Comprehensive psycholexical classification of Polish person-descriptive terms

Abstract

Lexical research based on the assumption that all the main human characteristics are encoded in the natural language constitutes one of the alternative ways of developing a taxonomy of individual differences in psychology. The majority of studies to date, including Polish ones, have been restricted to the analysis of the adjective lexicon, which means their results are at risk of reductionism. The aim of the presented research was to develop a classification of the complete Polish lexicon of person-descriptive terms (adjectives, participles, adverbs, nouns, and verbs). participants and procedure We analyzed 100,000 entries found in a universal dictionary of Polish and identified 27,813 terms used to describe human characteristics. The identified person-descriptive terms were classified by a team of 13 trained judges into 16 subcategories. The judges' taxonomic decisions were tested for validity and reliability. results Personality (dispositional) descriptors (5,598) constitute 20.1% of the Polish lexicon of person-descriptors; this includes 1,641 adjectives and participles, 612 adverbs, 1,442 attribute-nouns, 1,029 type-nouns, and 916 verbs. The analysis of the semantic redundancy of terms representing different parts of speech but having the same common morpheme among dispositional descriptors revealed 1,979 morphemes with distinct meanings. Only 64% of these morphemes are represented by adjectives. conclusions Adjectives constitute the largest group of personality (dispositional) descriptors but do not account for the entire Polish personality lexicon. The results of the study are a point of departure for research into the specificity of the structure of personality descriptions in the Polish language using various linguistic categories and for a comprehensive study on the entire Polish personality lexicon.

The Impact of Our Personality on Others: The Lithuanian Comprehensive Lexical Taxonomy of Social Effects

“…The main criteria for the selection were to include all of the verbs that denote either emotional, motivational, or cognitive reaction to the expression of personality disposition(s). Also, when making selection decisions, the author used several questions that were meant to facilitate the construction of the list (Gorbaniuk et al, 2019 ): (1) John is a person who often/rarely/never [verb] (e.g., to disappoint), (2) John is a person who can [verb] better/worse than Paul (e.g., to persuade), and (3) John often/rarely/never [verb] other people (e.g., to encourage). Another author of the study checked the resulting list for relevancy.…”

Tactics of Influence and Deinfluentization, Personality and the Personal Sense of Power Among Polish Managers

“…A model that merges the knowledge gathered under different theoretical approaches (Saucier & Srivastava, 2015) and that is marked as the one which provides an integrative descriptive model for research (John & Srivastava, 1999;de Raad, 1998) is the Big Five. Hence, it is often used to measure personality traits (Gorbaniuk et al, 2019), and is considered to describe the most salient aspects of personality among leaders . Managerial effectiveness is ensured by Conscientiousness, as it determines individual's goal orientation (Bono & Judge, 2004;Barrick & Mount, 1991), Openness to Experience, which is the tendency to seek for new opportunities and solutions, and Extraversion, as it is reflected in building and maintaining one's social network (Brandstätter, 2011).…”

Validation and Psychometric Properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory Observer Report Form in the Polish Language

“…The analysis of self-rating data indicated that the structure was consistent with the HEXACO model (Gorbaniuk et al, 2013;Szarota et al, 2007). For observer-rating data with heterogeneous attitude toward target sample, a six-factor structure included the following components: Agreeableness (e.g., good-natured, kind, honest, helpful), Extraversion (energetic, introverted, talkative, outgoing), Conscientiousness (orderly, conscientious, disciplined), Impulsiveness (nervous, impulsive, impetuous), Resilience (resilient, tough vs. fearful, cowardly), and Intellect (research-focused, creative, inquisitive) (Gorbaniuk et al, 2011(Gorbaniuk et al, , 2014. Agreeableness, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and Intellect were clearly interpretable as the dimensions of B5, while adjectives from the Agreeableness and Honesty scales formed the common Big Five Agreeableness factor.…”

“…Since the analyses of self-and observer-ratings were carried out on the identical Polish lexical material with a similar sample structure (a full range of age groups), the observed discrepancy may be related to differences in perception of the self and other structures, especially if we consider the descriptions of the liked and disliked target persons (Gorbaniuk et al, 2014). Both self-and observer-ratings may either describe different constructs or describe the same construct in different ways.…”

“…The reference points for the HEXACO-PI-R observer report form were questionnaires based on the Five-Factor Model (NEO-FFI; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and the structure of the Polish personality lexicon obtained in the observer-rating study (PPM-OR; Gorbaniuk et al, 2014). As mentioned before, FFM dimensions are not identical to HEXACO dimensions -conceptual differences exist, especially between Emotionality and Agreeableness .…”