No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Definitional ambiguities in character strengths: A comparative analysis with personality and other psychobiological attributes
... Karakter adalah "kombinasi dari ketekunan dan semangat untuk tujuan jangka panjang." Menurutnya, karakter mencakup ketahanan, tekad, dan kemampuan untuk tetap fokus pada tujuan meskipun menghadapi rintangan (Ruch at al., 2024). Karakter juga terbentuk melalui kebiasaan seharihari. ...
Kepemimpinan malaqbiq merupakan konsep kepemimpinan yang berlandaskan pada nilai-nilai keIslaman yang berisikan bijaksana, adil dan bertanggung jawab, khususnya dalam konteks budaya lokal masyarakat Mandar, Sulawesi Barat. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendeskripsikan kepemimpinan malaqbiq dalam membentuk dan mempengaruhi karakter santri dalam kehidupan sehari-hari. Penelitian mengenai interaksi simbolik di Pondok Pesantren Salafiyah Parappe menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan teknik pengumpulan data yaitu observasi, wawancara, dan studi dokumentasi mendalam terhadap pimpinan yayasan, ustaz dan santri di Pondok Pesantren Salafiyah Parappe. Teknik analisis data yang digunakan meliputi data condensation, data display, dan conclusion drawing and verification Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kepemimpinan malaqbiq berperan penting dalam menanamkan kedisiplinan, kemandirian, dan sikap tanggung jawab pada santri. Interaksi simbolik yang terjadi antara pimpinan pesantren dan santri melalui keteladanan serta komunikasi verbal dan non-verbal menjadi media yang efektif dalam membentuk karakter yang berbudi pekerti luhur dan berlandaskan moralitas yang tinggi. Penelitian ini memperkaya pemahaman tentang pentingnya pendekatan budaya lokal dalam sistem pendidikan karakter di lembaga pendidikan Islam.
... This study was established by two relatively recent and related literature reviews on the character strengths (CS) model of personality traits in the workplace (Freidlin & Littman-Ovadia, 2020;Miglianico et al., 2020). According to Stahlmann et al. (2024), CS is the term used to describe the individual differences that lead to personal fulfilment, happiness, and satisfaction and are reflected in particular emotions, thoughts, and behaviours. It also refers to the ability to elevate people who observe these differences and inspire admiration rather than caution. ...
Among several outcomes of establishing positive psychology is the character strengths construct, and the emerging literature offers
much support for its usefulness in the workplace. This study
investigated the association between prosocial behaviour at work (PSBW) and person-organisation fit (POF), as well as the impact of character strengths (CS) and POF on PSBW. The study was cross-sectional and quantitative, using self-report measures. Two hundred forty-six employees in public and private organisations provided the data that was gathered. With an average age of 34.95 (SD =10.10), the participants were 51.2% men and 63.4% married. The regression analysis adopted for hypothesis testing showed that CS
and POF are significant predictors of PSBW and that the interaction
of CS and POF does not occur in PSBW. It was concluded that while
CS and POF can improve PSWB, the character traits of CS do not
need a match between the person and the organisation to impact
PSBW positively. Therefore, HRM practitioners should promote CS
and POF to improve PSBW, which has much potential for effective
organisational functioning. The relationship between prosocial
behaviour and the emerging CS personality model in conjunction with POF was first empirically investigated in this study.
... A notable exception is a recent exploratory study by Stahlmann et al. (2024), who sought ratings from a group of laypersons regarding all criteria discussed in the literature in terms of their applicability to character strengths. They found that one or two criteria suffice to define character strengths with approximately 74% accuracy. ...
While both practitioners and the public regard character strengths positively, some psychologists and philosophers harbor skepticism. In this analytical commentary on current research and literature, we trace such skepticism to a premature focus on positive outcomes, which eclipsed the theoretical groundwork outlined in the 2004 handbook. We propose solutions to ten key issues which, in our estimation, not only sustain this skepticism but also hinder meaningful advancement in the field of character strengths research: (1) Criteria evaluation, (2) Virtue functions, (3) Situational affordances, (4) Content validity, (5) Criterion validity, (6) Fulfillment conceptualization, (7) Adverse outcome modeling (8) Moral excellency, (9) Strengths conservatism, and (10) Methodological mainstream thinking. We contend that resolving these issues is necessary to uphold the standing of character strengths and positive psychology among its counterparts, and to establish a potent foundation for effective character development.
Juvenile delinquency is a crucial issue faced by many schools, including vocational high schools in Cilegon City. This study aims to explore the role of interpersonal intelligence in mediating the influence of character strength and emotional intelligence on juvenile delinquency. Using a quantitative survey method, data were collected from 250 vocational high school students in Cilegon City through a validated questionnaire and analyzed using the SEM-PLS approach. The results showed that character strength has a negative and significant effect on juvenile delinquency with a coefficient value of -0.321, indicating that increasing character strength can significantly reduce the level of juvenile delinquency. In addition, emotional intelligence also showed a negative and significant effect on juvenile delinquency. This confirms that increasing emotional intelligence also contributes to reducing juvenile delinquency. Interpersonal intelligence itself has a negative and significant effect on juvenile delinquency with a coefficient value of -0.161, indicating that better interpersonal skills can reduce the tendency of delinquent behavior. Furthermore, character strength and emotional intelligence were found to have a positive and significant influence on interpersonal intelligence, with coefficient values of 0.370 and 0.484, respectively. Another important finding is the significant negative indirect effect of character strength and emotional intelligence on juvenile delinquency through interpersonal intelligence. This indicates that increasing character strength and emotional intelligence can reduce juvenile delinquency by increasing their interpersonal intelligence. This study concludes that strengthening students' character and emotional intelligence, as well as increasing interpersonal intelligence, are important strategies in reducing juvenile delinquency.
Character strengths were introduced into the positive psychology literature twenty years ago. The present bibliometric analysis quantitatively summarizes the research conducted in the field so far in terms of impact and themes analyzed. We conduct performance analysis to examine the total number of publications on character strengths, their bibliometric indices, the main journals contributing to the field, and the countries involved in such knowledge accumulation and how this has changed over time. We furthermore conduct science mapping analysis using the keywords of the papers. Specifically, we describe the time-varying occurrence of specific keywords and use network and thematic mapping analyses to determine the dynamic intercorrelations among the emerging research topics. Our results show the significant and growing contribution of character strengths to the positive psychology literature and beyond, but also the need for cross-fertilization with neighboring fields. We also highlight an increasing contribution from non-WEIRD countries in recent years, which calls for in-depth cross-cultural research. Topics such as measurement and well-being appear to be well-established and integrated, while there’s an emerging interest in mental health research. Overall, the present analysis illuminates on the past, present, and upcoming trends in the field.
Character strengths were introduced in the positive psychology literature twenty years ago. The present bibliometric analysis quantitatively summarizes the research conducted so far in the field in terms of impact and themes analyzed. We report on the performance of character strengths publications, the main contributors to the field, and how this has changed over the two decades (2004-2013 and 2014-2023). We furthermore conduct science mapping analysis to lay out the dynamic intercorrelations among research topics and their changes from the first (up to 2016) to the second (2017 onward) wave in positive psychology. Our results show the significant and growing contribution of character strengths to the literature, and a predominance of contributions from WEIRD countries. Topics such as measurement and well-being appear to be well-established and integrated, while there’s an emerging interest in mental health. Overall, the present analysis illuminates on the past, present, and upcoming trends in the field.
While both practitioners and the public regard character strengths positively, some psychologists and philosophers harbor skepticism. In this analytical commentary on current research and literature, we trace such skepticism to a premature focus on positive outcomes, which eclipsed the theoretical groundwork outlined in the 2004 handbook. We propose solutions to ten key issues which, in our estimation, not only sustain this skepticism but also hinder meaningful advancement in the field of character strengths research: (1) Criteria evaluation, (2) Virtue functions, (3) Situational affordances, (4) Content validity, (5) Criterion validity, (6) Fulfillment conceptualization, (7) Adverse outcome modeling (8) Moral excellency, (9) Strengths conservatism, and (10) Methodological mainstream thinking. We contend that resolving these issues is necessary to uphold the standing of character strengths and positive psychology among its counterparts, and to establish a potent foundation for effective character development.
Three determinants of the factor structures of personality traits are investigated. The 1st, selection of variables, was controlled by using 57 bipolar scales, selected to be representative of common trait terms. In analyses of 7 data sets, variants of the “Big Five” factors were always found. Factor similarities were very strong for the 3 largest factors, which were transformed into general evaluation and 2 descriptive dimensions. As a 2nd determinant, judgments about real people were compared with judgments about the conceptual relations among traits. Factor structures based on the 2 types of judgments are similar, but those based on conceptual judgments tend to be simpler. The 3rd determinant involved the degree of restriction of the sample to evaluatively homogeneous targets. Restriction of range reduced the size of all factors, especially Factor II. Findings from previous studies are integrated within this framework.
Allport’s distinction of personality devaluated (personality) and personality evaluated (character) raised the question of whether the character is redundant with personality, which still remains open today. The present study hence compares the Five-Factor Model of personality and the VIA-classification (Values in Action) of character strengths across two methods (self- and peer-reports) and two levels of abstraction (domains/factors and scales/facets). A sample of 152 participants and 152 peer-raters completed the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised and the VIA Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS). Personality and character assessed with these inventories were found to strongly overlap, yet the different operationalizations were rarely redundant (except for three personality facets). Multitrait-multimethod analyses mostly supported the convergent and discriminant validity of personality and character. Interpersonal strengths (e.g., teamwork) and abstract character factors lacked discriminant validity to personality facets. The present investigation contributes to a better understanding of the interplay between personality and character and provides an impetus for future research on the “virtue gap” between devaluated and evaluated personality traits.
Character strengths interventions constitute a diverse and highly promising subset of strategies and programs within the larger field of positive education. The diversity in this developing subgroup can be distinguished along a number of variables; however, central to effective and sustained intervention is the commitment to a systems approach to implementation. Through the practiced-based evidence of exemplars around the world, an emerging model for a systems approach to character strengths program implementation is being reified. Character strengths implementations grounded in systems change express a unique opportunity in that character strengths are simultaneously the content of the intervention and an effective process element for a systems approach to change.
In a recent work, we introduced a theoretical model for fulfillment in life that covers cognitive and affective components and distinguishes different time frames. The present study evaluates this model and describes the construction of the Fulfilled Life Scale (FLS) to assess fulfillment regarding the whole lived life retrospectively. We investigated the scale in two samples (Sample 1: N = 282 adults aged 50–93 years; Sample 2: N = 406 adults aged 40–85 years). The model of the cognitive component combines three sources of fulfillment (self, life, impact/legacy) with three criteria (wholeness, fit, value), yielding nine facets. Employing hierarchical factor analysis, we inspected all solutions between one and nine. We identified three optimal factors, which we labeled unfolded self and life, the worthwhile life, and positive impact and legacy. Next, we selected marker items and replicated the factor structure in Sample 2. The three scales were positively intercorrelated and showed good internal consistency in both samples. For the affective component, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses established a one-factor structure in both samples, and high internal consistency was obtained. Across a range of related constructs, we demonstrated construct and criterion validity. Notably, cognitive and affective fulfillment incrementally predicted a global rating of a fulfilled life and mental well-being, even after controlling for subjective and eudaimonic well-being. Overall, the study proves that the FLS is necessary to capture people’s experience of a fulfilled life, which could not be assessed sufficiently with previous well-being measures. Both cognitive and affective fulfillment were able to predict additional variance in mental well-being. Moreover, the study reveals psychometric support for the FLS and presents the first evidence on its validity. Lastly, applications in research and practice are discussed, especially in the context of living and aging well in the second half of life.
This brief overview focuses on the relations between character strengths and subjective well-being in children and adolescents. The VIA classification of good character encompasses 24 character strengths, positive personality traits that contribute to a good life, which includes but is not limited to satisfaction, happiness, and success. Subjective well-being is a multi-dimensional construct that can be differentiated into positive and negative affect as well as global and domain-specific satisfaction. Cross-national results show that specific character strengths are positively related to positive affect, global life satisfaction, and domain-specific satisfaction. Furthermore, specific character strengths are negatively related to negative affect. Effect sizes are typically small to medium in magnitude. It is concluded that character strengths are clearly relevant correlates of young people's subjective well-being. Because most-albeit not all-of the results are based on cross-sectional data, more longitudinal studies are needed to further validate these important findings. Nevertheless, the reported findings suggest that it could be very helpful for health-related and other youth-related professionals to be aware of a child or adolescent's character strengths in order to better interpret their level of subjective well-being.
A main challenge of educational organizations is how to foster students’ capacity to fulfill their potential. The present paper, based on educational, psychological, and organizational research, asserts that a discussion of character strengths and their development is highly relevant to this challenge. It provides an integrative overview of the relevance of character strengths to twenty-first-century schools and discusses different mechanisms that can help foster them. Character strengths—widely valued positive traits, theorized to be the basis for optimal functioning and well-being—may derive from inner tendencies, but are expected to have broad potential for development, depending on individuals’ experiences and environments. Furthermore, character strengths are closely related to twenty-first-century competencies – cognitive, interpersonal and intrapersonal competencies, identified by the American National Research Council as required for thriving in contemporary life and work, and thus considered to be desirable educational outcomes. The paper first delineates the connections between twenty-first-century competencies and character strengths, demonstrating the importance of promoting them in education. Then, mechanisms for fostering development of character strengths in schools are discussed, based on a review of the literature, including mechanisms that affect students (e.g., curriculum, relationships), teachers (e.g., training, supervisors), and schools (e.g., evaluation processes, resource allocation), while considering the interplay between these different levels. The concluding part of the paper outlines an integrative model of an optimal school system, expected to foster character strengths’ use and development and discuss its applications for research and practice.
This study examines Peterson and Seligman’s (2004, p. 19) claim that every VIA character strength “(…) is morally valued in its own right, even in the absence of obvious beneficial outcomes”. Although this criterion assumes a pivotal role in distinguishing character from personality, no previous study has investigated its validity. Based on what Peterson and Seligman (2004) have provided us with, we describe how we built our study around indirectly testing every strength’s assumed moral evaluation, in which inclinations toward deontology (e.g., “torture is wrong regardless of tangible positive outcomes”) and consequentialism (e.g., “torture can be good if it accounts for more positive than negative outcomes”) may play a critical role. We used Peterson and Seligman’s (2004) handbook to construct four ultra-short stories for every strength: the stories depict various agents engaging in strength-related behavior (e.g., a young student courageously stepping up against school bullies). We prompted participants to rate these and twelve anchor stories multiple times as to whether the agents acted morally correct: In the first block, the actions’ consequences were undetermined while in the second block, the actions had either positive, negative, or mixed consequences, which we used to compute proxies of participants’ inclinations toward deontology and consequentialism. The ratings of N = 230 German-speaking laypersons suggest that the criterion stands: participants perceived every strength as positively morally valued when consequences were undetermined, and positive consequences did not account for or increase this effect. However, moral value seems to come in degrees, and some strengths were valued more strongly than others (top five: judgment, honesty, kindness, fairness, and hope). Furthermore, specific character strengths (measured by self-report) were connected with more positive evaluations (e.g., endorsing spirituality was connected with rating spirituality as more positively valued). Both deontology and consequentialism were connected with more positive evaluations, and we suggest two hypotheses to explain how such inclinations can lead to perceiving character strengths as positively valued. Our findings highlight the importance of scrutinizing the criteria for character strengths, and our experimental paradigm can offer a template to further investigate character strengths’ moral evaluation and other fundamental assumptions in upcoming studies.
Due to Allport's (1927) claim that character is merely personality evaluated (and personality is character devalued) and personality alone will do, "character" had largely been neglected when exploring individual differences. This however changed with the emergence of positive psychology, which brought a renaissance of the concept of character on personality psychology. Early in the search for the roots of a good life, character was rediscovered as key to investigating and fostering subjective, objective and societal fulfillment. In 2004, these considerations were recognized in the VIA classification, which introduced 24 character strengths and six virtues. The fundament of the classification are criteria that define character strengths by means of decisive and verifiable benchmarks. In this narrative review, we delineate the progression of the list of criteria for character strengths (from seven to 12). Furthermore, we discuss the extent to which the literature shows that the 24 strengths indeed satisfy these criteria. It is evident that many studies were published, for example, to demonstrate that character strengths predict various indicators of well-being. However, there is surprisingly little research into this very foundation of the classification, for example, whether all character strengths are inherently morally valued and whether character strengths could be selectively missing in a person altogether. We argue that more research should be directed at the study of these criteria as they form the backbone of what character strengths are and may be considered the nucleus of an emerging theory of character.
This study reports the most comprehensive assessment to date of the relations that the domains and facets of Big Five and HEXACO personality have with self-reported subjective well-being (SWB: life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect) and psychological well-being (PWB: positive relations, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, self-acceptance, and personal growth). It presents a meta-analysis (n = 334,567, k = 462) of the correlations of Big Five and HEXACO personality domains with the dimensions of SWB and PWB. It provides the first meta-analysis of personality and well-being to examine (a) HEXACO personality, (b) PWB dimensions, and (c) a broad range of established Big Five measures. It also provides the first robust synthesis of facet-level correlations and incremental prediction by facets over domains in relation to SWB and PWB using 4 large data sets comprising data from prominent, long-form hierarchical personality frameworks: NEO PI-R (n = 1,673), IPIP-NEO (n = 903), HEXACO PI-R (n = 465), and Big Five Aspect Scales (n = 706). Meta-analytic results highlighted the importance of Big Five neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness. The pattern of correlations between Big Five personality and SWB was similar across personality measures (e.g., BFI, NEO, IPIP, BFAS, Adjectives). In the HEXACO model, extraversion was the strongest well-being correlate. Facet-level analyses provided a richer description of the relationship between personality and well-being, and clarified differences between the two trait frameworks. Prediction by facets was typically around 20% better than domains, and this incremental prediction was larger for some well-being dimensions than others. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Decades of research document individual differences in prosocial behavior using controlled experiments that model social interactions in situations of interdependence. However, theoretical and empirical integration of the vast literature on the predictive validity of personality traits to account for these individual differences is missing. Here, we present a theoretical framework that identifies four broad situational affordances across interdependent situations (i.e., exploitation, reciprocity, temporal conflict, and dependence under uncertainty) and more specific sub-affordances within certain types of interdependent situations (e.g., possibility to increase equality in outcomes) that can determine when, which, and how personality traits should be expressed in prosocial behavior. To test this framework, we meta-analyzed 770 studies reporting on 3,523 effects of 8 broad and 43 narrow personality traits on prosocial behavior in interdependent situations modelled in six commonly studied economic games (Dictator Game, Ultimatum Game, Trust Game, Prisoner’s Dilemma, Public Goods Game, and Commons Dilemma). Overall, meta-analytic correlations ranged between -.18 ≤ r ≤ .26 and most traits yielding a significant relation to prosocial behavior had conceptual links to the affordances provided in interdependent situations, most prominently the possibility for exploitation. Moreover, for several traits, correlations within games followed the predicted pattern derived from a theoretical analysis of affordances. On the level of traits, we found that narrow and broad traits alike can account for prosocial behavior, informing the bandwidth-fidelity problem. In sum, the meta-analysis provides a theoretical foundation that can guide future research on prosocial behavior and advance our understanding of individual differences in human prosociality.
The objective of the present article is to review the literature on strengths use and development in the workplace. This review (1) presents a summary of the outcomes of strengths use in organizations, and (2) proposes a general intervention model facilitating strengths development in the workplace. A systematic review was used to summarize the outcomes of studies on strengths use at work, whereas a narrative review was employed to examine the main strengths development interventions available, and to propose an integrative model. Results indicate that strengths use is associated with job satisfaction, work engagement, well-being, and work performance. Furthermore, scholars and professionals use similar intervention strategies that can be summarized in a five-step integrative model to promote strengths development in organizations. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications, as well as avenues for future research.
What basic personality traits characterize the psychologically healthy individual? The purpose of this article was to address this question by generating an expert-consensus model of the healthy person in the context of the 30 facets (and 5 domains) of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992) system of traits. In a first set of studies, we found that the healthy personality can be described, with a high level of agreement, in terms of the 30 facets of the NEO-PI-R. High levels of openness to feelings, positive emotions, and straightforwardness, together with low levels on facets of neuroticism, were particularly indicative of healthy personality functioning. The expert-generated healthy personality profile was negatively correlated with profiles of pathological personality functioning and positively correlated with normative personality functioning. In a second set of studies, we matched the NEO-PI-R profiles of over 3,000 individuals from 7 different samples with the expert-generated healthy prototype to yield a healthy personality index. This index was characterized by good retest reliability and cross-rater agreement, high rank-order stability, and substantial heritability. Individuals with high scores on the healthy personality index were psychologically well-adjusted, had high self-esteem, good self-regulatory skills, an optimistic outlook on the world, and a clear and stable self-view. These individuals were low in aggression and meanness, unlikely to exploit others, and were relatively immune to stress and self-sufficient. We discuss the results in the light of their implications for both research and theory on healthy personality functioning.
The random forest (RF) algorithm has several hyperparameters that have to be set by the user, for example, the number of observations drawn randomly for each tree and whether they are drawn with or without replacement, the number of variables drawn randomly for each split, the splitting rule, the minimum number of samples that a node must contain, and the number of trees. In this paper, we first provide a literature review on the parameters' influence on the prediction performance and on variable importance measures. It is well known that in most cases RF works reasonably well with the default values of the hyperparameters specified in software packages. Nevertheless, tuning the hyperparameters can improve the performance of RF. In the second part of this paper, after a presenting brief overview of tuning strategies, we demonstrate the application of one of the most established tuning strategies, model‐based optimization (MBO). To make it easier to use, we provide the tuneRanger R package that tunes RF with MBO automatically. In a benchmark study on several datasets, we compare the prediction performance and runtime of tuneRanger with other tuning implementations in R and RF with default hyperparameters.
This article is categorized under:
• Algorithmic Development > Biological Data Mining
• Algorithmic Development > Statistics
• Algorithmic Development > Hierarchies and Trees
• Technologies > Machine Learning
Two studies were conducted to investigate redundancy between the character strengths found in the VIA model of character and familiar personality facets. Study 1 used a community sample (N = 606) that completed a measure of character strengths, four personality inventories, and 17 criterion measures. The second study used Mechanical Turk workers (N = 498) who completed measures of the HEXACO and VIA models and 111 criterion variables. Analyses were conducted using both observed scores and true score estimates, evaluating both predictive and conceptual overlap. Eight of 24 VIA scales proved to be largely redundant with one HEXACO personality facet, but only one VIA scale (Appreciation of Beauty) was largely redundant with Five Factor facets. All strength scales except Spirituality overlapped substantially with at least one personality facet. The results suggest the VIA Classification variables are strongly related to commonly measured personality facets, but the two models are not redundant.
The study of individual differences in positive characteristics has mainly focused on moral traits. The objectives of this research were to study individual differences in positive characteristics from the point of view of the layperson, including non-moral individual characteristics, and to generate a replicable model of positive factors. Three studies based on a lexical approach were conducted. The first study generated a corpus of words which resulted in a refined list of socially shared positive characteristics. The second study produced a five-factor model of positive characteristics: erudition, peace, cheerfulness, honesty, and tenacity. The third study confirmed the model with a different sample. The five-positive-factor model not only showed positive associations with emotional, psychological and social well-being, but it also accounted for the variance beyond that accounted for by the Big Five factors in predicting these well-being dimensions. In addition, the presence of convergent and divergent validity of the five positive factors is shown with relation to the Values-in-Action (VIA) classification of character strengths proposed by Peterson and Seligman (2004).
Research has shown that character strengths are positively linked with well-being in general. However, there has not been a fine-grained analysis up to date. This study examines the individual relational aspects between the 24 character strengths, subjective well-being (SWB), and different aspects of psychological well-being (PWB) at two times of measurement (N=117). Results showed that overall the “good character” was significantly stronger related with PWB than with SWB. The character strength “hope” was at least moderately correlated with the PWB aspects meaning, optimism and autonomy, and “zest” with the PWB aspects relationships and engagement. “Persistence” showed the highest correlation with the PWB aspect mastery. Out of the 24 character strengths, the happiness-related strengths (hope, zest, gratitude, curiosity, and love) were more likely to correlate with PWB and SWB than any other character strength. This study offers a more fine-grained and thorough understanding of specific relational aspects between the 24 character strengths and a broad range of well-being aspects. Future studies should take up a detailed strategy when exploring relationships between character strengths and well-being.
Around the year 2000, a new trend emerged within psychology. This new trend was the positive psychology paradigm, and since its birth, it has grown a lot as a new psychology paradigm (Weiten, 2007). Embedded within the positive psychology paradigm one will find a lot of research on different character strengths. In 2004, a character strength classification system was developed. The result was the book ‘Character Strengths and Virtues‘. This book classifies 24 specific character strengths sorted under six virtues (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). The six virtues are respectively wisdom and knowledge, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence. Under each virtue, one will find the character strengths that relates to the specific virtue. For instance, the virtue courage entails emotional strengths that involve the exercise of will to accomplish goals in the face of opposition, external or internal. Included in this virtue are the character strengths bravery [valor], persistence [perseverance, industriousness], integrity [authenticity, honesty] and vitality [zest, enthusiasm, vigor, energy]. Courage is a fundamental aspect for every military officer when it comes to leading others in dangerous contexts (Matthews, 2014). A lot of research into Peterson and Seligman´s character strength classification system has been conducted over the past ten years (see Niemiec, 2013, for an overview of the research).
This personal historical article traces the development of the Big-Five factor structure, whose growing acceptance by personality researchers has profoundly influenced the scientific study of individual differences. The roots of this taxonomy lie in the lexical hypothesis and the insights of Sir Francis Galton, the prescience of L. L. Thurstone, the legacy of Raymond B. Cattell, and the seminal analyses of Tupes and Christal. Paradoxically, the present popularity of this model owes much to its many critics, each of whom tried to replace it, but failed. In reaction, there have been a number of attempts to assimilate other models into the five-factor structure. Lately, some practical implications of the emerging consensus can be seen in such contexts as personnel selection and classification.
The problem of detecting whether two behavioral constructs reference the same real world phenomenon has existed for over 100 years; we term discordant naming of constructs the Construct Identity Fallacy (CIF). We designed and evaluated the Construct Identity Detector (CID), the first tool with large-scale construct identity detection properties and the first tool that does not require respondent data. Through the adaptation and combination of different natural language processing (NLP) algorithms, six designs were created and evaluated against human expert decisions. All six designs were found capable of detecting construct identity, and a design combining two existing algorithms significantly outperformed the other approaches. A set of follow-up studies suggests the tool is valuable as a supplement to expert efforts in literature review and meta-analysis. Beyond Design Science contributions, this article has important implications related to the taxonomic structure of social- and behavioral-science constructs, for the jingle and jangle fallacy, the core of the Information Systems (IS) nomological network, and the inaccessibility of social and behavioral science knowledge. In sum, CID represents an important, albeit tentative, step towards discipline-wide identification of construct identities.
The VIA Classification is a widely used framework for helping individuals discover, explore, and use those qualities that are strongest in them – their character strengths. The VIA Inventory of Strengths is an accessible and widely used assessment instrument that measures 24 universally valued strengths. Research has found a number of important links between these character strengths and valued outcomes (e.g., life satisfaction, achievement). The practice of character strengths has not been studied as extensively; however, a number of practices, strength-based models, and applications are emerging with good potential.
This study reports on the development of the Spiritual Transcendence Scale, a measure designed to capture aspects of the individual that are independent of the qualities contained in the Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM). Using 2 separate samples of undergraduate students including both self-report (
Ns = 379 and 356) and observer data (
N = 279), it was shown that Spiritual Transcendence: (a) was independent of measures of the FFM; (b) evidenced good cross-observer convergence; and (c) predicted a wide range of psychologically salient outcomes, even after controlling for the predictive effects of personality. Given the long theoretical pedigree of Transcendence in the psychological literature, it was argued that Spiritual Transcendence represents a broad-based motivational domain of comparable breadth to those constructs contained in the FFM and ought to be considered a potential sixth major dimension of personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The Values in Action (VIA) classification of character strengths and virtues has been recently proposed by two leading positive psychologists, Christopher Peterson and Martin Seligman as “the social science equivalent of virtue ethics.” The very possibility of developing this kind of an “equivalent,” however, is very doubtful in the light of the cogent criticism that has been leveled at modern moral theory by Alasdair MacIntyre as well as the well argued accusations that positive psychology, despite its official normative neutrality, is pervaded by specifically Western individualism and instrumentalism. In order to evaluate whether the VIA project can be considered as substantially rooted in virtue ethical tradition, the classification was assessed against two fundamental features of the classical version of the latter: (1) the substantial interconnectedness of individual virtues, as expressed by the thesis of the unity of virtue, and (2) the constitutive character of the relationship between virtue and happiness. It turned out, in result, that the two above features are not only absent from but also contradicted by the VIA framework with the latter's: (1′) construal of individual virtues and character strengths as independent variables and (2′) official endorsement of the fact/value distinction. As soon as the arguments for the superiority of the classical virtue ethical perspective are provided, the potential responses available to the VIA's proponents are discussed.
In the 45 years since Cattell used English trait terms to begin the formulation of his “description of personality,” a number of investigators have proposed an alternative structure based on 5 orthogonal factors. The generality of this 5-factor model is here demonstrated across unusally comprehensive sets of trait terms. In the first 3 studies, 1,431 trait adjectives grouped into 75 clusters were analyzed; virtually identical structures emerged in 10 replications, each based on a different factor-analytic procedure. A 2nd study of 479 common terms grouped into 133 synonym clusters revealed the same structure in 2 samples of self-ratings and in 2 samples of peer ratings. None of the factors beyond the 5th generalized across the samples. In the 3rd study, analyses of 100 clusters derived from 339 triat terms suggest their potential utility as Big-Five markers in future studies.
Previous research has suggested that the Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS) have properties that are compatible with the substantive, structural, and external characteristics required by the circumplex-based interpersonal theory which guided scale construction procedures. In the present study, we describe an item-analytic procedure that identifies and selects items in terms of their estimated geometric location within a circumplex model and we apply the procedure to the task of reducing the 128-item IAS to a 64-item short form version (IAS-R). Scales constructed to conform to a circumplex model are evaluated by somewhat different structural criteria than are those developed to conform to other multivariate models and these differences are illustrated. The resultant IAS-R was found to have improved substantive and structural characteristics and acceptable reliability. We discuss possible applications of this highly efficient measure of interpersonal behavior.
In the short time since the publication of the Handbook of Positive Psychology, research results on the psychology of human strengths have proliferated. However, no major volume has documented the methods and theory used to achieve these results. Oxford Handbook of Methods in Positive Psychology fills this need, providing a broad overview of diverse contemporary methods in positive psychology. With contributions from both leading scholars and promising young investigators, the handbook serves to illuminate and, at times, challenge traditional approaches. Incorporating multiple levels of analysis, from biology to culture, the contributors present state-of-the-art techniques, including those for estimating variability and change at the level of the individual, identifying reliability of measurements within and across individuals, and separating individual differences in growth from aspects of phenomena that exhibit shorter-term variability over time. The volume covers such topics as wisdom, health, hope, resilience, religion, relationships, emotions, well-being, character strengths, and laughter. It enhances our understanding of the balance between human deficits and strengths and demonstrated their connections to other problems. Oxford Handbook of Methods in Positive Psychology will be the essential reference for methods in positive psychology.
Objective:
This preregistered study provides robust estimates of the links between Big Five personality traits and civic engagement across different samples and life stages.
Methods:
We recruited two samples from the United States and United Kingdom (total N = 1593) and measured Big Five domains, Big Five aspects, and six civic engagement indicators: volunteerism, charitable giving, donating blood, posthumous organ donation, political voting, and vaccination. We compared the links between these measures across samples and tested moderation across life stages and several sociodemographic variables. We explored whether these links replicate between self- and peer-reports.
Results:
We found small but robust effects. Agreeable, extraverted, and open/intellectual participants reported more civic engagement, especially volunteerism and charitable giving. Neurotic and conscientious participants mainly reported less civic engagement, especially blood and organ donations. One of the two Big Five aspects often drove these links, such as Compassion in the link between Agreeableness and volunteerism. We found some differences between younger and middle-aged adults.
Conclusions:
Big Five personality traits predict civic engagement modestly but consistently, with adequate study power being critical to detecting these links. Lower-order traits, such as Big Five aspects, clarify the relationships between traits and engagement. Life stages and sociodemographic variables have limited effects.
It has become widely recognized that religiousness has a predictable pattern of small associations with Big Five personality dimensions, and has some intersections with cultural psychology. But just how large are those culture-religiosity intersections, and are there additional associations with personality when one extends beyond the restricted spectrum represented by Big Five traits? Moreover, do the answers to these questions depend on how religiousness is defined and measured? I argue that, both conceptually and empirically, religiousness itself meets the criteria for a personality dimension (including stability, heritability, and other grounds), and is simultaneously for the most part a cultural phenomenon reflecting often widely shared sets of beliefs, values, worldviews, and norms. The patterns of modest associations with other personality dimensions, from the Big Five and beyond, are consistent with both arguments. A distributive model of culture, under which culture is aggregated personalities (and especially mindsets) helps make sense of these relations. Tradition-oriented religiousness tends to have a prominent position in enduring-order (as contrasted with evolving-order) cultures, which helps account for its occasional expressions in political religion. In contrast, mystical spirituality is more prone to manifest as a sub-cultural phenomenon peripheral to mainstream culture. But for either conception—religiousness or spirituality—the same personality-and-culture propositions appear to hold. Nonetheless, religiousness seems not totally reducible to a variable for personality or cultural psychology, and considerations are introduced regarding what that irreducible element is most likely to be.
Character strengths are positively valued traits that are expected to contribute to the good life (Peterson and Seligman 2004). Numerous studies have confirmed their robust relationships with subjective or hedonic well-being. Seligman (2011) provided a new framework of well-being suggesting five dimensions that encompass both hedonic and eudemonic aspects of well-being: positive emotions, engagement, positive relationships, meaning and accomplishment (forming the acronym PERMA). However, the role of character strengths has not been studied so far in this framework. Also, most studies on the relationships between character strengths and well-being only have only relied on self-reports. This set of two studies examines the relationships of character strengths and the orientations to well-being in two cross-sectional studies (Study 1: N = 5521), while also taking informant-reports into account and utilizing different questionnaires to control for a possible method bias (Study 2: N = 172). Participants completed validated assessments of character strengths and the PERMA dimensions (self-reports in Study 1, self- and informant-reports in Study 2). Results showed that in self-reports, all strengths were positively related to all PERMA dimensions, but there were differences in the size of the relationships. Accomplishment, for example, showed the strongest associations with strengths such as perspective, persistence, and zest, whereas for positive relationships, strengths such as teamwork, love, and kindness were the best predictors. These findings were largely confirmed by informant-reports in Study 2. The findings provide further support for the notion that character contributes to well-being and they could guide the development of strengths-based interventions tailored to individual needs.
Prosociality and morality are critical to the functioning and flourishing of society. There is, however, great variation in the degree to which individuals help or hinder one another, or adhere to ethical standards of “rightness.” One way to understand this variation is by drawing on theories and models within personality psychology, which may illuminate the basic individual characteristics that drive a wide range of other‐regarding tendencies. In this review, we provide a snapshot of three research strands addressing these themes. The first concerns how personality traits map onto prosocial preferences for fairness and cooperation, as studied using classic social decision‐making tasks called economic games. The second concerns the robust associations between personality traits and indicators of inter‐group prejudice (e.g., authoritarian ideology). The third concerns the emerging concept of moral exceptionality, and the personality traits that may characterise individuals at the forefront of moral progress. These examples demonstrate the core role that personality psychology is playing in the study of prosocial and moral behaviour, as well as the critical mass emerging in the Australian context around these themes.
This essay raises concerns about positive psychology’s classification of character strengths and virtues and issues of measurement. Part I examines the process whereby the classification was compiled. Part II turns to issues of measurement and questions about positive psychologists’ sensitivity to variations in the meanings of the constructs they purport to measure, both within and across cultures. I argue that attempts to find a ‘deep structure’ of the character strengths and virtues should proceed hand in hand with efforts to render positive psychology and its measurement tools more sensitive to variability in character strengths and virtues across and within cultures. The essay concludes with suggestions for future research.
Character strengths are positively valued personality traits that are assumed to be stable across time and situations, but also malleable due to cultivation or deliberate intervention. Also, studies showed that character strengths are robustly related to well-being. Consequently, character strengths have often been used in interventions aimed at increasing well-being. However, the stability of character strengths and the longitudinal relationships with well-being are widely unexplored: First, previous reports on the stability of character strengths have mainly focused on one assessment instrument only and second, they did not consider other indicators of stability (and malleability) besides rank-order stability, (i.e., mean-level stability). In this longitudinal study, we assessed character strengths and well-being at two time points and examined the stability and malleability of character strengths and the convergence of changes in character strengths and well-being by means of correlation analyses. Two samples (n1 = 601, n2 = 1162) completed different measures of character strengths and instruments for the assessment of well-being, ill-being, and health within up to three and a half years. Results showed that character strengths are stable over longer time periods (test-retest reliabilities ranging from rtt = .60–.83) and that relationships between changes in strengths and well-being are highly parallel to what has been reported in cross-sectional studies (strongest relationships for zest, hope, curiosity, and love). Furthermore, results suggest that some strengths, most predominantly humor, but also spirituality and prudence might be more amenable for change than others. These results might bear important information for selecting character strengths in interventions.
Written from the perspective of a philosopher, this paper raises a number of potential concerns with how the VIA classifies and the VIA-IS measures character traits. With respect to the 24 character strengths, concerns are raised about missing strengths, the lack of vices, conflicting character strengths, the unclear connection between character strengths and virtues, and the misclassification of some character strengths under certain virtues. With respect to the 6 virtues, concerns are raised about conflicting virtues, the absence of practical wisdom, and factor analyses that do not find a 6 factor structure. With respect to the VIA-IS, concerns are raised about its neglect of motivation and about the underlying assumptions it makes about character traits. The paper ends by sketching a significantly improved classification which omits the 6 virtues and introduces additional strengths, vices, and a conflict resolution trait. © 2018
The current review synthesized studies investigating the relationships between resilience and Big Five personality traits and aimed to investigate how the relationships vary according to the two types of resiliency, psychological resilience and ego-resiliency. Thirty studies with a total sample size of 15,609 met the inclusion criteria to be used for the current meta-analysis. Results indicated that overall, estimated average correlation coefficients for resilience were: r = −0.46 with Neuroticism, r = 0.42 for Extraversion, r = 0.34 for Openness, r = 0.31 for Agreeableness, and r = 0.42 for Conscientiousness. When comparing the differences between the two types of resiliency, a stronger negative relationship with Neuroticism, and stronger positive relationships with Openness and Agreeableness were obtained with ego-resiliency, compared with trait resilience. However, there was a lack of homogeneity in effect sizes across studies especially for ego-resilience. Directions for future research regarding resilience and the limitations of present research are discussed.
The present chapter was aimed at presenting an overview of the findings on the relations between character strengths and well-being. In order to get a broader picture about these relations, not just eudaimonic well-being but also hedonic well-being was considered. Within the scope of the chapter at hand, focus was on subjective well-being as indicator of hedonic well-being as well as on psychological well-being as indicator of eudaimonic well-being. Following the definitions of these constructs, research findings on the correlations between character strengths and well-being (i.e., subjective well-being: positive affect, negative affect, and global life satisfaction; psychological well-being: environmental mastery, personal growth, purpose in life, autonomy, self-acceptance, and positive relationships) are presented. None of the character strengths systematically showed a correlation coefficient that indicated a detrimental relation between a strength and (indicators of) subjective and psychological well-being. On the contrary and as expected, character strengths seem to be important individual factors facilitating well-being. Across all indicators of well-being (i.e., subjective well-being and psychological well-being) zest, hope, and curiosity were the most substantial correlates among the character strengths. Moreover, in addition to zest, hope, and curiosity, further character strengths were relevant for specific indicators of subjective well-being and psychological well-being as well. In-depth interpretations of the most important relations are presented and discussed. Finally, concluding remarks and open questions are presented, and future directions for research are discussed.
What is positive psychology? Positive psychology is concerned with the enhancement of happiness and well being, involving the scientific study of the role of personal strengths and positive social systems in the promotion of optimal well-being. The central themes of positive psychology, including Happiness, Hope, Creativity and Wisdom, are all investigated in this book in the context of their possible applications in clinical practise. Positive Psychology is unique in offering an accessible introduction to this emerging field of clinical psychology. It covers: available resources including websites and test forms, methods of measurement, a critique of available research, recommendations for further reading. Positive Psychology will prove a valuable resource for psychology students and lecturers who will benefit from the learning objectives and research stimuli included in each chapter. It will also be of great interest to those involved in training in related areas such as social work, counselling and psychotherapy.
What is the good of a person? Answers to this question lie at the heart of traditional moral philosophy as well as contemporary positive psychology. For the past few years, we have been involved in a project describing important strengths of character and ways to measure them. Our research program is sometimes identified as the Values in Action (VIA) project. The VIA classification includes two dozen strengths of character on which our research has focused. Various VIA measures comprise a family of assessment devices that measure individual differences in the strengths in the classification. The present contribution describes the process by which the VIA classification was created, the ways character strengths are measured, and empirical findings: distribution and demographics; correlates and consequences; origins and development; deliberate cultivation; interventions; and structure and trade-offs. Work is ongoing to refine our measures and to use empirical findings to generate theory. Especially important lines of future research include the relationship of character strengths to hard outcome measures, cultural differences and similarities, development, interventions, and the processes by which strengths of character give rise to actual behavior. Our project supports the premise of positive psychology that attention to good character sheds light on what makes life worth living.
An experiment was arranged whereby all three judges independently classified into the four selected columns 300 representative words, drawn from the total list according to a principle of representative distribution. The results of this study may be expressed in percentages of the total number of terms that each pair of judges assigned to identically the same columns. Taking only the instances where all three judges agree, we find 141 words or 47 per cent of the list, whereas 6.25 per cent represents the chance expectation. Examining this average agreement more closely we next determine the peculiarities of each individual judge when his placements are compared with those of the other two judges. This analysis calls attention to perhaps the principal source of unreliability, namely the tendency of each judge to have a mental set of "leniency" favoring the inclusion of marginal or doubtful terms in one column rather than another. Four outside judges selected 130 of the 300 terms as strange and unfamiliar to them. The agreement of the three editors for this group of terms averaged only 45 per cent, as against 47 per cent for the total list, and 48 per cent for the remaining 170 more familiar terms. Apparently established usage and familiarity enhances but slightly the reliability of the placement.
This study investigated the relation of the "Big Five" personality di- mensions (Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness, Consci- entiousness, and Openness to Experience) to three job performance criteria (job proficiency, training proficiency, and personnel data) for five occupational groups (professionals, police, managers, sales, and skilled/semi-skilled). Results indicated that one dimension of person- ality. Conscientiousness, showed consistent relations with all job per- formance criteria for all occupational groups. For the remaining per- sonality dimensions, the estimated true score correlations varied by occupational group and criterion type. Extraversion was a valid pre- dictor for two occupations involving social interaction, managers and sales (across criterion types). Also, both Openness to Experience and Extraversion were valid predictors of the training proficiency criterion (across occupations). Other personality dimensions were also found to be valid predictors for some occupations and some criterion types, but the magnitude of the estimated true score correlations was small (p < .10). Overall, the results illustrate the benefits of using the 5- factor model of personality to accumulate and communicate empirical findings. The findings have numerous implications for research and practice in personnel psychology, especially in the subfields of person- nel selection, training and development, and performance appraisal.
The authors collected and compared preference data on characteristics desired in long-term romantic partners between college students in two diverse countries, the United States and Russia. Based on evolutionary perspectives,the authors predicted that participants representing different cultures would retain certain adaptive gender differences. In addition, the authors included other attributes as potentially desirable in a long-term partner from studies within the field of positive psychology and predicted that these character strengths and virtues would feature prominently. Results suggested that the positive internal states of love, happiness, and kindness were among the most important qualities desired in a long-term romantic partner by both Russians and Americans. Gender differences were revealed for preferences in partner age and physique in both cultures as well as positive psychology’s traits of gratitude for Russians and forgiveness in the American sample. Overall, positive internal attributes were rated as highly important and the authors recommend these should be more fully considered in future studies on mate preferences.
La nécessité se fait sentir, pour les psychologizes qui travaillent dans une perspective interculturelle, d'expliciter leurs méthodes et de parvenir à un certain consensus qui permette de juger et de comparer les résultats. L'auteur propose ici un cadre de travail méthodologique pour la recherche interculturelle, qui s'inspire des discussions passées de certains anthropologues. Trois conditions s'avèrent nécessaires si l'on veut donner quelque validité aux comparaisons interculturelles des comportements: 1° Il faut d'abord démontrer qu'il y a équivalence fonctionnelle des comportements dans l'une et l'autre des cultures considérées; c'est-à-dire que seul, un comportement qui cst une réponse à un problème identique peut ětre comparé. 2° On peut, à titre d'essai, partir d'une conception du comportement observe qui est indépendante des cultures considérées (généralité hypothétique) à condition que ce soit seulement comme point de départ et que ce comportement soit ensuite conçu dans les termes měmes de chaque culture (particularité). Les aspects communs peuvent alors ětre utilisés pour construire un cadre de comparaison valide pour les deux cultures (généralité dérivée) et měme pour toutes les autres cultures (universalité). 3° Des instruments et des techniques de mesure peuvent alors ětre inventés, qui seront basés sur ce cadre de comparaison, pour autant qu'on puisse atteindre une équivalence conceptuclle. A titre d'exemple, les notions d'intelligence et de dépendance du champ sont discutées dans cette perspective méthodologique. L'auteur invite les lecteurs à commenter et à discuter le cadre de travail qu'il propose.
The structure of virtue was investigated through the development and construct validation of the Virtues Scale (VS), a 140-item self-report measure of virtues. A factor analysis of responses from 390 participants revealed four factors: Empathy, Order, Resourcefulness, and Serenity. Four virtue subscales constructed from the highest loading items on each factor were correlated with the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) scales in two additional samples (ns=181 and 143). One of these samples also completed the DIT measure of Kohlbergian moral development. Meaningful, replicated correlations between the virtue subscales and personality scales and complete lack of relationships between the virtues scales and the DIT indicate that virtue is a function of personality rather than moral reasoning and cognitive development. # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
The recently fashionable theories of positive psychology have educational ramifications at virtually every level of engagement, culminating in the model of positive education. In this critical review, I scrutinize positive education as a potential theory in educational psychology. Special attention is given to conceptual controversies and suggested educational interventions. Positive psychologists have yet to explore in detail the school as a positive institution. They have written at length, however, about such positive personal traits as moral virtue and resiliency, and about positive emotions both as embodied in experiences of classroom “flow” and as facilitators of students’ personal resources. Because the empirical evidence concerning these positive factors remains partly mixed or tentative, and because most of them had a home in other theoretical frameworks before the advent of positive psychology, searching questions remain about the effectiveness and originality of positive education. This article addresses some of those questions.
During the 1920's intelligence tests came in for violent criticism. The myth of the "child mind" of the American adult, fostered by an uncritical view of the Army test data, was ridiculed; critics, notably Walter Lippmann, lambasted psychologists for pretending to test what they could not even define. This paper was an attempt to communicate to a popular audience what the psychologist was doing and what a score on an intelligence test meant. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)