60
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality.

      ,
      American Psychologist
      American Psychological Association (APA)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Despite impressive advances in recent years with respect to theory and research, personality psychology has yet to articulate clearly a comprehensive framework for understanding the whole person. In an effort to achieve that aim, the current article draws on the most promising empirical and theoretical trends in personality psychology today to articulate 5 big principles for an integrative science of the whole person. Personality is conceived as (a) an individual's unique variation on the general evolutionary design for human nature, expressed as a developing pattern of (b) dispositional traits, (c) characteristic adaptations, and (d) self-defining life narratives, complexly and differentially situated (e) in culture and social context. The 5 principles suggest a framework for integrating the Big Five model of personality traits with those self-defining features of psychological individuality constructed in response to situated social tasks and the human need to make meaning in culture. 2006 APA, all rights reserved

          Related collections

          Most cited references1

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The cultural grounding of personal relationship: enemyship in North American and West African worlds.

          Three studies investigated the implicit constructions of reality associated with cultural differences in enemyship (personal relationship of hatred, malice, and sabotage). Results of interview (Study 1; N = 98) and questionnaire (Study 2; N = 166) research indicated that enemyship was more prominent among Ghanaian participants than among U.S. participants. Additional evidence located a potential source of these differences in different constructions of relationship. Responses linked the prominence of enemyship to constructions of relationship as inherent, enduring connection (interdependent models). Responses linked the sense of freedom from enemyship to constructions of relationship as the discretionary product of atomistic selves (independent models). An experiment among Ghanaian participants (Study 3; N = 48) provided evidence that increasing experience of inherent connection can be sufficient to increase accessibility of enemyship. Results help to illuminate the cultural grounding of personal relationship and other phenomena that are typically invisible in mainstream theory and research.

            Author and article information

            Journal
            American Psychologist
            American Psychologist
            American Psychological Association (APA)
            1935-990X
            0003-066X
            2006
            2006
            : 61
            : 3
            : 204-217
            Article
            10.1037/0003-066X.61.3.204
            16594837
            6d4fa13d-89ef-4011-8c7a-7518295a46c3
            © 2006
            History

            Comments

            Comment on this article

            Related Documents Log