“…Lists of trait terms of varying degrees of comprehensiveness have also been compiled for the Chinese (Cheung, Conger, Hau, Lew and Lau, 1992;Yang and Bond, 1990;Yang and Lee, 1971;Yik and Bond, 1993), Japanese (Aoki, 1971;Isaka, 1990), Filipino (Church and Katigbak, 1989), and selected additional Asian and Pacific Island languages (White, 1980;White and Prachuabmoh, 1983). Although replication of the Big-Five-like dimensions (Surgency or Extraversion, Agreeableness, Consicentiousness, Neuroticism, and Intellect or Openness to Experience) in Indo-European languages has been fairly good (Caprara and Perugini, 1994;De Raad, 1992;Ostendorf, 1990;Shmelyov and Pokhil'ko, 1993), results in non-European languages have been less definitive (Bond, 1979;Bond, Nakazato and Shiraishi, 1975;Church and Katigbak, 1989;Cheung et al, 1992;Guthrie and Bennett, 1971;Isaka, 1990;Szirmik and De Raad, 1994;Yang and Bond, 1990;Yik and Bond, 1993). Studies that use representative terms from the indigenous languages, rather than translations of English markers, provide the most persuasive evidence for the universality of trait dimensions.…”