2 Taxonomy is always a contentious issue because the world does not come to us in neat little packages (S. Personality has been conceptualized from a variety of theoretical perspectives, and at various levels of Each of these levels has made unique contributions to our understanding of individual differences in behavior and experience. However, the number of personality traits, and scales designed to measure them, escalated without an end in sight (Goldberg, 1971). Researchers, as well as practitioners in the field of personality assessment, were faced with a bewildering array of personality scales from which to choose, with little guidance and no overall rationale at hand. What made matters worse was that scales with the same name often measure concepts that are not the same, and scales with different names often measure concepts that are quite similar. Although diversity and scientific pluralism are useful, the systematic accumulation of findings and the communication among researchers became difficult amidst the Babel of concepts and scales. Many personality researchers had hoped that they might devise the structure that would transform the Babel into a community speaking a common language. However, such an integration was not to be achieved by any one researcher or by any one theoretical perspective. As Allport once put it, " each assessor has his own pet units and uses a pet battery of diagnostic devices " (1958, p. 258). What personality psychology needed was a descriptive model, or taxonomy, of its subject matter. One of the central goals of scientific taxonomies is the definition of overarching domains within which large numbers of specific instances can be understood in a simplified way. Thus, in personality psychology, a taxonomy would permit researchers to study specified domains of personality characteristics, rather than examining separately the thousands of particular attributes that make human beings individual and unique. Moreover, a generally accepted taxonomy would greatly facilitate the accumulation and communication of empirical findings by offering a standard vocabulary, or nomenclature. After decades of research, the field is approaching consensus on a general taxonomy of personality traits, the " Big Five " personality dimensions. These dimensions do not represent a particular theoretical perspective but were derived from analyses of the natural-language terms people use to describe themselves 3 and others. Rather than replacing all previous systems, the Big Five taxonomy serves an integrative function because it can represent the various and diverse systems of personality …

The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives.

The five-factor model of personality is a hierarchical organization of personality traits in terms of five basic dimensions: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience. Research using both natural language adjectives and theoretically based personality questionnaires supports the comprehensiveness of the model and its applicability across observers and cultures. This article summarizes the history of the model and its supporting evidence; discusses conceptions of the nature of the factors; and outlines an agenda for theorizing about the origins and operation of the factors. We argue that the model should prove useful both for individual assessment and for the elucidation of a number of topics of interest to personality psychologists.

/pdf/an-introduction-to-the-five-factor-model-and-its-1hd8x7eums.pdf

An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications.

University of TorontoThe authors summarize 35 years of empirical research ongoal-setting theory. They describe the core ﬁndings of thetheory, the mechanisms by which goals operate, modera-tors of goal effects, the relation of goals and satisfaction,and the role of goals as mediators of incentives. Theexternal validity and practical signiﬁcance of goal-settingtheory are explained, and new directions in goal-settingresearch are discussed. The relationships of goal setting toother theories are described as are the theory’s limitations.

https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/642/articles syllabus/locke pract goal setting 2002 am psy.pdf

Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation

1. Introduction and Overview. 2. Detecting Influential Observations and Outliers. 3. Detecting and Assessing Collinearity. 4. Applications and Remedies. 5. Research Issues and Directions for Extensions. Bibliography. Author Index. Subject Index.

Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity

Building Leadership Effectiveness This program encourages leaders to develop practices that transform values into action, vision into realities, obstacles into innovations, and risks into rewards. Participants will be introduced to the five practices of exemplary leadership: modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart Coaching & Communicating for Performance Coaching & Communicating for Performance is a highly interactive program that will give supervisors and managers the opportunity to build skills that will enable them to share expectations and set objectives for employees, provide constructive feedback, more effectively engage in learning conversations, and coaching opportunities. Skillful Conflict Management for Leaders As a leader, it is important to understand conflict and be effective at conflict management because the way conflict is resolved becomes an integral component of our university’s culture. This series of conflict management sessions help leaders learn and put into practice effective strategies for managing conflict.

기독교 사역과 Leadership

The authors hypothesized that the relationship between conscientiousness and job performance would be stronger for persons high in agreeableness than for those low in agreeableness. Results of hierarchical moderated regression analyses for 7 independent samples of employees across diverse occupations provided support for the hypothesis in 5 of the samples. In samples supporting the hypothesis, among the highly conscientious workers, those low in agreeableness were found to receive lower ratings of job performance than workers high in agreeableness. One explanation for lack of an interaction between conscientiousness and agreeableness in the other 2 samples is that those jobs were not characterized by frequent, cooperative interactions with others. Overall, the results show that highly conscientious workers who lack interpersonal sensitivity may be ineffective, particularly in jobs requiring cooperative interchange with others.

RESEARCH REPORTS The Interactive Effects of Conscientiousness and Agreeableness on Job Performance

The purpose of this study was to identify higher-order dimensions that explain the relationships among the Big 6 interest types and the Big 5 personality traits. Meta-analyses were conducted to identify an 11 × 11 true score correlation matrix of interest and personality attributes. Cluster analysis and nonmetric multidimensional scaling were used to identify 3 dimensions that explained relations among the 11 attributes: (a) Interests versus Personality Traits; (b) Striving for Accomplishment Versus Striving for Personal Growth, and (c) Interacting with People Versus Interacting with Things. Overall, results clarified the relationships among interests and personality traits by showing that 3 rather than 2 dimensions best explain the relationships among interests and personality traits. Personality traits and vocational interests are two major, noncognitive individual difference domains in the field of psychology. Both sets of dispositional attributes are important because they influence numerous outcomes associated with work and life success. One common thread that links personality traits and vocational interests is that they influence behavior through motivational processes. That is, they influence choices individuals make about which tasks and activities to engage in, how much effort to exert on those tasks, and how long to persist with those tasks. Although psychologists have conducted hundreds of studies that investigate one or both topics, the precise nature of the linkages between the two domains remains ambiguous and controversial.

Higher‐order dimensions of the big five personality traits and the big six vocational interest types

We present a comprehensive theory of collective organizational engagement, integrating engagement theory with the resource management model. We propose that engagement can be considered an organiza...

Collective organizational engagement: : Linking motivational antecedents, strategic implementation, and firm performance

The interactive effects of conscientiousness and agreeableness on job performance.

The authors examined the validity of observer ratings (supervisor, coworker, and customer) and selfratings of personality measures. Results based on a sample of 105 sales representatives supported the 2 hypotheses tested. First, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings of the 2 job-relevant personality dimensions—conscientiousness and extraversion—were valid predictors of performance ratings, and the magnitude of the validities were at least as large as for self-ratings. Second, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings accounted for significant variance in the criterion measure beyond self-ratings alone for the relevant dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that validities of personality measures based on self-assessme nts alone may underestimate the true validity of personality constructs. In the past 10 years, the views of many personality psychologists have converged regarding the structure and concepts of personality. Generally, researchers agree that there are five robust factors of personality that can serve as a meaningful taxonomy for classifying personality attributes (Digman, 1990). This taxonomy has consistently emerged in longitudinal studies; across different sources (e.g., ratings by self, spouse, acquaintances, and friends); with numerous personality inventories and theoretical systems; and in different age, sex, race, and language groups. It also has some biological basis, as suggested by evidence of heritability (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1992; Digman, 1990). Although the names for these factors differ across researchers, the following labels and prototypical characteristics are representative: (a) extraversion (sociable, talkative, assertive, ambitious, and active), (b) agreeableness (good-natured, cooperative, and trusting), (c) conscientiousness (responsible, dependable, able to plan, organized, persistent, and achievement oriented), (d) emotional stability (calm, secure, and not nervous), and (e) openness to experience (imaginative, artistically sensitive, and intellectual). The emergence of the five-factor model has enabled researchers to conduct construct-oriented meta-analytic reviews of the predictive validity of personality (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hough, Eaton, Dunnette, Kamp, & McCloy, 1990; Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991). Although these reviews have adopted slightly different personality frameworks, the conclusions can be summarized in terms of the Big Five taxonomy. The Barrick and Mount (1991) and Hough et al. (1990) reviews demonstrated that only one dimension of the Big Five, conscientiousness (achievement and dependability in the Hough et al. frame

/pdf/validity-of-observer-ratings-of-the-big-five-personality-1hpph7ougk.pdf

Murray R. Barrick

Papers

RESEARCH REPORTS The Interactive Effects of Conscientiousness and Agreeableness on Job Performance

Higher‐order dimensions of the big five personality traits and the big six vocational interest types

Collective organizational engagement: : Linking motivational antecedents, strategic implementation, and firm performance

The interactive effects of conscientiousness and agreeableness on job performance.

Validity of observer ratings of the big five personality factors.