Current Controversies in the Study of Personality across Cultures

Church, A. Timothy

doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00132.x

Cited by 30 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 127 publications

(195 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cross-cultural research on personality is traditionally conducted either from an etic (universalistic) or an emic (culture-specific) perspective (Cheung, Van de Vijver, & Leong, 2011;Church, 2008). In more recent studies, there is a tendency to seek an integration of the two perspectives in an emic-etic framework that recognizes indigenous as well as universal components of personality (Cheung et al, 2011).…”

Section: Abstract Implicit Personality Concepts Emic-etic Approach mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Etic studies of personality are primarily concerned with the cross-cultural replicability of universal personality models (Church, 2001(Church, , 2008 Emic studies, on the other hand, direct their attention to the identification of personality concepts that are especially relevant in specific cultural contexts, although they may not be represented in universal models. These studies often start with an exploration of implicit personality concepts using qualitative methods and the study of lexica and later develop questionnaires to represent the implicit model (Church, 2008).…”

Section: Emic-etic Approaches To Personalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Etic studies of personality are primarily concerned with the cross-cultural replicability of universal personality models (Church, 2001(Church, , 2008. These studies typically employ questionnaires measuring a model developed in a Western context such as the Big Five or Five-Factor Model (FFM) in an array of cultures and, when replicability is adequately established, compare mean levels of the personality traits under that model across cultures.…”

Section: Emic-etic Approaches To Personalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Similarities and Differences in Implicit Personality Concepts across Ethnocultural Groups in South Africa

Valchev

Nel

Vijver

et al. 2012

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a combined emic-etic approach, the present study investigates similarities and differences in the indigenous personality concepts of ethnocultural groups in South Africa. Semistructured interviews asking for self-and other-descriptions were conducted with 1,027 Blacks, 58 Indians, and 105 Whites, speakers of the country's 11 official languages. A model with 9 broad personality clusters subsuming the Big Five-Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Facilitating, Integrity, Intellect, Openness, Relationship Harmony, and Soft-Heartedness (Nel et al., 2012)-was examined. The 9 clusters were found in all groups, yet the groups differed in their use of the model's components: Blacks referred more to social-relational descriptions, specific trait manifestations, and social norms, whereas Whites referred more to personal-growth descriptions and abstract concepts, and Indians had an intermediate pattern. The results suggest that a broad spectrum of personality concepts should be included in the development of common personality models and measurement tools for diverse cultural groups. Keywords implicit personality concepts, emic-etic approach, indigenous personality modelCross-cultural research on personality is traditionally conducted either from an etic (universalistic) or an emic (culture-specific) perspective (Cheung, Van de Vijver, & Leong, 2011;Church, 2008). In more recent studies, there is a tendency to seek an integration of the two perspectives in an emic-etic framework that recognizes indigenous as well as universal components of personality (Cheung et al., 2011). The present study investigates a recently developed indigenous model of personality for South Africa in an emic-etic framework. This model has been at University of Pretoria on February 12, 2014 jcc.sagepub.com Downloaded from 366Journal of developed from an indigenous perspective to represent the implicit personality concepts of all major cultural groups in South Africa. The salience of the specific elements of this model for different groups has not been addressed so far, although group differences can be expected both as a function of broad factors like individualism-collectivism (Triandis, 1995), autonomy-embeddedness, and egalitarianism-hierarchy values (Schwartz, 2006) and of more specific factors like cultural differences in definitions of intelligence (Serpell, 1993). This study explores the similarities and differences in the salience and composition of implicit personality concepts across three ethnocultural groups in South Africa: Blacks, Indians, and Whites. We first provide a brief overview of the emic-etic approaches to personality. We then sketch the background of personality study in South Africa and describe in detail the indigenous model under investigation. Emic-Etic Approaches to PersonalityEtic studies of personality are primarily concerned with the cross-cultural replicability of universal personality models (Church, 2001(Church, , 2008 Emic studies, on the other hand, direct their attention to th...

show abstract

Section: Abstract Implicit Personality Concepts Emic-etic Approach mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Emic-etic Approaches To Personalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Emic-etic Approaches To Personalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Similarities and Differences in Implicit Personality Concepts across Ethnocultural Groups in South Africa

Valchev

Nel

Vijver

et al. 2012

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…- Rozin (2003, p. 281) Personality is shaped by both genetic and environmental factors; among the most important of the latter are cultural influences (Benet-Martínez & Oishi, 2008;Church, 2010). 3 Culture, which is transmitted through language, media messages, cultural practices and institutions, values and artifacts, and the modeling of behavior (Cohen, 1996;Markus & Kitayama, 1998), however, does not have a deterministic influence on individuals' behavior.…”

Section: Cultural Personality Psychology Veronica Benet-martínezmentioning

confidence: 99%

Six visions for the future of personality psychology.

Benet‐Martínez¹,

Donnellan²,

Fleeson³

et al. 2015

APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology, Volume 4: Personality Processes and Individual Differences.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is an exciting time to be a personality psychologist. A few years ago a distinguished colleague described the field as "coming out of a tailspin." He was right, but things are much better now. Personality psychology's important contributions are having an increasing impact as creative researchers push forward with programs on topics as diverse as the molecular biology of genetics and the psychological dynamics of people who have been socialized in more than one culture.Personality is the most important topic in psychology because it is where all the other areas come together. Cognitive psychology describes how people think and perceive. Developmental psychology traces the course of a person's psychological construction and change from infancy throughout life. Biological psychology explains the underpinnings of behavior in anatomy, physiology, genetics, and evolutionary history. And social psychology concerns how people respond to and affect the behavior of others. All of these subdisciplines serve personality psychology, the only field with the self-assigned mission of explaining whole people. It does this by focusing on individual differences, for the most part, but this is only natural. People are different from each other, and an understanding of how and why they differ necessarily entails a complementary understanding of the ways in which they are the same.So it is a bit surprising, in retrospect, what a difficult time personality has sometimes had in gaining the attention and even respect of the rest of psychology, not to mention the world at large. I can identify at least three historic reasons for this difficulty. First, personality psychology has long been identified in the minds of many people with the first (and perhaps only) course in the subject that they took in college. Too often, this was (and sometimes still is) the classic "tour of the graveyard" that focuses on brilliant but long-deceased theorists and leads students to end the semester thinking the burning concern of the field is the disagreement between Freud and Jung (see Laura King's contribution later in this chapter). I actually defend the inclusion of Freud and Jung in modern personality courses, in measured doses, but a course that is restricted to theorists like these is an unforgivable misrepresentation of the field, a failure in one's duty to educate students, and a slap in the face to every contemporary personality researcher.A second source of personality's difficulty is, of course, Mischel's (1968) critique and the ensuing decades of arguments, rebuttals, and obfuscations. The controversy resulted in some hard-won enlightenment (Kenrick & Funder, 1988) but also left behind damage that included decimated or disestablished graduate programs, careers that ended prematurely or never even began, and a lingering image in the minds of a surprising number of smart psychologists outside the field that "personality" is a quaint,

show abstract

“…vant literature, there is debate about whether these personality traits are shaped by culture, or if they are universal (see Church, 2010). Since these traits are not visible in some cultures, it has been interpreted that personality structure changes across cultures (John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Help-Seeking Attitudes of University Students: The Role of Personality Traits and Demographic Factors

Atik

Yalçin

2011

South African Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study examined the influences of personality traits, gender, previous counseling or therapy experiences, and knowledge about the psychological services provided on campus on the help-seeking attitudes of Turkish undergraduate students and their initial preferences for help sources. The students ( N = 524) completed measures of attitudes toward help-seeking, personality traits, and demographic factors. Hierarchical linear regression indicated that the females, those who had knowledge about the psychological services provided on campus, and those who were extraverted, agreeable, and open had more positive help-seeking attitudes. Most of the students initially preferred sharing their problems/concerns with their peers. The findings are discussed in light of the relevant literature and were used to draw some implications for university counseling centres.

show abstract

Current Controversies in the Study of Personality across Cultures

Cited by 30 publications

References 127 publications

Similarities and Differences in Implicit Personality Concepts across Ethnocultural Groups in South Africa

Similarities and Differences in Implicit Personality Concepts across Ethnocultural Groups in South Africa

Six visions for the future of personality psychology.

Help-Seeking Attitudes of University Students: The Role of Personality Traits and Demographic Factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About