Acts and dispositions: A reconsideration of the Act Frequency Approach

Abstract

The Act Frequency Approach (AFA) proposed by Buss and Craik was summarized and critically reviewed on the basis of a German replication study using six interpersonal traits each with 100 translated acts. The six traits studied were dominant, gregarious, agreeable, submissive, aloof, and quarrelsome. The internal structure of these categories was examined via multiple prototypicality ratings. It was demonstrated that many acts are highly prototypical for more than one category. The manifested categorical structure was tested by gathering retrospective act reports about performance and frequency of exhibiting each of these 600 acts using a sample of 213 adults. Aggregation of the acts according to their prototypicality key yielded reliable subscales. The validities obtained on the basis of the 25 highly prototypical acts were slightly higher compared with those of the 100 act set, as well as the sets with lower prototypicality. The validity gradient proposed by Buss and Craik was found using selected personality scales as well as global self‐ratings and peer‐ratings on some of the respective trait terms. In general, the results of the German study replicated the findings of Buss and Craik.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Angleitner

Buss

D. M.

Demtröder

A. I.

(1988). ‘A cross‐cultural comparison using the Act Frequency Approach in West Germany and the United States’. In preparation.

Borkenau

(1986). ‘Towards an understanding of trait interrelations: acts as instances of several traits’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51:371–381.

Broughton

(1984). ‘A prototype strategy for the construction of personality scales’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47:1334–1346.

Buss

A. H.

Durkee

(1957). ‘An investigation for assessing different kinds of hostility’, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21:343–348.

Buss

D. M.

(1981). 'The act frequency analysis of interpersonal dispositions’, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

Buss

D. M.

(1985). 'The interpersonal categorization of acts'. Presentation to the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, Chicago, IL, 18 October.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1980). ‘The frequency approach of disposition: dominance and prototypically dominant acts’, Journal of Personality, 48:379–392.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1981). ‘The act frequency analysis of interpersonal dispositions: aloofness, gregariousness, dominance, and submissiveness’. Journal of Personality, 49:174–192.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1983a). ‘The act frequency approach to personality’, Psychological Review, 90:105–126.

10.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1983b). ‘Act prediction and the conceptual analysis of personality scales: indices of act density, bipolarity and extensity’, Journal of Personality and Soicial Psychology, 45:1081–1095.

11.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1983c). ‘The dispositional analysis of everyday conduct’, Journal of personality, 51:393–412

12.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1984). ‘ Acts, dispositions and personality’. In: Maher B. A. and Maher, W. B. (Eds), Progress in Experimental Personality Research: Normal Personality Processes, Vol. 13, pp.240–300, Academic Press, New York.

13.

Buss

D. M.

Craik

K. H.

(1986). ‘ The act frequency approach and the construction of personality’. In: Angleitner, A. , Furnham, A. and Van Heck, G. (Eds), Personality Psychology in Europe: Current Trends and Controversies, Vol. 2, pp.141–156, Swets and Zeitlinger, Lisse.

14.

Epstein

(1979). ‘The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people much of the time’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37:1097–1126.

15.

Epstein

(1980). ‘The stability of behavior: II. Implications for psychological research’, American Psychologist, 35:790–806.

16.

Eysenck

H. J.

Eysenck

S. B. G.

(1968).The Manual of the Eysenck Personality Inventory, Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego, CA.

17.

Gergen

K. J.

Hepburn

Fisher

D. C.

(1986). ‘Hermeneutics of personality description’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50:1261–1270.

18.

Gough

H. G.

(1957). Manual for the California Psychological Inventory, Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, CA.

19.

Hampson

John

O. P.

Goldberg

L. R.

(1986). ‘Category breadth and hierarchical structure in personality: studies of asymmetries in judgments of trait implications'. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51:37–54

20.

Jaccard

J. J.

(1974). ‘Predicting social behavior from personality traits’, Journal of Research in Personality, 7:358–367.

21.

Jackson

D. N.

(1967). Personality Research Form Manual, Research Psychologist Press, Goshen, NY.

22.

Mischel

Peake

P. K.

(1982). ‘Beyond déjà vu in search for cross‐situational consistency’, Psychological Review, 89:730–755.

23.

Rosch

(1975a). ‘Cognitive reference points’. Cognitive Psychology, 7:532–547.

24.

Rosch

(1975b). ‘Cognitive representations of semantic categories’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104:192–233.

25.

Rosch

(1978). ‘ Principles of categorization’. In: Rosch, E. and Lloyd, B. B. (Eds), Cognition and Categorization, pp.27–48, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

26.

Rosch

Mervis

C. B.

(1975). ‘Family resemblances: studies in the internal structure of categories’. Cognitive Psychology, 7:563–605.

27.

Rotter

J. B.

(1975). ‘Some problems and misconceptions related to the construct of internal versus external control of reinforcement’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43:56–67.

28.

Stumpf

Angleitner

Wieck

Th.

Jackson

D. N.

Beloch‐Till

(1985). Deutsche Personality Research Form (PRF), Hogrefe, Göttingen.

29.

Wiggins

J. S.

(1979). ‘A psychological taxonomy of trait‐descriptive terms: the interpersonal domain’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37:395–412.

30.

Zadeh, L. A. , Fu, K. S. , Tanaka, K. and Shimura, M. (Eds) (1975). Fuzzy Sets and Their Application to Cognitive and Decision Processes, Academic Press, New York.