{"title":"一对还是远亲?","authors":"W. Ruch, Valentina Vylobkova, Sonja Heintz","doi":"10.1027/1614-0001/a000400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Allport’s distinction of personality devaluated (personality) and personality evaluated (character) raised the question of whether the character is redundant with personality, which still remains open today. The present study hence compares the Five-Factor Model of personality and the VIA-classification (Values in Action) of character strengths across two methods (self- and peer-reports) and two levels of abstraction (domains/factors and scales/facets). A sample of 152 participants and 152 peer-raters completed the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised and the VIA Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS). Personality and character assessed with these inventories were found to strongly overlap, yet the different operationalizations were rarely redundant (except for three personality facets). Multitrait-multimethod analyses mostly supported the convergent and discriminant validity of personality and character. Interpersonal strengths (e.g., teamwork) and abstract character factors lacked discriminant validity to personality facets. The present investigation contributes to a better understanding of the interplay between personality and character and provides an impetus for future research on the “virtue gap” between devaluated and evaluated personality traits.","PeriodicalId":47049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Individual Differences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two of a Kind or Distant Relatives?\",\"authors\":\"W. Ruch, Valentina Vylobkova, Sonja Heintz\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/1614-0001/a000400\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: Allport’s distinction of personality devaluated (personality) and personality evaluated (character) raised the question of whether the character is redundant with personality, which still remains open today. The present study hence compares the Five-Factor Model of personality and the VIA-classification (Values in Action) of character strengths across two methods (self- and peer-reports) and two levels of abstraction (domains/factors and scales/facets). A sample of 152 participants and 152 peer-raters completed the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised and the VIA Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS). Personality and character assessed with these inventories were found to strongly overlap, yet the different operationalizations were rarely redundant (except for three personality facets). Multitrait-multimethod analyses mostly supported the convergent and discriminant validity of personality and character. Interpersonal strengths (e.g., teamwork) and abstract character factors lacked discriminant validity to personality facets. The present investigation contributes to a better understanding of the interplay between personality and character and provides an impetus for future research on the “virtue gap” between devaluated and evaluated personality traits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Individual Differences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Individual Differences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000400\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000400","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: Allport’s distinction of personality devaluated (personality) and personality evaluated (character) raised the question of whether the character is redundant with personality, which still remains open today. The present study hence compares the Five-Factor Model of personality and the VIA-classification (Values in Action) of character strengths across two methods (self- and peer-reports) and two levels of abstraction (domains/factors and scales/facets). A sample of 152 participants and 152 peer-raters completed the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised and the VIA Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS). Personality and character assessed with these inventories were found to strongly overlap, yet the different operationalizations were rarely redundant (except for three personality facets). Multitrait-multimethod analyses mostly supported the convergent and discriminant validity of personality and character. Interpersonal strengths (e.g., teamwork) and abstract character factors lacked discriminant validity to personality facets. The present investigation contributes to a better understanding of the interplay between personality and character and provides an impetus for future research on the “virtue gap” between devaluated and evaluated personality traits.
期刊介绍:
Researchers, teachers, and students interested in all areas of individual differences (e.g., gender, temperament, personality, intelligence) and their assessment in human and animal research will find the Journal of Individual Differences useful. The Journal of Individual Differences publishes manuscripts dealing with individual differences in behavior, emotion, cognition, and their developmental aspects. This includes human as well as animal research. The Journal of Individual Differences is conceptualized to bring together researchers working in different areas ranging from, for example, molecular genetics to theories of complex behavior.