Quantity and quality of trait-descriptive type nouns

Raad, Boele De; Ostendorf, Fritz

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0984(199603)10:1<45::aid-per245>3.0.co;2-6

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…De Raad and his colleagues have pioneered the application of the lexical approach to personality-type nouns (De Raad & Hoskens, 1990;De Raad & Ostendorf, 1996) and personality-relevant verbs (De Raad, Mulder, Kloosterman, & Hofstee, 1988). Some of the noun factors (labeled "Malignity") are reminiscent of Negative Valence from the Big Seven.…”

Section: Studies In Dutchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ipsatizing is discussed in detail by ten Berge (1999). All studies described in the following review involved ipsatized data, with these exceptions: (a) Peabody's (1987;Peabody & Goldberg, 1989) studies in English that employed bipolar scales, (b) the studies of Dutch nouns and verbs by De Raad and his colleagues (e.g., De Raad & Hoskens, 1990;De Raad, Mulder, Kloosterman, & Hofstee, 1988;De Raad & Ostendorf, 1996), and (c) Saucier's (2000a) studies of eight American data sets that used both raw and ipsatized data sets, and in some cases bipolar scales. Di Blas and Forzi (1999) indicated their results were similar in either raw or ipsatized data.…”

Section: Group 1: Studies With Structures Resembling the Anglo-germanmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lexical Studies of Indigenous Personality Factors: Premises, Products, and Prospects

Saucier¹,

Goldberg

2001

Journal of Personality

267

243

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rationale for lexical studies rests on the assumption that the most meaningful personality attributes tend to become encoded in language as single-word descriptors. We articulate some key premises of the lexical approach and then review a number of studies that have been conducted examining the factor structure of personality descriptors extracted from dictionaries. We compare lexical studies in English and 12 other languages, with attention to delineating consistencies between the structures found in diverse languages. Our review suggests that the Anglo-Germanic Big Five is reproduced better in some languages than in others. We propose some organizing rules for lexical factor structures that may be more generalizable than the contemporary Big-Five model. And, we propose several candidate structural models that should be compared with the Big Five in future studies, including structures with one, two, and three very broad factors, an alternative five-factor structure identified in Italian and Hungarian studies, and a seven-factor structure represented in Hebrew and Philippine studies. We recommend that in future studies more attention be paid to middle-level personality constructs and to examining the effects of methodological variations on the resulting factor structures.

show abstract

Section: Studies In Dutchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Group 1: Studies With Structures Resembling the Anglo-germanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lexical Studies of Indigenous Personality Factors: Premises, Products, and Prospects

Saucier¹,

Goldberg

2001

Journal of Personality

267

243

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used original`indigenous' representative trait taxonomies from five different languages, that have come about according to principles of psycholexical research that are roughly the same, but with variations in concrete realizations of the taxonomic procedures. These variations, largely relating to choice of lexical resource, definition of unit of lexical entries, and specification of categories of lexical entries, are described in more detail by De Raad (1994), De Raad and Ostendorf (1996), and Hofstee, Kiers, De Raad, Goldberg and Ostendorf (1997). In the present study, pairwise comparisons are undertaken, using as input material for the comparisons five published Big-Five solutions in American English (Hofstee, De Raad and Goldberg, 1992), Dutch (De Raad, Hendriks and Hofstee, 1992), German (Ostendorf, 1990), Hungarian , and Italian (Caprara and Perugini, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Pursuit of a Cross-lingual References Structure of Personality Traits: Comparisons among Five Languages

1997

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data sets from five original trait taxonomies from different languages, Dutch, Italian, Hungarian, American English, and German, are used for a cross-cultural study. Factor structures, presumably Big-Five structures, within these languages, based on ratings from about 400±800 subjects on approximately 500 trait variables per language, are used for comparison. The five five-factor structures are pairwise compared. To enable these comparisons, the best one-to-one translations of trait terms between the languages are used. These translations yielded subsets of the data for direct comparisons. Congruence coefficients were calculated for the corresponding factors in the different languages, based on their independent positions, on their positions after target rotations, and on their positions after simultaneous rotations. The congruences show replicability of the first three factors of the Big Five across the five languages, and replicability of the fourth factor among Dutch, Italian, and Hungarian. Relatively high congruences between all five factors were found between Italian and Dutch.

show abstract

“…The results of the classification of person-descriptive terms representing different word classes con-firm De Raad and Ostendorf's (1996) assertion about the frequency of personality adjectives being higher than that of type-nouns. What is more, we found a predominance of adjectives over all the remaining word classes in personality description.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…A personality study can be called lexical and its results can be compared with the results of studies devoted to other natural languages if it is based on a representative sample of the personality lexicon of that language and if the factor structure of this list of personality terms has been established on the basis of a representative sample of personality descriptions generated by the users of that language (De Raad, 1998;De Raad & Ostendorf, 1996;Saucier, 1997). Due to the time-consuming nature of lexical research, the structure of the personality lexicon has been explored to date in about 30 natural languages out of the several thousand that exist in the world, which still limits the possibilities of formulating conclusions about personality traits universal across different cultures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive psycholexical classification of Polish person-descriptive terms

Gorbaniuk¹,

Korczak²,

Toruj³

et al. 2019

Current Issues in Personality Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lexical research based on the assumption that all the main human characteristics are encoded in the natural language constitutes one of the alternative ways of developing a taxonomy of individual differences in psychology. The majority of studies to date, including Polish ones, have been restricted to the analysis of the adjective lexicon, which means their results are at risk of reductionism. The aim of the presented research was to develop a classification of the complete Polish lexicon of person-descriptive terms (adjectives, participles, adverbs, nouns, and verbs). participants and procedure We analyzed 100,000 entries found in a universal dictionary of Polish and identified 27,813 terms used to describe human characteristics. The identified person-descriptive terms were classified by a team of 13 trained judges into 16 subcategories. The judges' taxonomic decisions were tested for validity and reliability. results Personality (dispositional) descriptors (5,598) constitute 20.1% of the Polish lexicon of person-descriptors; this includes 1,641 adjectives and participles, 612 adverbs, 1,442 attribute-nouns, 1,029 type-nouns, and 916 verbs. The analysis of the semantic redundancy of terms representing different parts of speech but having the same common morpheme among dispositional descriptors revealed 1,979 morphemes with distinct meanings. Only 64% of these morphemes are represented by adjectives. conclusions Adjectives constitute the largest group of personality (dispositional) descriptors but do not account for the entire Polish personality lexicon. The results of the study are a point of departure for research into the specificity of the structure of personality descriptions in the Polish language using various linguistic categories and for a comprehensive study on the entire Polish personality lexicon.

show abstract

Quantity and quality of trait-descriptive type nouns

Abstract: In this paper we refute Henss' (1995)

Cited by 9 publications

References 13 publications

Lexical Studies of Indigenous Personality Factors: Premises, Products, and Prospects

Lexical Studies of Indigenous Personality Factors: Premises, Products, and Prospects

In Pursuit of a Cross-lingual References Structure of Personality Traits: Comparisons among Five Languages

Comprehensive psycholexical classification of Polish person-descriptive terms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About