Personality traits and reflexive characteristic adaptations: the isomorphism or a polymorphism?

Russian version of the article

Issue 1 (25) 2016

DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2016-1-57-73

PERSONALITY TRAITS AND REFLEXIVE CHARACTERISTIC
ADAPTATIONS: THE ISOMORPHISM OR A POLYMORPHISM?

Shchebetenko Sergey Alexandrovich
PhD. in Psychology, Docent, Associate Professor
of Department of General and Clinical Psychology

Perm State University,
15, Bukirev str., Perm, 614990, Russia;
e-mail: shebetenko@rambler.ru

The present study examined the previously hypothesized isomorphism in the structures of personality traits and their reflexive characteristic adaptations. One hundred thirty undergraduates completed a Russian version of the Big Five Inventory and a number of its modifications aimed to four reflexive characteristic adaptations including trait efficacy, meta-traits, attitudes toward traits, and meta-attitudes toward traits. To test the isomorphism hypothesis, Tucker’s congruence coefficient was employed which sought for an iterative congruence of the five-factor structures of traits and reflexive adaptations. However, the full isomorphism was warranted for meta-traits only. For trait efficacy, the factor congruence was manifested regarding three traits―conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness . Four traits demonstrated similarity regarding attitudes toward traits, whereas among meta-attitudes a similarity was found for conscientiousness only. To determine the numbers of factors that should be retained for reflexive characteristic adaptations, seven various statistical criteria were used and a number of logical steps for the final decision were developed. A 7-factor solution was found to be optimal for trait efficacy. Along with two factors relevant for the five-factor model — namely the efficacy in conscientious- and neurotic-driven situations — the solution includes the factors of the efficacy in creativity- and erudition-driven situations originated from the openness factor as well as the efficacy in situations of hostility, reserved tactfulness, and positive sociability. The two-factor solutions consistent with the stability/plasticity model fitted best for attitudes and meta-attitudes toward traits.

Key words: personality traits; five-factor theory; factor analysis.

References

  1. AleksandrovVvedenie v obschuyu teoriyu mnozhestv i funktsij [Introduction into general theory of multitudes and functions]. Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Ogiz Publ., 1948, 413 
  2. Belous V.V. Vvedenie v psihologiyu polimorfnoj individual’nosti [Introduction into psychology of polymorphous individuality]. Pyatigorsk, Pyatigorsk State Linguistic University Publ., 2002, 236 p. (In Russian).
  3. Dorfman L.Ya. [Methodological analysis of V.S. Merlin’s integrated individuality theory]. Metodologiya i istoriya psihologii [Methodology and history of psychology]. 2008, vol. 3, no 3, pp 106–121. (In Russian).
  4. Ibragimov K.R. [On essence of personality culture phenomenon]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv [The Herald of Moscow State University of Culture and Arts]. 2011, no 42, pp. 126–129. (In Russian).
  5. Karnyshev A.D. [Isomorphism and emergence as neurophysiology and organisation psychology phenomena]. Organizatsionnaya psihologiya [Organisation psychology]. 2015, vol. 5, no 3, pp. 26–48. (In Russian).
  6. Knyazev G.G., Mitrophanova L.G., Bocharov V.A. [Validation of Russian version of L. Goldberg’s inventory of Big Five factor markers]. Psihologicheskij zhurnal [Psychological journal]. 2010, vol. 31, no 5, pp. 100–110. (In Russian).
  7. Merlin V.S. Ocherk integral’nogo issledovaniya individual’nosti [Sketch on integral individuality study]. Moscow, 1986, 253 p. (In Russain).
  8. Muhiddinov A.G. [Integration of authentic and social parts of I-concept during personality establishment and development]. Aktual’nye problemy gumanitarnyh i estestvennyh nauk [Timely probles of humane and natural sciences]. 2013, no 8, pp. 156–158. (In Russian).
  9. Nebylitsin V.D. Osnovnye svojstva nervnoj sistemy cheloveka [Main characteristics of human’s nervous system]. Moscow, Prosveschenie Publ., 1966, 384 p. (In Russian).
  10. Rusyaeva I.A. [Isomorphism of psychologicl defenses of mother and child]. Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Tyumen State University Herald]. 2012, no 9, pp. 157–162. (In Russian).
  11. Filosofskij entsiklopedicheskij slovar’ [Philosophicencyclopedic dictionary]. Moscow, Sovetskaya entsiklopediya Publ., 1983, 836 p. (In Russian).
  12. Schebetenko S.A. [Reflected attitudes to personality features as a predictor of students’ academic success]. Psihologiya i psihotehnika [Psychology and Psychotechnics]. 2015, no 76, pp. 70–82. (In Russian).
  13. Schebetenko S.A. [Reflexive adaptations of character in five factors theory]. Psihologicheskij zhurnal [Psychologic journal]. 2015, vol. 36, no 6, pp. 55–
  14. Jung K.G. Arhetip i simvol [Archetype and symbol]. Moscow, Renessans, 1991, 304 p. (In Russian).
  15. Ashton M.C., Lee K. Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2007. Vol. 11. P. 150–166. (In English).
  16. Brocklebank S., Pauls S., Rockmore D., Bates T.C. A spectral clustering approach to the structure of personality: Contrasting the FFM and HEXACO models. Journal of Research in Personality. 2015. Vol. 57. P. 100–109.(In English).
  17. Carlson E.N., Vazire S., Furr M.R. Meta-insight: Do people really know how others see them? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2011. Vol. 101. P. 831–846. (In English).
  18. Cattell R.B. The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1966. Vol. 1. P. 245–276. (In English).
  19. Cudeck R., Henly S.J. Model selection in covariance structures analysis and the «problem»(In English).
  20. DeYoung C.G. Cybernetic Big Five Theory // Journal of Research in Personality, 2015. Vol. 56.
  21. FabrigarEvaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research.Psychological Methods. .
  22. HaytonFactor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial on parallel analysis.Organizational Research Methods..
  23. HornA rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika..
  24. HuCutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999. Vol. 6. P. 1–55. (In English).
  25. JohnThe Big Five Inventory – Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research, 1991. (In English).
  26. KaiserThe application of electronic computers to factor analysis.Educational and Psychological Measurement..
  27. KorthThe distribution of chance congruence coefficients from simulated data // Psychometrika..
  28. LeharGestalt isomorphism and the primacy of subjective conscious experience: A Gestalt Bubble mode.Behavioral and Brain Sciences..
  29. MatthewsThe factor structure of the 16PF: Twelve primary and three secondary factors. Personality and Individual Differences..
  30. McCraeToward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. J.S. Wiggins. The Five-factor Model of Personality: Theoretical Perspectives. N.Y.: Guilford Press, 1996. P. 51–87. (In English).
  31. PaulhusThe Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy.Journal of Research in Personality. 2002. Vol. 36. P. 556–563. (In English).
  32. Preacher K.J., Zhang G., Kim C., Mels G.Choosing the optimal number of factors in exploratory factor analysis: A model selection perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2013. Vol. 48. P. 28–56. (In English).
  33. R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2015. URL: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed 20.11.2015). (In English).
  34. Revelle W. An overview of the psych package, 2015. URL: http://personality-project.org/r/psych/ (accessed 20.11.2015). (In English).
  35. Revelle W., Rocklin T. Very simple structure: An alternative procedure for estimating the optimal number of interpretable factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1979. Vol. 14. P. 403–414. (In English).
  36. Sharp C., Wright A.G.C., Fowler J.C., et al. The structure of personality pathology: Both general («g») and specific («s») factors? Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 2015. Vol. 124. P. 387–398. (In English).
  37. Shchebetenko S.«The best man in the world»: Attitudes toward personality traits. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2014. Vol. 11(3). P. 129–148. (In English).
  38. Soto C.J., John O.P. Ten facet scales for the Big Five Inventory: Convergence with NEO PI-R facets, self-peer agreement, and discriminant validity. Journal of Research in Personality. 2009. Vol. 43. P. 84–90. (In English).
  40. Zwick W.R., Velicer W.F. Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin. 1986. Vol. .99. P. 432–442. (In English).

The date of the manuscript receipt 21.11.2015

Please cite this article in English as:

Shchebetenko S.A. Personality traits and reflexive characteristic adaptations: the isomorphism or a polymorphism? // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2016. Iss.1(25). P.57–73.

Категория: Psychology.