Marcia S. Katigbak

Only Three Factors of Personality Description Are Fully Replicable Across Languages : A Comparison of 14 Trait Taxonomies

We tested the hypothesis that only 3 factors of personality description are replicable across many different languages if they are independently derived by a psycholexical approach. Our test was based on 14 trait taxonomies from 12 different languages. Factors were compared at each level of factor extraction with solutions with 1 to 6 factors. The 294 factors in the comparisons were identified using sets of markers of the 6-factor model by correlating the marker scales with the factors. The factor structures were pairwise compared in each case on the basis of the common variables that define the 2 sets of factors. Congruence coefficients were calculated between the varimax rotated structures after Procrustes rotation, where each structure in turn served as a target to which all other structures were rotated. On the basis of average congruence coefficients of all 91 comparisons, we conclude that factor solutions with 3 factors on average are replicable across languages; solutions with more factors are not.

Cross-cultural generalizability of personality dimensions: Relating indigenous and imported dimensions in two cultures.

The cross-cultural generalizability of personality dimensions was investigated by (a) identifying indigenous Philippine dimensions, (b) testing the cross-cultural replicability of the NEO 5-factor model (P. T. Costa & R.R. McCrae, 1992), and (c) relating Philippine and Western dimensions in Philippine and U.S. samples of college students. Filipino self-ratings (N = 536) on indigenous items were factor analyzed, and 6 Philippine dimensions were obtained. Conclusions about the replicability of the 5-factor model in the Philippines (N = 432) depended on whether exploratory, Procrustes, or confirmatory factor methods were used. In regression and joint factor analyses, moderate to strong associations were found between the Philippine dimensions and (a) dimensions from the 5-factor model in both Philippine (N = 387) and U.S. (N = 610) samples, and (b) the Tellegen model (A. Tellegen, 1985; A. Tellegen & N.G. Waller, in press) in a U.S. sample (N = 603).

Self-Described Traits, Values, and Moods Associated with Individualism and Collectivism Testing I-C Theory in an Individualistic (U.S.) and a Collectivistic (Philippine) Culture

The authors tested individualism-collectivism (I-C) theory by comparing self-described traits, values, and moods of students in individualistic (U.S., n = 660) and collectivistic (Philippine, n = 656) cultures and in students within these cultures varying in individualism and collectivism. They also examined the cross-cultural generalizability of factor dimensions derived with Hui’s I-C measure. U.S. and Philippine students’ selfdescriptions of their personality traits, valued traits, general values, and moods generally differed in ways predicted by I-C theory. However, in comparing individualistic and collectivistic students within the two cultures, the U.S. results conformed more consistently to I-C theory than did the Philippine results. The cross-cultural comparability of the I-C factor dimensions was fair at best.

Need Satisfaction and Well-Being Testing Self-Determination Theory in Eight Cultures

According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT), satisfaction of needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness is a universal requirement for psychological well-being. We tested this hypothesis with college students in the United States, Australia, Mexico, Venezuela, the Philippines, Malaysia, China, and Japan. Participants rated the extent to which these needs, plus needs for self-actualization and pleasure-stimulation, were satisfied in various roles and reported their general hedonic (i.e., positive and negative affect) and eudaimonic (e.g., meaning in life, personal growth) well-being. Asian participants averaged lower than non-Asian participants in perceived satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and self-actualization needs and in most aspects of eudaimonic well-being, and these differences were partially accounted for by differences in dialecticism and independent self-construals. Nonetheless, perceived need satisfaction predicted overall well-being to a similar degree in all cultures and in most cultures provided incremental prediction beyond the Big Five traits. Perceived imbalance in the satisfaction of different needs also modestly predicted well-being, particularly negative affect. The study extended support for the universal importance of SDT need satisfaction to several new cultures.

Are indigenous personality dimensions culture specific? Philippine inventories and the five-factor model

The authors addressed the culture specificity of indigenous personality constructs, the generalizability of the 5-factor model (FFM), and the incremental validity of indigenous measures in a collectivistic culture. Filipino college students (N = 508) completed 3 indigenous inventories and the Filipino version of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). On the basis of the factor and regression analyses, they concluded that (a) most Philippine dimensions are well encompassed by the FFM and thus may not be very culture specific: (b) a few indigenous constructs are less well accounted for by the FFM: these constructs are not unknown in Western cultures, but they may be particularly salient or composed somewhat differently in the Philippines; (c) the structure of the NEO-PI-R FFM replicates well in the Philippines: and (d) Philippine inventories add modest incremental validity beyond the FFM in predicting selected culture-relevant criteria.

Further exploration of Filipino personality structure using the lexical approach: do the big-five or big-seven dimensions emerge?†

Filipino college students (N=740) rated their personalities using 502 reasonably familiar terms from a comprehensive taxonomy of Filipino trait adjectives. Using factor analysis, we replicated the seven Filipino personality dimensions identified in a previous study (Church, Reyes, Katigbak and Grimm, 1997). At least seven factors are needed to identify dimensions resembling all of the Big Five. When positive‐ and negative‐evaluation terms are included a Negative‐Valence dimension is found, but positive‐evaluation terms blend with Intellect terms rather than identifying a distinct dimension. Thus, the cross‐cultural generalizability of the Big‐Seven model (Tellegen and Waller, 1997) is not completely supported. Correlational analyses consistently show good one‐to‐one correspondence between the Filipino Gregariousness, Concern for Others versus Egotism, Conscientiousness, and Intellect dimensions and Big‐Five Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Intellect, respectively. The Filipino Temperamentalness and Self‐assurance dimensions, although moderately correlated with Neuroticism, are multidimensional in terms of the Big Five.

Implicit Theories and Self-Perceptions of Traitedness Across Cultures Toward Integration of Cultural and Trait Psychology Perspectives

From the trait perspective, traitedness, or consistency of behavior, is expected in all cultures. However, cultural psychologists argue that behavior may be more determined by traits in individualistic than collectivistic cultures. The authors investigated implicit theories and self-perceptions of traitedness in two individualistic cultures, the United States (n = 342) and Australia (n = 172), and four collectivistic cultures, Mexico (n = 400), Philippines (n = 363), Malaysia (n = 251), and Japan (n = 192). Although implicit trait beliefs were endorsed in all cultural groups, they were stronger in individualistic than collectivistic cultures. Cultural differences in self-perceptions of one’s own traitedness, as operationalized by self-monitoring, were also found, and comparisons involving the United States and most collectivistic cultures were consistent with cultural psychology perspectives. The ability of self-construals to predict implicit beliefs and self-perceptions of traitedness was also investigated. Overall, the results supported efforts to integrate trait and cultural psychology perspectives.

Culture, cross-role consistency, and adjustment: testing trait and cultural psychology perspectives.

Trait and cultural psychology perspectives on cross-role consistency and its relation to adjustment were examined in 2 individualistic cultures, the United States (N=231) and Australia (N=195), and 4 collectivistic cultures, Mexico (N=199), the Philippines (N=195), Malaysia (N=217), and Japan (N=180). Cross-role consistency in trait ratings was evident in all cultures, supporting trait perspectives. Cultural comparisons of mean consistency provided support for cultural psychology perspectives as applied to East Asian cultures (i.e., Japan) but not collectivistic cultures more generally. Some but not all of the hypothesized predictors of consistency were supported across cultures. Cross-role consistency predicted aspects of adjustment in all cultures, but prediction was most reliable in the U.S. sample and weakest in the Japanese sample. Alternative constructs proposed by cultural psychologists--personality coherence, social appraisal, and relationship harmony--predicted adjustment in all cultures but were not, as hypothesized, better predictors of adjustment in collectivistic cultures than in individualistic cultures.

Are cross-cultural comparisons of personality profiles meaningful? Differential item and facet functioning in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory.

Measurement invariance is a prerequisite for confident cross-cultural comparisons of personality profiles. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was used to detect differential item functioning (DIF) in factor loadings and intercepts for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (P. T. Costa, Jr., & R. R. McCrae, 1992) in comparisons of college students in the United States (N = 261), Philippines (N = 268), and Mexico (N = 775). About 40%-50% of the items exhibited some form of DIF and item-level noninvariance often carried forward to the facet level at which scores are compared. After excluding DIF items, some facet scales were too short or unreliable for cross-cultural comparisons, and for some other facets, cultural mean differences were reduced or eliminated. The results indicate that considerable caution is warranted in cross-cultural comparisons of personality profiles.

Indigenization of psychology in the Philippines

The status of efforts to indigenize psychology in the Philippines is reviewed. We address progress in four aspects of indigenization: theoretical/conceptual, methodological, topical, and institutional. Much, but not all, of this progress is the result of efforts associated with the indigenous Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology) movement, which emphasizes (a) the development of a Filipino psychology that reflects the unique experiences and orientations of Filipinos, (b) Filipino identity and national consciousness, (c) explicit socio-political considerations, (d) application of psychology to societal problems, (e) the study of less elite Filipinos, (f) interdisciplinary efforts, and (g) the use of indigenous languages in the development and dissemination of indigenous psychology. We note considerable progress, but also controversy, in the selection and interpretation of indigenous concepts and less progress in the formulation of indigenous theories. Existing theories are narrow in scope, only parti...