全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
Psychology  2022 

The Meaning-Based Assessment of Personality Tendencies

DOI: 10.4236/psych.2022.138082, PP. 1267-1285

Keywords: Meaning, Personality Traits, Assessment, Self-Report, Meaning Test, Meaning Profile, Meaning Variables, Meaning Value, Referent, Meaning Unit, Meaning System, Meaning Dimensions, Types of Relation, Forms of Relation, Forms of Expression, Referent Shifts, Conflicts

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

The paper presents a new approach to the assessment of personality traits based on the theory and methodology of meaning. Meaning consists of contents and processes involved in the psychological domains of cognition, emotions, personality, behavior and physiology. On the basis of a large body of empirical data, it is defined as a referent-centered pattern of meaning values, whereby the referent is the carrier of meaning and the meaning values are the assigned meanings. Meaning assessment is done in terms of five sets of meaning variables characterizing the contents, relations, structure and mode of expression of the meaning. Any communication or statement can be analyzed in terms of the five sets of meaning variables. The meaning variables characterizing the meaning communications of an individual in response to the stimuli used in the Meaning Test constitute the individual’s meaning profile. The correspondences between the individuals’ meaning profiles and the scores on standard personality questionnaires enable defining the meaning profiles of the personality traits. Each trait corresponds to a unique pattern of meaning variables. Matching the meaning profiles of the individual and of the specific trait provides the individual’s score of the trait even without administering the actual trait questionnaire to the individual. The methodologies of defining the meaning profiles are done on a computer program (Kreitlermeaningsystem.tau.ac.il). The following are the main advantages of the meaning-based trait scores: they are valid; they are correlated significantly with the scores based on standard questionnaires; they are not based on self-report; they provide cheap and easily applied means of scoring; they include a lot of information about the trait beyond the score itself; they provide insight into the manner in which the trait functions; they enable comparing traits, and they provide means for identifying traits and differentiating between traits and other personality tendencies. Future research will focus on improving the precision and range of application of the methodology.

References

[1]  American Psychological Association (2015). APA Dictionary of Psychology (2nd ed.).
[2]  Baranowsky, T. (1988) Validity and Reliability of Self Report Measures of Physical Activity: An Information-Processing Perspective. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 59, 314-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1988.10609379
[3]  Barr, S. (2007). Factors Influencing Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors. Environmental Behavior, 39, 435-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916505283421
[4]  Fajkowska, M., & Kreitler, S. (2018). Status of the Trait Concept in Contemporary Personality Psychology: Are the Old Questions Still the Burning Questions? Journal of Personality, 86, 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12335
[5]  Funder, D. C. (2010). The Personality Puzzle. W.W. Norton & Company.
[6]  Kassin, S. (2003). Psychology. Prentice-Hall.
[7]  Kormos, C., & Gifford, R. (2014). The Validity of Self-Report Measures of Proenvironmental Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 359-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.003
[8]  Kreitler, S. (2002). The Psychosemantic Approach to Alexithymia. Personality & Individual Differences, 33, 393-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00163-5
[9]  Kreitler, S. (2003). Dynamics of Fear and Anxiety. In P. L. Gower (Ed.), Psychology of Fear (pp. 1-17). Nova Science Publishers.
[10]  Kreitler, S. (2005). Fear of Death. In P. L. Gower (Ed.), New Research on the Psychology of Fear (pp. 59-89). Nova Science Publishers.
[11]  Kreitler, S. (2008). The Psychosemantic Approach to the NEO-PI Personality Traits. In 14th European Conference on Personality. Tartu University Campus.
[12]  Kreitler, S. (2013). The Psychosemantic Approach to the NEO-PI Personality Traits. In The International Society for the Study of Individual Differences.
[13]  Kreitler, S. (2014). Meaning and Its Manifestations: The Meaning System. In S. Kreitler, & T. Urbanek (Eds.), Conceptions of Meaning (pp. 3-32). Nova Publishers.
[14]  Kreitler, S. (2015). Meaning—Its Nature and Assessment. In C. Pracana (Ed.), InPACT International Psychological Applications Conference and Trends (pp. 424-426). W.I.A.R.S.
[15]  Kreitler, S. (2017). The Meaning Profiles of Anxiety and Depression: Similarities and Differences in Two Age Groups. Cognition and Emotion, 32, 1-15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1311248
[16]  Kreitler, S. (2018). Personality Traits as Patterns of Meaning Assignment Tendencies. Journal of Personality, 86, 55-68. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12315
[17]  Kreitler, S. (2019). Towards a Consensual Model in Personality Psychology. Personality and Individual Differences, 147, 156-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.03.009
[18]  Kreitler, S. (2020). Kreitlermeaningsystem.tau.ac.il. V.3.
[19]  Kreitler, S. (2022a). The Construct of Meaning. Nova Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.52305/BNOC7210
[20]  Kreitler, S. (2022b). Spheres of Meaning. Nova Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.52305/AUYY1064
[21]  Kreitler, S. (2022c). Chapter 4. Health-Related Behaviors. In S. Kreitler (Ed.), Mental and Physical Health. Springer.
[22]  Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1985). The Psychosemantic Determinants of Anxiety: A Cognitive Approach. In H. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in Test Anxiety Research (Vol. 4, pp. 117-135). Swets & Zeitlinger and Erlbaum.
[23]  Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1990). The Cognitive Foundations of Personality Traits. Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2227-4
[24]  Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1992). Cognitive Foundations of Personality Traits. International Journal of Psychology, 27, 330-331.
[25]  Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1993). Personality Traits: The Cognitive Revolution. In D. L. Palenzuela, & A. M. Barros (Eds.), Modern Trends in Personality Theory and Research (pp. 47-63). Porto.
[26]  Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1997). The Paranoid Person: Cognitive Motivations and Personality Traits. European Journal of Personality, 11, 101-132.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199706)11:2<101::AID-PER279>3.0.CO;2-X
[27]  Lee, C. (1993). Attitudes, Knowledge and Stages of Change: A Survey of Exercise Patterns in Older Australian Women. Health Behavior, 12, 476-480.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.12.6.476
[28]  Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Smith, R. E. (2004). Introduction to Personality: Toward an Integration. John Wiley & Son.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133