. & Perugini, M. (Eds.), Big Five Assessment (pp. 397–409). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B. (2001). Intelligence and personality: Do they mix? In Collis, J. M. & Messick, S. (Eds.), Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement (pp. 43–60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B. (2003). Structures of personality traits. In Millon, T. & Lerner, M. J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Personality and social Psychology (Vol. 5. pp. 213–254). John Wiley.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B., Kiers, H. A. L., De Raad, B., Goldberg, L. R., & Ostendorf, F. (1997). Comparison of Big-Five structures of personality traits in Dutch, English, and German. European Journal of Personality, 11, 15–31.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B., & Ten Berge, J. M. F. (2004). Personality in proportion: A bipolar proportional scale for personality assessments and its consequences for trait structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 120–127.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B., Ten Berge, J. M. F., & Hendriks, A. A. J. (1998). How to score questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 897–909.Google Scholar
John, O. P., Angleitner, A., & Ostendorf, F. (1988). The lexical approach to personality. European Journal of Personality, 2, 171–205.Google Scholar
Karson, S. (1961). Second-order personality factors in positive mental health. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 17, 14–19.Google Scholar
Kretschmer, E. (1948). Körperbau und charakter [Constitution and character]. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Krug, S. E., & Johns, E. F. (1986). A large scale cross-validation of second-order personality structure defined by the 16PF. Psychological Reports, 59, 683–693.Google Scholar
Lave, C. A., & March, J. G. (1975). An introduction to models in the social sciences. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1985). Updating Norman’s “adequate taxonomy”: Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 710–721.Google Scholar
Mlačić, B., & Ostendorf, F. (2005). Taxonomy and structure of Croatian personality-descriptive adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 19, 117–152.Google Scholar
Musek, J. (2007). A general factor of personality: Evidence for the Big One in the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1213–1233.Google Scholar
Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574–583.Google Scholar
Norman, W. T. (1967). 2,800 personality trait descriptors: Normative operating characteristics for a university population. Ann Arbor, MI: Department of Psychology, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Ostendorf, F. (1990). Sprache und persönlichkeitsstruktur: Zur validität des fünf-faktoren modells der persönlichkeit [Language and personality structure: Towards the validity of the five-factor model of personality]. Regensburg, Germany: Roderer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Panter, A. T., Tanaka, J. S., & Hoyle, R. H. (1994). Structural models for multimode designs in personality and temperament research. In Halverson, C. F. Jr., Kohnstamm, G. A. & Martin, R. P. (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 111–138). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Peabody, D. (1987). Selecting representative trait adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 59–71.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., Georgiades, S., Tsaousis, I., & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). The factor structure of Greek personality adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 856–875.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1996). Evidence for the Big Five in analyses of familiar English personality adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 10, 61–77.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., Thalmayer, A. G.,Payne, D. L., Carlson, R., Sanogo, L., Ole-Kotikash, L., Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., Somer, O., Szarota, P., Szirmák, Z., & Zhou, X. (2014). A basic bivariate structure of personality attributes evident across nine languages. Journal of Personality, 82, 1–14.Google Scholar
Sells, S. B., Demaree, R. G., & Will, D. P. Jr. (1970). Dimensions of personality: I. Conjoint factor structure of Guilford and Cattell trait markers. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 5, 391–422.Google Scholar
Sells, S. B., Demaree, R. G., & Will, D. P. Jr. (1971). Dimensions of personality: II. Separate factor structures in Guilford and Cattell trait markers. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 6, 135–185.Google Scholar
Somer, O., & Goldberg, L. R. (1999). The structure of Turkish trait-descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 431–450.Google Scholar
Ten Berge, J. M. F. (1986). Rotation to perfect congruence and the cross-validation of components weights across populations. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 41–64; 262–266.Google Scholar
Trapnell, P. D., & Wiggins, J. S. (1990). Extension of Interpersonal Adjective Scales to include the Big Five dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 781–790.Google Scholar
Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. C. (1958). Stability of personality trait rating factors obtained under diverse conditions (USAF ASTIA Document No. AD 151 041), U.S. Air Force, Lackland, Air Force Base, TX.Google Scholar
Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. C. (1961). Recurrent Personality Factors Based on Trait Ratings (USAF ASD Technical Report, No. 61–97). U.S. Air Force, Lackland Air Force Base, TX.Google Scholar
Webb, E. (1915). Character and intelligence: An attempt at an exact study of character. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. S. (1968). Personality structure. Annual Review of Psychology, 19, 293–350.Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. S. (Ed.) (1996) . The Five-Factor Model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. S., & Trapnell, P. D. (1996). A dyadic-Interactional perspective on the Five-Factor Model. In Wiggins, J. S. (Ed.), The Five-Factor Model of Personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 88–162). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (1971). Dimensions of sensation seeking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 45–52.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (1979). Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimal level of arousal. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (1991). Psychobiology of personality. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (2005). Psychobiology of personality (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., & Glicksohn, J. (2016). Hans Eysenck’s personality model and the constructs of sensation seeking and impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 103, 48–52.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., Kolin, E. A., Price, L., & Zoob, I. (1964). Development of a sensation-seeking scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 28, 477–482.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., & Camac, C. (1988). What lies beyond E and N? Factor analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 96–107.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The Big Three, the Big Five, and the Alternative Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757–768.Google Scholar