Haynes S N, Uchigakiuchi P
University of Hawaii, Honolulu 96822.
Behav Modif. 1993 Jan;17(1):72-92. doi: 10.1177/01454455930171006.
Articles by Collins and Thompson, Staats, and Williams and Thompson have taken different tracks, but all advocate the integration of "personality" measures with behavioral assessment. This article addresses several issues that have hindered such integration. First, many traits are poorly defined, inconsistently applied, and excessively molar. The concept of trait communicates a useful idea--that there are meaningful consistencies in behavior across situations. However, the concepts of personality and personality traits are superfluous. They are inbued with semantic imprecision, redundancy, and unwanted psychodynamic and causal connotations. Also, trait measures are insensitive to the dynamic aspects of behavior. Finally, personality assessment questionnaires are frequently used in behavioral assessment but most often for client or subject selection and molar therapy outcome evaluation. The goal of research in this area should be to determine the persons. situations, purposes, particular traits, and measurement methods affecting the utility of trait measures in behavioral assessment.
柯林斯与汤普森、斯塔茨以及威廉姆斯与汤普森所撰写的文章虽各有不同侧重点，但均主张将“人格”测量与行为评估相结合。本文探讨了阻碍这种整合的几个问题。首先，许多特质定义不明确、应用不一致且过于笼统。特质这一概念传达了一个有用的观点——即行为在不同情境下存在有意义的一致性。然而，人格及人格特质的概念是多余的。它们存在语义不精确、冗余以及不必要的心理动力学和因果内涵。此外，特质测量对行为的动态方面不敏感。最后，人格评估问卷在行为评估中经常被使用，但大多是用于客户或受试者的筛选以及总体治疗效果评估。该领域的研究目标应是确定影响特质测量在行为评估中效用的人、情境、目的、特定特质及测量方法。
