Paper 6 Personality traits and Personal Values PDF

Preview

Summary

Samenvatting van deze paper waar de belangrijkste informatie in staat....

Description

Paper 6 Personality traits and Personal Values: A Meta-analysis By Parks-Leduc, Feldman, Bardi Important psychological characteristics, important predictors of outcomes. Cognitively based traits are more strongly related to values and more emotionally based traits are less strongly related to values.

Personality Traits and Personal values Personality traits = descriptions of people in terms of relatively stable patterns of behavior, thoughts and emotions. With Five-Factor model (FFM) large number of traits combined into five broad trait dimensions. Personal values = stable broad life goals important to people in their lives and guide their perception, judgements, and behavior. Organized in personal hierarchies of importance. Schwartz’s Value theory identifying 10 values based on motivations underlying them.

Values structured in circle based on relationships, values positively correlated are closer to one another and based on compatible motivations. Values at opposite sides are negatively correlated and based on conflicting motivations. Grouped into 4 higher order types of values organized on 2 bipolar dimensions: self-enhancement vs selftranscendence, and openness to change vs conversation.

Traits and values conceptually similar but several distinctions between the two constructs: -

-

Traits = descriptive valuables, describe how individuals tend to feel, think, and behave. Summaries of an individual’s responses and behaviors (creative person). Some say influenced by genetics, vary in culture and influenced by environmental variables additionally. Values = motivational variables, express person’s motivations that may or may not be reflected in behavior (creativity important in their life). Some say values are product of person’s environment and also additional genetic origins.

The nature of the relationships between traits and values Common heritage in lexical hypothesis (encoded in language and found in dictionary), examined separately since 30s. Allport removed values items from studies and referred to traits as temperament and values as character but unclear if term personality is reference temperament (traits) only or both traits and values. Many don’t distinguish putting all meaningful aspects of personality under traits or that both are different way of measuring the same thing. Others see traits and values as different components of personality drawing on two integrative models of personality. 1 three levels of personality components differing in level of contextualization. 2 traits are tendencies that have biological basis and traits influence characteristic adaptations including values (influenced by traits but not solely determined by them). Neither suggest strong links between levels of personality. Traits are antecedent of values and values might influence traits as values motivate behavior if leading to recurrent behavior which later becomes trait (include recurrent patterns of behavior) Some do not clearly distinguish between traits and values, some view them as distinct and separate contstructs and some view them as loosely related components at different levels of personality.

Two sources for the strength of the relationships between traits and values Strength of relationship may be based on two sources of similarities: in the nature and in the content of particular traits and values.

Similarities in the nature of traits and values All values inherently cognitive and traits may very in extent based on cognition. Values predict cognitively based outcome better and traits predict affectively based outcome better. FFM traits vary in extent to which they are cognitively oriented, based on research on item-level content of Big Five traits and neurobiological processes (mid-brain are emotional and automatic processes while frontal lobe is cognitive processing linked with character traits and this research supports that traits vary in extent affectively and cognitive based) involved in personality expression. Expect openness to experience to have strongest links with values, followed by agreeableness. Emotional stability should have weakest link with values, and conscientiousness & extraversion fall in between.

Similarities in the content of traits and values -

-

-

Openness to experience: expected relationships with stimulation (+), self-direction (+), universalism (+), conformity, motivation fulfill expectations of others) (-), tradition (-), and security (-). Agreeableness: expected relationships with benevolence, enhance well-being others in environment, (+), conformity (+), tradition (+), and power (-). Extraversion: expected relationships with achievement (+) and stimulation (+). Conscientiousness: expected relationships with achievement (+) and conformity (+). Two components: proactive aspect related to motivation for success & inhibitive related to motivation for impulse control. Emotional stability: primarily affective and values don’t tend to have direct relations to wellbeing or distress, so this trait is likely to be unrelated to values.

Sinusoid patterns of correlation Values theory says that one variable associating with another one means they will also exhibit positive relations with compatible types of values. Value circle is motivational continuum, related variable have systematic pattern of correlations with entire value system. Correlations less positive moving around circle away from a value moving to negative relationship eventually (maximum when opposite. Moving around circle then a sinusoid curve (sine wave, one major peak and on major valley).

Possible moderators Affecting strength of relationship between traits and values?

Culture A shared system of meaning, cultures differ in the meanings they attribute to events. Individualistic cultures emphasize individuality, the uniqueness and right to pursue personal goals. While collectivistic cultures emphasize importance of one’s group and its obligations. Cultures also differ in strength, the pervasiveness of social norms and tolerance to deviant behavior from those norms. Tight societies have strong norms and severe sanctions for the violation whereas loose cultures have more ambiguous norms and more permissive of deviance. Tighter and more collectivistic encourage more normative value endorsement where individuals subscribe to dominant values of the culture rather than those consistent with individual’s traits. Members of looser and individualistic cultures endorse values consistent with individual personality traits. Individualism vs collectivism and Tightness vs looseness. Links between two systems might be universal such as traits and values so support view that links are based on processes unaffected by culture.

Values Instruments No fully hierarchical moderator analyses for both traits measure and values. For values most studies used either Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) or Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ). PVQ less abstract cognitively complex where respondents read descriptions of individual in terms of values and extent described person is similar to them. Difference in instruments is how they measure values as SVS measures values directly as respondents rate abstract goals in term of importance guiding principle in life. PVQ description person 2 sentences with first one describing goal important to them (direct measure of value) and other sentence involves trait-like elements so can result in inflated trait-value correlations.

Personality Instruments 2 used frequently Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience (NEO) and Big Five Inventory (BFI). NEO available with different versions based on age & gender and widely used in variety of settings. Later added Agreeableness and Conscientiousness creating NEO-PI-R. measuring 6 facets for each for each of the five factors, items provided in sentence form so respondents rate level of (dis)agreement. BFI to achieve convergence among different views of content of the factors of the Five being conceptualized differently. 300 items from Adjective Check List in 55 categories, high level of agreement retained and then list 44 representative items (adjectives can have more than one meaning so created short phrases for items. BFI and NEO highly correlated but not exactly the same as both rely on longer descriptions (sentences or phrases).

Statistical Adjustments for Values Scale Use Values research requires different approach to data analysis compared with traits. People make decisions about how to behave not based on importance of value but importance relative to other values. Cannot predict behavior based on person’s benevolence values but need to know how high relative to other values. Individuals differ in use of scale as some people tend to attribute high importance to values across items and some low. Recommend controlling for mean importance values, anticipate expected trait-value relations more accurate when controlling scale-use tendency of values.

Other Moderators Many studies with university students who are a more homogenous group than general population so somewhat different results in study. Examined study population as possible moderator, tested sample size if moderates trait-value correlations and tested that too for publication status if there is a possible publication bias....