POGLAVJA IZ KOGNITIVNE PSIHOLOGIJE IN PSIHOLOGIJE OSEBNOSTI

POGLAVJA IZ KOGNITIVNE PSIHOLOGIJE IN PSIHOLOGIJE OSEBNOSTI

POMEN OSEBNOSTNIH DIMENZIJ

Razvoj osebnostnih dimenzij

Pregled vsebine

Veljavnost osebnostnih dimenzij Prediktivna vrednost osebnostnih dimenzij Splošna ocena Na posameznih pomembnih področjih

Pomembni vidiki obnašanja Doživljanje sveta in sebe, počutje, psihično

blagostanje in zdravje Zadovoljstvo z delom Motiviranost

Raziskovalni rezultati

Paunonen, S. V. (2003). Big Five Factors of Personality and Replicated Predictions of Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 84, No. 2, 411-424.

Paunonen, S. V. & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five Factors and Facets and the Prediction of Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 81, No. 3, 524-539.

DeNeve, K. M.,& Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197-229.

Judge, T. A., Heller, D. & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 3, 530-541.

Judge, T. A. & Ilie, R. (2002). Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 4, 797-807.

Paunonen, 2003

Problem Kako dobri prediktorji so veliki

faktorji osebnosti Kako se obnesejo kot

napovedovalci pomembnih, kompleksnih in socialno relevantnih načinov obnašanja

Metode Instrumenti

3 mere B5 NEO-FFI;

Costa & McCrae, 1992 NEO-PI-R;

Costa & McCrae, 1992 FF-NPQ;

Paunonen, Ashton, & Jackson, 2001

Neverbalni test (Paunonen & Ashton, 2002; Paunonen et al., 2001

vedenjsko poročilo (Behavior Report Form); Paunonen & Ashton, 2001a

OSEBNOSTNE DIMENZIJE

VEDENJSKIKRITERIJI

http://www.psycinfo.com/library/display.cfm?document=psp/2003/february/psp842411.html#c7








FF-NPQ “The FF-NPQ is a 60-item five-factor measure

based on the Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire (NPQ), which is a longer 136-item measure of 16 Murray needs (see Paunonen & Ashton, 1998; Paunonen, Jackson, & Keinonen, 1990; Paunonen, Jackson, Trzebinski, & Forsterling, 1992; Paunonen et al., 1996; Paunonen, Zeidner, Engvik, Oosterveld, & Maliphant, 2000). Most items in the FF-NPQ were selected from the NPQ (a few new items were created) using item analysis and factoring procedures to identify the best Big Five exemplars in the nonverbal item pool (see Paunonen & Ashton, 2002).

Each NPQ and FF-NPQ item represents a line drawing of a central character performing a trait- or factor-relevant behavior in a specific situation. Respondents are asked to consider each item in a questionnaire and to decide, using a 7-point rating scale, the likelihood that they would engage in the type of behavior depicted in the illustration. An example FF-NPQ item (representing thrill-seeking behavior) is shown on the Instructions and Rating Form page reproduced inFigure 1. Other examples of the nonverbal items can be found in the articles by Paunonen and Ashton (2002), Paunonen et al. (1990, 1996, 2001), and Paunonen and Jackson (1979).”








http://www.psycinfo.com/library/display.cfm?document=psp/2003/february/psp842411.html#fig1






FF-NPQ (nadaljevanje) “As already stated, the items of the FF-NPQ were selected empirically from the longer NPQ to measure the

Big Five factors of personality. The particular conceptualization of personality structure chosen for this task was the same five-factor model underlying the construction of the NEO-FFI and the NEO-PI-R. In fact, the domain scales on the NEO-FFI were used as one basis for selecting FF-NPQ items from the nonverbal item pool—NPQ items that correlated well with the particular NEO-FFI scales were assigned to measure those factors in the FF-NPQ (see Paunonen et al., 2001). An implication of this test construction procedure is that one of the FF-NPQ scales measures Openness to Experience, instead of a dimension that others have labeled as Culture or Intellect (see Digman, 1990).

In preliminary studies with the FF-NPQ (Paunonen et al., 2001), the five nonverbal factor scales showed good levels of internal consistency reliability and convergent validity. For example, in a sample of 304 Canadian students, the mean internal consistency of the scales was. 80, and the mean convergence with corresponding NEO-FFI scales was.52. Self-ratings and peer ratings of university residence roommates collected on the FF-NPQ scales also correlated positively, with a mean value of.41. Moreover, both the FF-NPQ and the NEO-FFI were found to show a strikingly similar pattern of relations in predicting different criterion variables. For example, in a set of 14 behavior criteria, both Big Five questionnaires best predicted the same criterion (self-reported alcohol consumption of students), and both had the same mean multiple correlation of scales with criteria (both R =.25, each averaged across the 14 criterion variables).

The FF-NPQ, being a nonverbal personality inventory, is of obvious interest to cross-cultural researchers. Because no translation of the items is required (the instructions shown inFigure 1 do, of course, require translation), the questionnaire can be easily administered to people in many different language groups as well as to people who have difficulty reading or understanding any language. Further evaluations of the FF-NPQ items (Paunonen et al., 2001) have shown those Big Five scales to have good levels of internal consistency reliability and reasonable degrees of convergence with verbal indicators of the Big Five in several cross-cultural samples (see also Paunonen & Ashton, 2002).”




http://www.psycinfo.com/library/display.cfm?document=psp/2003/february/psp842411.html#fig1



Vedenjsko poročilo

21 vprašanj Nanašajo se na:

Samoopis osebnostnih značilnosti, pomembnih v socialnih situacijah (privlačen, inteligenten, popularen, maskulin, veren, pošten)

Uspešnost, razvade, interesi, zdravje, zaslužek...

Pregledne statistike

Solidna notranja konsistentnost (največja pri NEO-PI-R, največ postavk)

Korelacije med merami B5 Znotraj (glej desno: “monomethod-multitrait”) Med

“The differences in scale correlations described above suggest that the nonverbal items and the verbal items may be measuring somewhat different aspects of the same Big Five factors.

However, despite these differences in heterotrait correlations, the FF-NPQ correlated.55 on average with the corresponding NEO-FFI factor scales in the first sample's data (Neuroticism =.57, Extraversion =.51, Openness =.64, Agreeableness =.48, Conscientiousness =.56; in contrast, the mean absolute value of the heteromethod-heterotrait correlations was appropriately low at only.11).

Coincidentally, the FF-NPQ also correlated.55 with the NEO-PI-R scales in the second sample's data (Neuroticism =.51, Extraversion =.57, Openness =.63, Agreeableness =.58, Conscientiousness =.46, with a mean absolute heteromethod-heterotrait correlation of only.17).

These convergent validity values between the verbal and nonverbal scales are not much lower than the.59 mean correlation reported between NEO-FFI factor scales and adjective-based Big Five marker variables (Costa & McCrae, 1992, p. 54).”

Parcialne korelacije B5 s kriteriji

Nereplicirane B5 s kriteriji

Zaključki Uporabljene mere B5 so dovolj veljavne in zanesljive To velja za nekatere mere vedenjskega poročila, ne pa za vse

(npr. subjektivne samoopise) B5 pomembno napovedujejo vedenjske kriterije Korelacije pa niso visoke (najvišje so okrog znanega

osebnostnega koeficienta, 0,30) Zakaj?

Prisotna napaka merjenja zmanjšuje korelacije Kriteriji so morda premalo dobro operacionalizirani Pomembni so tudi drugi vzročni dejavniki (dednost, vplivi okolja,

situacij, prejšnjega obnašanja...) Posamezne komponente (faceti) B5 so v nekaterih primerih

morda boljši prediktorji kot cela dimenzija (vestnost – alkohol: samodisciplina kot komponenta vestnosti vpliva, druge pa morda sploh ne; njihova vključitev zmanjšuje prediktorsko vrednost)

Med drugimi prediktorji so lahko tudi osebnostne poteze, ki niso zajete v B5

Paunonen, Ashton, 2001 Problem Kako dobri prediktorji so

veliki faktorji osebnosti in njihovi faceti

Prediktorska moč B5 in prediktorska moč skupaj s faceti

Kako se obnesejo kot napovedovalci pomembnih, kompleksnih in socialno relevantnih načinov obnašanja

Metode Instrumenti

Jackson's (1984) Personality Research Form-E (PRF) (20 potez)

Jackson Personality Inventory (JPI; Jackson, 1976) (15 potez)

NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992 (B5 + 30 facetov)

vedenjsko poročilo (Behavior Report Form); Paunonen & Ashton, 2001a

Kognitivne sposobnosti: Multidimensional Aptitude Battery (MAB; Jackson, 1990).

Ocene opazovalcev Ocene študijske uspešnosti

idr. OSEBNOSTNE

DIMENZIJEVEDENJSKIKRITERIJI

Poteze PRF-JPI in faceti B5

Rezultati Prediktivna vrednost petih

faktorjev PRF-JRI, ki visoko korelirajo z B5

“The factor scores for our participants correlated quite highly, in general, with their corresponding NEO-PI-R domain scores: Conscientiousness = .79, Extraversion = .71, Agreeableness = .68, Openness to Experience = .60, and Neuroticism = .40. The lower correlation for Neuroticism probably reflects the greater role of social dependency in the PRF–JPI variant of that factor (i.e., reflecting conformity, succorance, social recognition, and low autonomy). In any case, the fact that the corresponding factor measures are by no means perfectly correlated means that there is ample opportunity in this study for the PRF–JPI and NEO-PI-R measures to act independently in the prediction of our criterion variables.”

Rezultati (nadaljevanje) Prediktivna

vrednost petih komponent (potez) PRF-JRI, ki so jih eksperti ocenili kot najbolj prediktivne v odnosu do posameznega kriterija


vrednost B5


vrednost facetov B5, ki so jih eksperti ocenili kot najbolj prediktivne v odnosu do posameznega kriterija

Prediktivni porast Inkrementalna

veljavnost: NEO-PI-R

domene + poteze PRF-

JPI Pri najbolj

prediciranih kriterijih je porast pomemben

Prediktivni porast Inkrementalna

veljavnost: PRF-JPI faktorji + B5 faceti

Pri najbolj prediciranih kriterijih je porast pomemben

Zaključki

Pet faktorjev v pomembni meri predicira številne socialno in življenjsko relevantne vidike obnašanja

Komponente velikih dimenzij lahko pomembno izboljšajo predikcijo

Ostaja še velik del nepojasnjene variance kriterijev, ki je delno posledica delovanja drugih osebnostnih faktorjev (zunaj območja B5 in njihovih facetov), v večji meri pa je rezultat napake merjenja, genetskih ter miljejskih (situacijskih) vplivov in osebnih dejavnikov zunaj temperamenta (sposobnosti, motivi...)

Če je tako, potem temeljne dimenzije osebnosti sodijo med pomembnejše prediktorje obnašanja

DeNeve & Cooper, 1998 Problem Kakšna je prediktivna

vrednost petih velikih faktorjev osebnosti v odnosu do psihičnega blagostanja (zadovoljstva z življenjem)

Metode Metaanaliza: 142 raziskav, 148

neodvisnih vzorcev, 1538 korelacij

Instrumenti Mere B5 Mere psihičnega blagostanja -

SB (zadovoljstvo z življenjem, sreča, pozitivni, negativni afekt)


PSIHIČNI (SUBJEKTIVNI)

BLAGOR

Rezultati

Korelacija med B5 in SB

Rezultati (nadaljevanje)

Korelacija med B5 in posameznimi vidiki SB

Zaključki

Osebnostne dimenzije so pomemben prediktor psihičnega blagostanja

Nedvomno pomembno predicirajo N, C, E in A; O najmanj Pomembni so tudi drugi prediktorji (zdravje, SES, izpolnjevanje

ciljev in vrednot, vernost...) Kako si lahko predstavljamo vpliv osebnosti?

Neposredno: dimenzije vplivajo kot dispozicije, ki naravnavajo posameznika na pozitivno ali negativno emocionalno odzivanje (E, N); prim. Grayev BAS in BIS sistem

Posredno: dimenzije nas motivirajo za situacije, ki vplivajo na dobro počutje (C, A)

Največji je vpliv lastnosti, ki omogočajo zdrave atribucije in uspešnost pri izpolnjevanju ciljev

Literatura

Glej v: DeNeve, K. M.,& Cooper, H. (1998). The

happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197-229.

Kaj kažejo naše raziskave?

Avsec, Musek (še neobj.) 367 subjektov B5 (BFQ) Psihično blagostanje (Dienerjeva lestvica

SWS; PANAS) Linearna regresijska analiza:

Prediktorji: B5 – E, A, C, N, O Kriteriji: SWS, PA, NA

Rezultati

B5 in subjektivni blagor R = 0,427, prediktorji E, C, N, A

Model Summary

,427a ,182 ,171 4,88688 ,182 16,059 5 361 ,000Model1

R R SquareAdjustedR Square

Std. Error ofthe Estimate

R SquareChange F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change

Change Statistics

Predictors: (Constant), Odprtost, Vestnost, Cust. stabilnost, Sprejemljivost, Energijaa.

Coefficientsa

2,079 2,762 ,753 ,452

,417 ,114 ,200 3,645 ,000 ,307 ,188 ,174

,379 ,117 ,165 3,246 ,001 ,281 ,168 ,155

,349 ,109 ,167 3,202 ,001 ,270 ,166 ,152

,325 ,155 ,109 2,105 ,036 ,230 ,110 ,100

6,452E-02 ,120 ,028 ,540 ,590 ,147 ,028 ,026

(Constant)

Energija

Cust. stabilnost

Vestnost

Sprejemljivost

Odprtost

Model1

B Std. Error

UnstandardizedCoefficients

Beta

StandardizedCoefficients

t Sig. Zero-order Partial Part

Correlations

Dependent Variable: Blagostanjea.


Metoda po korakih: kriterij SWS

Model Summary

,307a ,094 ,092 5,11356 ,094 38,038 1 365 ,000

,381b ,145 ,141 4,97396 ,051 21,776 1 364 ,000

,414c ,171 ,164 4,90534 ,026 11,255 1 363 ,001

,426d ,181 ,172 4,88209 ,010 4,465 1 362 ,035

Model1

2

3

4




Change Statistics

Predictors: (Constant), Energijaa.

Predictors: (Constant), Energija, Vestnostb.

Predictors: (Constant), Energija, Vestnost, Cust. stabilnostc.

Predictors: (Constant), Energija, Vestnost, Cust. stabilnost, Sprejemljivostd.

Coefficientsa

14,732 1,438 10,242 ,000

,641 ,104 ,307 6,167 ,000 ,307 ,307 ,307

8,503 1,934 4,397 ,000

,569 ,102 ,273 5,567 ,000 ,307 ,280 ,270

,478 ,103 ,229 4,666 ,000 ,270 ,238 ,226

5,731 2,078 2,757 ,006

,460 ,106 ,220 4,337 ,000 ,307 ,222 ,207

,430 ,102 ,205 4,208 ,000 ,270 ,216 ,201

,393 ,117 ,171 3,355 ,001 ,281 ,173 ,160

2,685 2,521 1,065 ,288

,440 ,106 ,211 4,154 ,000 ,307 ,213 ,198

,348 ,109 ,166 3,197 ,002 ,270 ,166 ,152

,380 ,117 ,166 3,256 ,001 ,281 ,169 ,155

,326 ,154 ,109 2,113 ,035 ,230 ,110 ,100

(Constant)

Energija

(Constant)

Energija

Vestnost

(Constant)

Energija

Vestnost

Cust. stabilnost

(Constant)

Energija

Vestnost

Cust. stabilnost

Sprejemljivost

Model1

2

3

4

B Std. Error


Beta



Correlations

Dependent Variable: Blagostanjea.


Metoda po korakih: kriterij PA

Model Summary

,504a ,254 ,252 3,76731 ,254 124,072 1 365 ,000

,597b ,356 ,352 3,50459 ,102 57,775 1 364 ,000

,618c ,382 ,377 3,43862 ,026 15,101 1 363 ,000

Model1

2

3




Change Statistics

Predictors: (Constant), Odprtosta.

Predictors: (Constant), Odprtost, Energijab.

Predictors: (Constant), Odprtost, Energija, Vestnostc.

Coefficientsa

21,295 1,232 17,279 ,000

,941 ,084 ,504 11,139 ,000 ,504 ,504 ,504

17,007 1,278 13,310 ,000

,681 ,086 ,365 7,949 ,000 ,504 ,385 ,334

,591 ,078 ,349 7,601 ,000 ,494 ,370 ,320

13,386 1,562 8,569 ,000

,685 ,084 ,367 8,145 ,000 ,504 ,393 ,336

,548 ,077 ,323 7,114 ,000 ,494 ,350 ,294

,275 ,071 ,162 3,886 ,000 ,229 ,200 ,160

(Constant)

Odprtost

(Constant)

Odprtost

Energija

(Constant)

Odprtost

Energija

Vestnost

Model1

2

3

B Std. Error


Beta



Correlations

Dependent Variable: Poz. efekta.


Metoda po korakih: kriterij NA Pomemben prediktor samo N

Model Summary

,610a ,372 ,371 5,14871 ,372 216,630 1 365 ,000Model1




Change Statistics

Predictors: (Constant), Cust. stabilnosta.

Coefficientsa

49,100 1,487 33,030 ,000

-1,691 ,115 -,610 -14,718 ,000 -,610 -,610 -,610

(Constant)

Cust. stabilnost

Model1

B Std. Error


Beta



Correlations

Dependent Variable: Neg. efekta.

Zaključki

Osebnostne dimenzije napovedujejo psihično blagostanje

Najbolj predicirajo E, N in C, najmanj O Najbolj PA (0,622) in NA (0,618) in

zadovoljstvo z življenjem (0,427) Napovedne vrednosti v naši študiji so

nekoliko višje (bolj izenačeni pogoji in metode kot v primeru metaanaliz; “ena dobra študija je boljša kot povprečje metaanalize”)

Judge, Heller & Mount, 2002 Problem Kakšna je prediktivna

vrednost petih velikih faktorjev osebnosti v odnosu do zadovoljstva z delom

Metode Metaanaliza: 163 neodvisnih

vzorcev, 334 korelacij Instrumenti

Mere B5 (neposr., posr.) Mere zadovoljstva z delom


ZADOVOLJSTVOZ DELOM

Rezultati

Rezultati metaanalize

Regresijske vrednosti

Multiple korelacije substancialne (0,41; 0,43)

Odprtost ni pomemben prediktor


Moderatorji odnosa:

Metoda merjenja zadovoljstva z delom

Neposrednost merjenja B5

Dizajn Prerezni Longitudinalni


Primerjava prediktivnosti B5 pri zadovoljstvu z delom (beli stolpci) s prediktivnostjo B5 pri zadovoljstvu z življenjem (črni stolpci).

Literatura

Glej v: Judge, T. A., Heller, D. & Mount, M. K. (2002).

Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 3, 530-541.

Judge, T. A. & Ilies, R. (2002). Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 4, 797-807.

Judge, Ilies (2002)

Problem Kako dobri prediktorji so

veliki faktorji osebnosti Kako se obnesejo kot

napovedovalci motivacije za delo(vanje) (performance motivation) 3 modeli (Samo)postavljanje ciljev Pričakovanje (uspeha) Samoučinkovitost

Metode: metaanaliza (65 študij, 150 korelacij)

Instrumenti študije, ki merijo odnos

med osebnostnimi dimenzijami (B5) in merami motivacije za opravljanje nalog (v kontekstu model samopostavljanja ciljev, pričakovanja in samoučinkovitosti)


MOTIVACIJAZA DELOVANJE

Rezultati Multipla korelacija: 0,63; 0,36; 0,49; povprečje 0,49 B5 nedvomno so pomembni prediktorji C in N pri vseh, E in O pri dveh, A pri enem vidiku motivacije za delo

Literatura Ashton, M. C. (1998). Personality and job performance: The importance of narrow traits. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 19, 289-303. Ashton, M. C., Jackson, D. N., Helmes, E.,& Paunonen, S. V. (1998). Joint factor analysis of the Personality Research Form and the Jackson Personality Inventory: Comparisons with the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, 243-250. Ashton, M. C., Jackson, D. N., Paunonen, S. V., Helmes, E.,& Rothstein, M. G. (1995). The criterion validity of broad factor scales versus specific trait scales. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 432-442. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K.,& Son, C. (2000). Honesty as the sixth factor of personality: Correlations with Machiavellianism, primary psychopathy, and social adroitness. European Journal of Personality, 14, 359-368. Costa, P. T. Jr.,& McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. (Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.) Fishbein, M.,& Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes towards objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychological Review, 81, 59-74. Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. (In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, the Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.) Jackson, D. N. (1976). Jackson Personality Inventory manual. (Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists Press.) Jackson, D. N. (1984). Personality Research Form manual. (Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists Press.) Jackson, D. N. (1990). Multidimensional Aptitude Battery manual. (Port Huron, MI: Sigma Assessment Systems.) Jackson, D. N., Paunonen, S. V., Fraboni, M.,& Goffin, R. G. (1996). A five-factor versus a six-factor model of personality structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 33-45. Jang, K. L., McCrae, R. R., Angleitner, A., Riemann, R.,& Livesley, W. J. (1998). Heritability of facet-level traits in a cross-cultural twin sample: Support for a hierarchical model of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1556-1565. McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr., del Pilar, G. H., Rolland, J.-P.,& Parker, W. D. (1998). Cross-cultural assessment of the Five-Factor Model: The revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 171-188.

Literatura (nadaljevanje) McCrae, R. R.,& John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications.

Journal of Personality, 60, 175-215. Mershon, B.,& Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Number of factors in the personality sphere: Does increase in factors increase the predictability of real-life criteria? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 675-680. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. (New York: McGraw-Hill.) Ones, D. S.,& Viswesvaran, C. (1996). Bandwidth-fidelity dilemma in personality measurement for personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 609-626. Paunonen, S. V. (1998). Hierarchical organization of personality and prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 538-556. Paunonen, S. V.,& Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five predictors of academic achievement. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 78-90. Paunonen, S. V.,& Jackson, D. N. (1996). The Jackson Personality Inventory and the Five-Factor Model of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 42-59. Paunonen, S. V.,& Jackson, D. N. (2000). What is beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of Personality, 68, 821-835. Paunonen, S. V., Jackson, D. N., Trzebinski, J.,& Forsterling, F. (1992). Personality structure across cultures: A multimethod evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 447-456. Paunonen, S. V., Keinonen, M., Trzebinski, J., Forsterling, F., Grishenko-Rose, N., Kouznetsova, L.,& Chan, D. W. (1996). The structure of personality in six cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 339-353. Paunonen, S. V., Rothstein, M. G.,& Jackson, D. N. (1999). Narrow reasoning about the use of broad personality measures in personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 389-405. Rothstein, M. G., Paunonen, S. V., Rush, J. C.,& King, G. A. (1994). Personality and cognitive ability predictors of performance in graduate business school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 516-530. Saucier, G.,& Goldberg, L. R. (1998). What is beyond the Big Five? Journal of Personality, 66, 495-524.

Literatura Allik, J.,& Realo, A. (1997). Intelligence, academic abilities, and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 809-814.

Ashton, M. C. (1998). Personality and job performance: The importance of narrow traits. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 289-303. Ashton, M. C., Jackson, D. N., Paunonen, S. V., Helmes, E.,& Rothstein, M. G. (1995). The criterion validity of broad factor scales versus specific trait scales. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 432-442. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K.,& Son, C. (2000). Honesty as the sixth factor of personality: Correlations with Machiavellianism, primary psychopathy, and social adroitness. European Journal of Personality, 14, 359-368. Barrick, M. R.,& Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta- analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.) Costa, P. T. Jr.,& McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five- Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. (Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.) De Raad, B.,& Perugini, M. (2002). Big Five assessment. (Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber.) Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the Five- Factor Model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440. Funder, D. C. (2001). Personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 197-221. Goff, M.,& Ackerman, P. L. (1992). Personality- intelligence relations: Assessment of typical intellectual engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 537-552. Hough, L. M. (1992). The “Big Five” personality variables- construct confusion: Description versus prediction. Human Performance, 5, 139-155. Jackson, D. N. (1984). Personality Research Form manual. (Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists Press.) Lord, F. M.,& Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. (Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.) McCrae, R. R.,& John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175-215. Mershon, B.,& Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Number of factors in the personality sphere: Does increase in factors increase predictability of real-life criteria? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 675-680. Paunonen, S. V. (1993, August). Sense, nonsense, and the Big Five factors of personality. (Paper presented at the 101st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.) Paunonen, S. V. (1998). Hierarchical organization of personality and prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 538-556. Paunonen, S. V. (2000). Construct validity and the search for cross- situational consistencies in personality. (In R. D. Goffin & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (pp. 123–140). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.)

Literatura (nadaljevanje) Paunonen, S. V.,& Ashton, M. C. (1998). The structured assessment of personality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural

Psychology, 29, 150-170. Paunonen, S. V.,& Ashton, M. C. (2001a). Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 524-539. Paunonen, S. V.,& Ashton, M. C. (2001b). Big Five predictors of academic achievement. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 78-90. Paunonen, S. V.,& Ashton, M. C. (2002). The nonverbal assessment of personality: The NPQ and the FF-NPQ. (In B. De Raad & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five assessment (pp. 171–194). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber.) Paunonen, S. V., Ashton, M. C.,& Jackson, D. N. (2001). Nonverbal assessment of the Big Five personality factors. European Journal of Personality, 15, 3-18. Paunonen, S. V.,& Jackson, D. N. (1979). Nonverbal trait inference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1645-1659. Paunonen, S. V.,& Jackson, D. N. (1985). Idiographic measurement strategies for personality and prediction: Some unredeemed promissory notes. Psychological Review, 92, 486-511. Paunonen, S. V.,& Jackson, D. N. (2000). What is beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of Personality, 68, 821-835. Paunonen, S. V., Jackson, D. N.,& Keinonen, M. (1990). The structured nonverbal assessment of personality. Journal of Personality, 58, 481-502. Paunonen, S. V., Jackson, D. N., Trzebinski, J.,& Forsterling, F. (1992). Personality structure across cultures: A multimethod evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 447-456. Paunonen, S. V., Keinonen, M., Trzebinski, J., Forsterling, F., Grishenko-Roze, N., Kouznetsova, L.,& Chan, D. W. (1996). The structure of personality in six cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 339-353. Paunonen, S. V.,& Nicol, A. A. M. (2001). The personality hierarchy and the prediction of work behaviors. (In R. Hogan & B. W. Roberts (Eds.), Personality psychology in the workplace (pp. 161–191). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.) Paunonen, S. V., Rothstein, M. G.,& Jackson, D. N. (1999). Narrow reasoning about the use of broad personality measures in personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 389-405. Paunonen, S. V., Zeidner, M., Engvik, H., Oosterveld, P.,& Maliphant, R. (2000). The nonverbal assessment of personality in five cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 220-239. Rothstein, M. G., Paunonen, S. V., Rush, J. C.,& King, G. A. (1994). Personality and cognitive ability predictors of performance in graduate business school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 516-530. Saucier, G.,& Goldberg, L. R. (1998). What is beyond the Big Five? Journal of Personality, 66, 495-524. Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N.,& Rothstein, M. G. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.

Documents

POGLAVJA IZ KOGNITIVNE PSIHOLOGIJE IN PSIHOLOGIJE OSEBNOSTI