Front | Back |
How can such characteristics be organized into a coherent typology?
|
1
|
List of characteristics that must be organized
|
Typology
|
How do the traits relate to one another or "hang together"
|
1
|
How many basic trait are there?
|
1
|
Are traits single entities or are they composed of different subtraits or facets?
|
1
|
Are traits more than adjectives?
|
1
|
Internal casual properties that actively EXPLAIN behavior
|
Traits
|
Do traits equal the behaviors they are evoked to explain?
|
No
|
Descriptive summaries that do not have to be internal or casually related to behaviors
|
Traits
|
Are what make causal theories possible but are not causes themselves
|
Trait descriptions
|
They serve as useful shorthand description of phenomena (eg. categories of actions) (ie. its easier and helpful)
|
Trait descriptions
|
Why evoke the idea of a "trait"
|
- Useful means of communication (rather
like diagnostic labels)- Can have predictive value
- Can
provide impetus for theories of human nature/behavior- categorization
as an intrinsic need?
|
What is the downside of "traits"
|
•Much
behavior is context or situation specific•Difficulties
with polarity vs. separate traits, and measuring complex traits such as
affective instability •Cross-cultural
relevance of major trait groupings •Labels
vs. explanations
|
What 3 approaches can you use to identify traits
|
1. lexical approach 2. statistical approach 3. theoretical approach
|
- all important traits are "encoded" in natural language - a good starting point to understanding people
|
Lexical approach
|