• 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

团队中受重视的人格特征:并非“越多越好”?

Personality characteristics that are valued in teams: Not always "more is better"?

机构信息

Department of Psychology, "Babeş-Bolyai" University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Department of Organization, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Psychol. 2019 Oct;54(5):638-649. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12511. Epub 2018 Jul 16.

DOI:10.1002/ijop.12511
PMID:30014482
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6767192/
Abstract

This study investigates the relationships between personality traits and contributions to teamwork that are often assumed to be linear. We use a theory-driven approach to propose that extraversion, agreeableness and conscientiousness have inverted U-shaped relationships with contributions to teamwork. In a sample of 220 participants asked to perform a creative task in teams, we found that extraversion, agreeableness and conscientiousness were curvilinearly associated with peer-rated contributions to teamwork in such a way that the associations were positive, with a decreasing slope, up to a peak, and then they became negative as personality scores further increased. We replicated the results concerning the non-linear association between extraversion, conscientiousness and peer-rated contributions to teamwork in a sample of 314 participants engaged in a collaborative learning exercise. Our results support recent claims and empirical evidence that explorations of personality-work-related behaviours relationships should move beyond the linearity assumptions. We conclude by discussing the implications of our research for personnel selection.

摘要

本研究探讨了人格特质与团队合作贡献之间的关系,这些关系通常被认为是线性的。我们采用理论驱动的方法,提出外向性、宜人性和尽责性与团队合作贡献呈倒 U 型关系。在一项要求 220 名参与者在团队中完成创造性任务的研究中,我们发现外向性、宜人性和尽责性与同伴评定的团队合作贡献呈曲线相关,这种关联是积极的,斜率逐渐减小,达到峰值,然后随着人格得分进一步增加,关联变为负性。我们在一项由 314 名参与合作学习练习的参与者组成的样本中复制了外向性、尽责性与同伴评定的团队合作贡献之间的非线性关联的结果。我们的研究结果支持了最近的观点和实证证据,即对人格与工作相关行为关系的探索应该超越线性假设。最后,我们讨论了本研究对人员选拔的意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4174/6767192/34b22a1f2274/IJOP-54-638-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4174/6767192/7187d5fd5474/IJOP-54-638-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4174/6767192/34b22a1f2274/IJOP-54-638-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4174/6767192/7187d5fd5474/IJOP-54-638-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4174/6767192/34b22a1f2274/IJOP-54-638-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Personality characteristics that are valued in teams: Not always "more is better"?团队中受重视的人格特征:并非“越多越好”?
Int J Psychol. 2019 Oct;54(5):638-649. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12511. Epub 2018 Jul 16.
2
On the temporal stability of personality: evidence for differential stability and the role of life experiences.论人格的时间稳定性:差异稳定性的证据及生活经历的作用。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002 Dec;83(6):1469-84.
3
Social anxiety and the Big Five personality traits: the interactive relationship of trust and openness.社交焦虑与大五人格特质:信任与开放性的交互关系。
Cogn Behav Ther. 2015;44(3):212-22. doi: 10.1080/16506073.2015.1008032. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
4
On traits and temperament: general and specific factors of emotional experience and their relation to the five-factor model.论特质与气质:情绪体验的一般因素和特殊因素及其与五因素模型的关系
J Pers. 1992 Jun;60(2):441-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00980.x.
5
Domain and facet personality predictors of all-cause mortality among Medicare patients aged 65 to 100.65至100岁医疗保险患者全因死亡率的领域和层面人格预测因素
Psychosom Med. 2005 Sep-Oct;67(5):724-33. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000181272.58103.18.
6
How universal is the Big Five? Testing the five-factor model of personality variation among forager-farmers in the Bolivian Amazon.五大特质模型在多大程度上具有普遍性?对玻利维亚亚马逊地区的采集-农耕者的人格变异性的五大特质模型检验。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Feb;104(2):354-70. doi: 10.1037/a0030841. Epub 2012 Dec 17.
7
Stability and change of personality across the life course: the impact of age and major life events on mean-level and rank-order stability of the Big Five.人格在整个生命历程中的稳定性和变化:年龄和重大生活事件对五大人格特质的均数稳定性和等级稳定性的影响。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Oct;101(4):862-82. doi: 10.1037/a0024950.
8
Personality and mental health: Arabic Scale of Mental Health, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, and Neo Five Factor Inventory.人格与心理健康:阿拉伯心理健康量表、艾森克人格问卷和大五人格问卷简式量表。
Psychol Rep. 2012 Aug;111(1):75-82. doi: 10.2466/09.02.08.PR0.111.4.75-82.
9
Associations between five-factor model traits and perceived job strain: a population-based study.五因素模型特质与感知到的工作压力之间的关联:一项基于人群的研究。
J Occup Health Psychol. 2013 Oct;18(4):492-500. doi: 10.1037/a0033987.
10
Differential relationships between personality and brain function in monetary and goal-oriented subjective motivation: multichannel near-infrared spectroscopy of healthy subjects.人格与货币和目标导向主观动机的大脑功能之间的差异关系:健康受试者的多通道近红外光谱。
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2012 Jun;66(4):276-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1819.2012.02349.x.

引用本文的文献

1
The influence of credits and stigmas in volunteering on depression, the modulating effects of volunteer personality and motivation.志愿服务中的声誉和污名对抑郁的影响、志愿者个性和动机的调节作用。
BMC Public Health. 2025 Feb 5;25(1):460. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21727-2.
2
AI-enhanced collective intelligence.人工智能增强的集体智慧。
Patterns (N Y). 2024 Oct 10;5(11):101074. doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2024.101074. eCollection 2024 Nov 8.
3
Peering into the team role kaleidoscope: the interplay of personal characteristics and verbal interactions in collaborative problem solving.

本文引用的文献

1
Item response theory scoring and the detection of curvilinear relationships.项目反应理论评分与曲线关系的检测。
Psychol Methods. 2017 Mar;22(1):191-203. doi: 10.1037/met0000101. Epub 2016 Nov 7.
2
Too Much of a Good Thing: The Challenge and Opportunity of the Inverted U.过犹不及:倒 U 型曲线的挑战与机遇
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011 Jan;6(1):61-76. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393523. Epub 2011 Feb 3.
3
Can we get some cooperation around here? The mediating role of group norms on the relationship between team personality and individual helping behaviors.
审视团队角色万花筒:协作解决问题中个人特质与言语互动的相互作用。
Front Psychol. 2024 Sep 16;15:1345892. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1345892. eCollection 2024.
4
Does participation in sports competitions enhance interprofessional teamwork among medical students? Evidence from a medical school curriculum experiment.参与体育竞赛是否能增强医学生的跨专业团队合作精神?医学院课程实验的证据。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Jul 30;24(1):821. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05807-2.
5
Learning from failure feedback for subsequent task performance: A matter of personality?从失败反馈中学习以提升后续任务表现:与性格有关?
Front Psychol. 2022 Dec 15;13:1032273. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1032273. eCollection 2022.
6
How Personality and Communication Patterns Affect Online Teams Under Pressure.个性与沟通模式如何在压力下影响线上团队。
Front Artif Intell. 2022 May 27;5:818491. doi: 10.3389/frai.2022.818491. eCollection 2022.
7
Accuracy and Idea Consideration: A Study of Small-Group Interaction in Biology.准确性与思路考量:生物学中小组互动的研究。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2022 Mar;21(1):ar5. doi: 10.1187/cbe.21-03-0067.
8
Investigating the impacts of personality on the use and perceptions of online collaborative platforms in higher education.探究个性对高等教育中在线协作平台的使用及认知的影响。
SN Soc Sci. 2021;1(1):40. doi: 10.1007/s43545-020-00053-x. Epub 2021 Feb 1.
9
Curvilinear Effects of Extraversion on Socialization Outcomes Among Chinese College Students.外向性对中国大学生社交化结果的曲线效应
Front Psychol. 2021 Jun 3;12:652834. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652834. eCollection 2021.
我们能在这里合作一下吗?群体规范在团队人格与个体帮助行为关系中的中介作用。
J Appl Psychol. 2014 Sep;99(5):988-99. doi: 10.1037/a0037278. Epub 2014 Jun 30.
4
The magic of collective emotional intelligence in learning groups: No guys needed for the spell!学习小组中集体情商的魔力:施展魔法无需男生!
Br J Psychol. 2015 May;106(2):217-34. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12075. Epub 2014 Jun 6.
5
Uncovering curvilinear relationships between conscientiousness and job performance: how theoretically appropriate measurement makes an empirical difference.揭示责任心与工作绩效之间的曲线关系:理论上合适的测量如何产生实际差异。
J Appl Psychol. 2014 Jul;99(4):564-86. doi: 10.1037/a0034688. Epub 2013 Nov 4.
6
Team task analysis: differentiating between tasks using team relatedness and team workflow as metrics of team task interdependence.团队任务分析:使用团队相关性和团队工作流程作为团队任务相互依赖的度量标准来区分任务。
Hum Factors. 2012 Apr;54(2):277-95. doi: 10.1177/0018720811435234.
7
An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits.大五人格特质短量表使用后果的评估。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012 Apr;102(4):874-88. doi: 10.1037/a0027403. Epub 2012 Feb 20.
8
The validity of interpersonal skills assessment via situational judgment tests for predicting academic success and job performance.通过情境判断测试评估人际技能对预测学业成功和工作绩效的有效性。
J Appl Psychol. 2012 Mar;97(2):460-8. doi: 10.1037/a0025741. Epub 2011 Oct 3.
9
Too much of a good thing: curvilinear relationships between personality traits and job performance.物极必反:人格特质与工作绩效之间的曲线关系。
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Jan;96(1):113-33. doi: 10.1037/a0021016.
10
Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups.人类群体表现中存在集体智慧因素的证据。
Science. 2010 Oct 29;330(6004):686-8. doi: 10.1126/science.1193147. Epub 2010 Sep 30.