RESEARCH PAPER
Do adjectives exhaust the personality lexicon? A psycholexical study of the Lithuanian language
 
More details
Hide details
Submission date: 2017-09-25
Final revision date: 2017-12-13
Acceptance date: 2017-12-21
Online publication date: 2018-03-09
Publication date: 2018-09-01
 
Current Issues in Personality Psychology 2018;6(3):171–180
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
The psycholexical approach is based on the assumption that the most important individual differences that people can observe have been encoded into the natural language. Thus, by studying the structure of these lexicons, we are able to identify individual differences that are universal across cultures as well as dimensions that are unique to some of them. The aim of the study was to develop a psycholexical taxonomy of the Lithuanian language including different parts of speech.

Participants and procedure:
the authors analysed over 76,000 entries included in a dictionary of Lithuanian and identified 9625 person-descriptive terms: adjectives, attribute-nouns, type-nouns, and participles. The selected lexical material was classified by a team of six judges into 11 subcategories making up six higher-order categories. The authors performed the psychometric validity and consistency of the judges’ classification decisions.

Results:
The analysis of proportions between types of lexical units describing dispositional traits showed that nearly 20.00% of terms in the personality lexicon did not have an adjectival form and were expressed by means of other – morphemically non-redundant – parts of speech.

Conclusions:
The present study points to the necessity of taking into account various parts of speech describing dispositional traits in order to avoid the error of reductionism; it also contributes to the debate on universals in personality description. The results of the study can be used to determine the structure of the description of individual differences for the Lithuanian personality lexicon, for type-nouns or attribute-nouns, and for non-dispositional categories, including emotions, social effects, and worldview.

 
REFERENCES (42)
1.
Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47, 1–171.
 
2.
Angleitner, A., Ostendorf, F., & John, O. P. (1990). Towards a taxonomy of personality descriptors in German: A psycho-lexical study. European Journal of Personality, 4, 89–118.
 
3.
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2004). A hierarchical analysis of 1,710 English personality-descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 707–721.
 
4.
Brokken, F. B. (1978). The Language of Personality. Krips: Meppel.
 
5.
Caprara, G. V., & Perugini, M. (1994). Personality described by adjectives: the generalizability of the Big Five to the Italian lexical context. Journal of Personality, 8, 357–369.
 
6.
Cattel, R. B. (1945). The description of personality: Principles and findings in a factor analysis. The American Journal of Psychology, 58, 69–90.
 
7.
De Raad, B., & Ostendorf, F. (1996). Quantity and quality of trait-descriptive type nouns. European Journal of Personality, 10, 45–56.
 
8.
De Raad, B., & Barelds, D. P. H. (2008). A new taxonomy of Dutch personality traits based on a comprehensive and unrestricted list of descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 347–364.
 
9.
De Raad, B., & Mlačić, B. (2017). Psycholexical studies of personality structure across cultures. In A. T. Church (Ed.), The Praeger Handbook of Personality across cultures. Trait psychology across cultures (Vol. 1, pp. 161–192). Santa Barbara, Denver: Praeger.
 
10.
Di Blas, L., & Forzi, M. (1998). An alternative taxonomic study of personality-descriptive adjectives in the Italian language. European Journal of Personality, 12, 75–101.
 
11.
Di Blas, L. (2005). Personality-relevant attribute-nouns: A taxonomic study in the Italian language. European Journal of Personality, 19, 537–557.
 
12.
Eysenck, H. J. (1953). The structure of human personality. London: Methuen.
 
13.
Galton, F. (1884). Measurement of character. Fortnightly Review, 36, 179–185.
 
14.
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In: L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 141–165). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
 
15.
Goldberg, L. R. (1982). From ace to zombie: Some explorations in the language of personality. In C. D. Spielberger & J. N. Butcher (Eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol. 1, pp. 203–234). Erlbaum: Hillsdale.
 
16.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.
 
17.
Gorbaniuk, O., & Macheta, K. (2017). Psycholexical taxonomy of emotional states: the study of Polish language. Closer to Emotions Conference, Lublin, 18–19.05.2017.
 
18.
Gorbaniuk, O., Czarnecka, E., & Chmurzyńska, M. (2011). Taxonomy of Person-Descriptive Terms in Polish: A Psycho-Lexical Study. Current Problems of Psychiatry, 12, 100–106.
 
19.
Gorbaniuk, O., Kulewicz, P., Gorbaniuk, J., Kordon, A., Leoszko, W., Ivanova, A., & Suchomska, M. (2014a). Taksonomia psycholeksykalna języka białoruskiego. Current Problems of Psychiatry, 15, 89–95.
 
20.
Gorbaniuk, O., Mirovich, A., Leoshko, W., Gorbaniuk, J., Kordon, A., & Ivanova, A. (2014b). Taksonomia psycholeksykalna języka ukraińskiego. III Ogólnoukraiński Kongres Psychologiczny. Instytut Psychologii im. G. S. Kostiuka Ukraińskiej Akademii Nauk 2014, Kijów, 20-21.11.2014.
 
21.
Hofstee, W. K. B. (1976). Dutch traits: The first stages of the Groningen taxonomy study of personality descriptive adjectives. University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
 
22.
Hřebíčková, M. (2007). The lexical approach to personality description in the Czech context. Chechoslovak Psychology, 51, 50–61.
 
23.
Ivanova, A., Gorbaniuk, O., Kordon., A., Gorbaniuk, J., Leoszko, W., & Kulewicz, P. Języki wschodniosłowiańskie: aktualne problemy współczesnej lingwistyki. XVIII Międzynarodowa Konferencja Slawistyczna „Literatury, kultury i języki wschodniosłowiańskie wobec swego czasu historycznego”. Zielona Góra, 22-23.05.2017.
 
24.
John, O. P., Angleitner, A., & Ostendorf, F. (1988). The lexical approach to personality: A historical review of trait taxonomic research. European Journal of Personality, 2, 171–203.
 
25.
Livaniene, V., & De Raad, B. (2017). The factor structure of Lithuanian personality-descriptive adjectives of the highest frequency of use. International Journal of Psychology, 52, 453–462.
 
26.
Mlačić, B., & Ostendorf, F. (2005). Taxonomy and structure of Croatian personality-descriptive adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 19, 117–152.
 
27.
Mlačić, B. (2016). Social and reputational aspects of personality. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 2, 15–36.
 
28.
Norman, W. T. (1967). 2,800 personality trait descriptors: Normative operating characteristics for a university population. Department of Psychology, University of Michigan; Ann Arbor Research Rep. Nr 08310-1-T.
 
29.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Singapore: Longman.
 
30.
Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality-trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 552–567.
 
31.
Peabody, D., & De Raad, B. (2002). The substantive nature of psycholexical personality factors: A comparison across languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 983–997.
 
32.
Saucier, G. (1997). Effects of variable selection on the factor structure of person descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1296–1312.
 
33.
Saucier, G. (2003). Factor structure of English-language personality type-nouns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 695–708.
 
34.
Saucier, G. (2010). The structure of social effects: Personality as impact on others. European Journal of Personality, 24, 222–240.
 
35.
Saucier, G. (2013). Isms dimensions: Toward a more comprehensive and integrative model of belief-system components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 921–939.
 
36.
Saucier, G., & Srivastava, S. (2015). What makes a good structural model of personality? Evaluating the Big Five and alternatives. In M. Mikulincer, P. R. Shaver, M. L. Cooper, & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 4:.
 
37.
Personality processes and individual differences (pp. 283–305). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
 
38.
Szirmák, Z., & De Raad, B. (1994). Taxonomy and structure of Hungarian personality traits. European Journal of Personality, 8, 95–117.
 
39.
Truskauskaitė-Kunevičienė, I., Kaniušionytė, G., Kratavičienė, R., & Kratavičiūtė-Ališauskienė (2012). Psychometric properties of the Lithuanian versions of HEXACO-100 and HEXACO-60. Educational Psychology, 23, 6–14.
 
40.
Utka, A. (2009). Dažninis rašytinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo Universitetas, Humanitarinis fakultetas, Kompiuterinės lingvistikos centras.
 
41.
Wierzbicka, A. (1986). What’s in a noun? (Or: how do nouns differ in meaning from adjectives?). Studies in Language, 10, 353–389.
 
42.
Žukauskienė, R., & Barkauskienė, R. (2006). Lietuviškosios NEO PI-R versijos psichometriniai rodikliai. Psichologija, 33, 7–21.
 
eISSN:2353-561X
ISSN:2353-4192