Weinberger D A, Schwartz G E
Stanford University.
J Pers. 1990 Jun;58(2):381-417. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00235.x.
Individual differences in distress and restraint have recently been validated as two superordinate dimensions of social-emotional adjustment (Weinberger, 1989). In two samples (N1 = 139; N2 = 136) of university students, scores on these dimensions were jointly used to define six higher order personality styles: reactive, sensitized, oversocialized, undersocialized, self-assured, and repressive. To evaluate this typology, group differences were investigated on 28 measures within seven domains related to adjustment: self-expression, emotional control, proneness to personality disorders, physical illness, self-concept, neurotic symptoms, and impulse gratification. One-way multivariate analyses of variance revealed significant group differences within each domain. Univariate analyses revealed significant differences on 26 of the 28 measures and marginally significant differences on the remaining 2. A large number of nonadditive patterns consistent with a priori group descriptions corroborated the utility of a person-centered, typological approach. The data also provided an empirically derived, prototypic description of each adjustment style.
最近,痛苦和克制方面的个体差异已被确认为社会情绪适应的两个上位维度(温伯格,1989年)。在两个大学生样本(N1 = 139;N2 = 136)中,这些维度的得分被共同用于定义六种高阶人格类型:反应型、敏感型、过度社会化型、社会化不足型、自信型和压抑型。为了评估这种类型学,研究了与适应相关的七个领域内28项指标上的组间差异:自我表达、情绪控制、人格障碍倾向、身体疾病、自我概念、神经症状和冲动满足。单向多变量方差分析显示每个领域内存在显著的组间差异。单变量分析显示,28项指标中有26项存在显著差异,其余2项存在边缘显著差异。大量与先验组描述一致的非加性模式证实了以人为主的类型学方法的实用性。数据还提供了每种适应风格的基于经验得出的原型描述。