Abstract:Now look at sample $:2. CBACKED means . . . broken, looney, cranky, crooked Which of the last four words best explains the meaning of CRACKED' Either "broken" or "looney" will do, so draw a line under either one, but only under one. Now on the rest of the page are a great number of exercises Remember, underline only one word on each line, that word which will give the best meaning. Begin at the top and work all the way down the list until the time is called. SIMP means dumbell, simpleton, sink, scab IVORY DOME… Show more
“…Not bothering to practice what he so eloquently preached, Filter then failed to provide an even rudimentary definition of character! This conceptual ambiguity was also evident in the writings of a surprising number of early applied scholars (cf., Cushing & Ruch, 1927;Schwesinger, 1926;Slawson, 1922).…”
Section: Defining Charactermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, did the size, shape, and texture of an individual's head determine the type and extent of their moral character? Notwithstanding the occasional foray into the ridiculous and sublime exemplified by phrenology, an underlying theme of this early applied research on character was to help determine which character traits were most appropriate in what profession or work (Slawson, 1922) to identify dishonest and criminal behavior (Cushing & Ruch, 1927;Schwesinger, 1926), and to identify various character classification systems (Cleeton & Knight, 1924;Broom & Bramkamp, 1933).…”
Section: Character Across Time and Culturementioning
We propose that strength of character is a potentially important organizational research topic, one that has been largely untapped in applied research. Character (ethos) refers to those inter-penetrable habitual qualities within individuals and applicable to organizations that constrain and lead them to desire and pursue personal and societal good. In our review, we first provide an initial conceptualization of character, partly by distinguishing it from virtue and values. Second, starting with the Old Testament, we examine how character has traditionally been considered across time and culture. Next, we discuss the extant research on strength of character and organizational virtue. We conclude with promising research directions involving individual character strength and organizational virtue.
“…Not bothering to practice what he so eloquently preached, Filter then failed to provide an even rudimentary definition of character! This conceptual ambiguity was also evident in the writings of a surprising number of early applied scholars (cf., Cushing & Ruch, 1927;Schwesinger, 1926;Slawson, 1922).…”
Section: Defining Charactermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, did the size, shape, and texture of an individual's head determine the type and extent of their moral character? Notwithstanding the occasional foray into the ridiculous and sublime exemplified by phrenology, an underlying theme of this early applied research on character was to help determine which character traits were most appropriate in what profession or work (Slawson, 1922) to identify dishonest and criminal behavior (Cushing & Ruch, 1927;Schwesinger, 1926), and to identify various character classification systems (Cleeton & Knight, 1924;Broom & Bramkamp, 1933).…”
Section: Character Across Time and Culturementioning
We propose that strength of character is a potentially important organizational research topic, one that has been largely untapped in applied research. Character (ethos) refers to those inter-penetrable habitual qualities within individuals and applicable to organizations that constrain and lead them to desire and pursue personal and societal good. In our review, we first provide an initial conceptualization of character, partly by distinguishing it from virtue and values. Second, starting with the Old Testament, we examine how character has traditionally been considered across time and culture. Next, we discuss the extant research on strength of character and organizational virtue. We conclude with promising research directions involving individual character strength and organizational virtue.
“…Since the beginning of recorded history, philosophers and practitioners alike have acknowledged the existence and importance of character (Hunter, ). This interest has been shared by a number of pioneering organizational researchers as well, including such esteemed scholars as Mary Goodyear Earle (), Raymond Filter (), Gladys Schwesinger (), and John Slawson (). Unfortunately, agreement on what character is and how it should be operationalized remains highly problematic, with character as traditionally defined being oftentimes conflated with such concepts as values and personality (Wright, , ).…”
“…Schwesinger (80) studied the correspondence between delinquency and the knowledge of slang. She devised a slang battery test, which was given to adolescents in a New Jersey reform school.…”
Section: Differences In Language Responses For Groups and Individualsmentioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.