• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

人格特质层次结构的基本水平:不同情境下特质使用与可及性的研究

The basic level in personality-trait hierarchies: studies of trait use and accessibility in different contexts.

作者信息

John O P, Hampson S E, Goldberg L R

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley 94720.

出版信息

J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991 Mar;60(3):348-61. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.60.3.348.

DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.60.3.348
PMID:2027078
Abstract

A person's behavior and experiences can be described at different levels of abstraction. For example, a person might be described as charitable, as generous, as kind, or as good. Is there a level in such a trait hierarchy that is particularly useful in personality descriptions? The present 4 studies show that there is indeed a general preference for a particular level; the size of this preference depends on the familiarity and likability of the target people, which included various others and the self. These findings suggest that in trait hierarchies, people prefer the highest level of abstraction that is still descriptive of behavior (e.g., kind) over more descriptive subordinate levels (e.g., charitable and generous) and over an even broader level devoid of descriptive meaning (e.g., good). This level is basic in that it represents the optimal resolution of the trade-off between bandwidth and fidelity that characterizes all hierarchies.

摘要

一个人的行为和经历可以在不同的抽象层次上进行描述。例如,一个人可能被描述为慈善的、慷慨的、善良的或品德好的。在这样的特质层次结构中,是否存在一个在人格描述中特别有用的层次呢?目前的4项研究表明,确实存在对特定层次的普遍偏好;这种偏好的程度取决于目标人物(包括他人和自己)的熟悉程度和受欢迎程度。这些发现表明,在特质层次结构中,人们更喜欢仍然能够描述行为的最高抽象层次(如善良),而不是更具描述性的下属层次(如慈善的和慷慨的),也不是缺乏描述意义的更宽泛层次(如品德好的)。这个层次是基本的,因为它代表了所有层次结构中带宽和保真度之间权衡的最佳分辨率。

相似文献

1
The basic level in personality-trait hierarchies: studies of trait use and accessibility in different contexts.人格特质层次结构的基本水平:不同情境下特质使用与可及性的研究
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991 Mar;60(3):348-61. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.60.3.348.
2
Self-other agreement of personality judgments in job interviews: exploring the effects of trait, gender, age and social desirability.求职面试中个性判断的自我-他人一致性:探究特质、性别、年龄及社会赞许性的影响
Scand J Psychol. 2014 Oct;55(5):520-6. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12154. Epub 2014 Jul 25.
3
Aging and social expertise: the impact of trait-diagnostic information on impressions of others.衰老与社会专长:特质诊断信息对他人印象的影响。
Psychol Aging. 2001 Sep;16(3):497-510. doi: 10.1037//0882-7974.16.3.497.
4
Personality-trait descriptions of differentially liked persons.不同受欢迎程度的人的性格特征描述。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1970 Oct;16(2):284-90. doi: 10.1037/h0029851.
5
What we think we do (to each other): how personality can bias behavior schemas through the projection of if-then profiles.我们认为自己对他人做了什么:人格如何通过假设情境的投射来影响行为模式。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Oct;101(4):754-70. doi: 10.1037/a0023639.
6
Evidence of differential meta-accuracy: people understand the different impressions they make.元准确性差异的证据:人们了解自己给他人留下的不同印象。
Psychol Sci. 2009 Aug;20(8):1033-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02409.x. Epub 2009 Jul 23.
7
Using the PRISM to compare the explanatory value of general and role-contextualized trait ratings.使用PRISM比较一般特质评分和角色情境化特质评分的解释价值。
J Pers. 2007 Dec;75(6):1103-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00469.x.
8
Emotional and behavioral predictors of preschool peer ratings.学前儿童同伴评价的情绪和行为预测因素
Child Dev. 1990 Aug;61(4):1145-52.
9
Accuracy of person perception: do people know what kinds of impressions they convey?人物感知的准确性:人们知道自己传达了什么样的印象吗?
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1987 Feb;52(2):303-15. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.52.2.303.
10
Person memory and judgment: pragmatic influences on impressions formed in a social context.个人记忆与判断:语用对在社会情境中形成的印象的影响。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994 Feb;66(2):254-67. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.66.2.254.

引用本文的文献

1
Is personality reflected in the gestures of second language speakers?第二语言使用者的手势能反映其个性吗?
Front Psychol. 2024 Sep 11;15:1463063. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1463063. eCollection 2024.
2
Modular Ontologies for Genetically Modified People and their Bioethical Implications.转基因人类的模块化本体及其生物伦理意义。
Nanoethics. 2024;18(2):9. doi: 10.1007/s11569-024-00459-4. Epub 2024 Aug 19.
3
A descriptive systematic review of the relationship between personality traits and quality of life of women with non-metastatic breast cancer.
非转移性乳腺癌女性人格特质与生活质量关系的描述性系统评价。
BMC Cancer. 2022 Apr 19;22(1):426. doi: 10.1186/s12885-022-09408-4.
4
EEG-Based Personality Prediction Using Fast Fourier Transform and DeepLSTM Model.基于快速傅里叶变换和深度长短期记忆模型的脑电信号人格预测
Comput Intell Neurosci. 2021 Sep 20;2021:6524858. doi: 10.1155/2021/6524858. eCollection 2021.
5
Personality and Motives for Social Media Use When Physically Distanced: A Uses and Gratifications Approach.身体保持社交距离时使用社交媒体的个性与动机:一种使用与满足的研究方法
Front Psychol. 2021 Jun 14;12:607948. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.607948. eCollection 2021.
6
Measuring single constructs by single items: Constructing an even shorter version of the "Short Five" personality inventory.用单个项目测量单一构念:构建更简短版本的“简版五因素”人格量表。
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 11;12(8):e0182714. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182714. eCollection 2017.
7
A New Twist on Old Questions: A Life Span Approach to the Trait Concept.新视角下的老问题:从毕生发展的角度看特质概念。
J Pers. 2018 Feb;86(1):97-108. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12304. Epub 2017 Mar 29.
8
Bidirectional Associations Between Newlyweds' Marital Satisfaction and Marital Problems over Time.新婚夫妇的婚姻满意度和婚姻问题随时间的双向关联。
Fam Process. 2017 Dec;56(4):869-882. doi: 10.1111/famp.12264. Epub 2016 Nov 8.
9
Contextual Variability in Personality From Significant-Other Knowledge and Relational Selves.基于重要他人认知和关系自我的人格情境变异性
Front Psychol. 2016 Jan 7;6:1882. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01882. eCollection 2015.
10
How people explain their own and others' behavior: a theory of lay causal explanations.人们如何解释自己和他人的行为:一种外显因果解释理论。
Front Psychol. 2015 Feb 18;6:139. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00139. eCollection 2015.