Evidence for an indigenous Interpersonal Relatedness (IR) personality trait that is distinct from the Big Five personality taxonomy has been demonstrated in Chinese culture; however, research has not yet established whether this construct is specific to the Chinese culture or whether it is more universal. The current research extended this personality construct to a workplace context and examined the relevance of the Workplace IR trait within Taiwanese (n = 573) and U.S. (n = 155) employees. Results indicated that in both cultural groups the Workplace IR construct emerged and was not subsumed within the workplace Big Five domains; however, the content of the Workplace IR construct varied slightly between Taiwanese and U.S. employees. These findings suggest that this purported indigenous Chinese personality trait has potential relevance for working adults in Western as well as Eastern cultures.
BarrickM. R.MountM. K. (1993). Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 111-118.
2.
BolinoM. C.TurnleyW. H. (2003). Going the extra mile: Cultivating and managing employee citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Executive, 17(3), 60-71.
3.
BondM. H. (1994). Trait theory and cross-cultural studies of person perception. Psychological Inquiry, 5, 114-117. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0502_2
4.
BondM. H.HwangK. K. (1986). The social psychology of Chinese people. In BondM. H. (Ed.), The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 213-266). Hong Kong, China: Oxford University Press.
5.
BriggsS. R.CheekJ. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54, 106-148. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00391.x
6.
BrislinR. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185-216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
7.
The Center of Applied Cognitive Studies. (2005). The WorkPlace Big Five ProFile 3.0 TM [Brochure]. Charlotte, NC: Author.
8.
CheungF. M. (1985). Cross-cultural considerations for the translation and adaptation of the Chinese MMPI in Hong Kong. In ButcherJ. N.SpielbergerC. D. (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 4, pp. 131-158). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
CheungF. M.CheungS. F. (2003). Measuring personality and values across cultures: Imported versus indigenous measures. In LonnerW. J.DinnelD. L.HayesS. A.SattlerD. N. (Eds.), Online readings in psychology and culture (Unit 6, Chapter 5). Bellingham, WA: Center for Cross-Cultural Research, Western Washington University. Retrieved from http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/index-cc.htm
10.
CheungF. M.CheungS. F.LeungK.WardC.LeongF. (2003). The English version of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 433-452. doi:10.1177/0022022103034004004
11.
CheungF. M.CheungS. F.WadaS.ZhangJ. (2003). Indigenous measures of personality assessment in Asian countries: A review. Psychological Assessment, 15, 280-289. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.15.3.280
12.
CheungF. M.CheungS. F.ZhangJ.LeungK.LeongF.HuiyehK. (2008). Relevance of openness as a personality dimension in Chinese culture: Aspects of its cultural relevance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 81-108. doi:10.1177/0022022107311968
13.
CheungF. M.LeungK.FanR. M.SongW.ZhangJ.ZhangJ. (1996). Development of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 181-199. doi:10.1177/0022022196272003
14.
CheungF. M.LeungK.ZhangJ.SunH.GanY.SongW.XieD. (2001). Indigenous Chinese personality constructs: Is the Five-Factor Model Complete?Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407-433. doi:10.1177/0022022101032004003
15.
CheungF. M.van de VijverF. J. R.LeongF. T. L. (2011). Toward a new approach to the study of personality in culture. American Psychologist, 66, 593-603. doi:10.1037/a0022389
16.
CheungS. F.CheungF. M.HowardR.LimY. H. (2006). Personality across the ethnic divide in Singapore: Are “Chinese traits” uniquely Chinese?Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 467-477. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.023
17.
ChurchA. T. (2001). Personality measurement in cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Personality, 69, 979-1006.
18.
ChurchA. T. (2010). Current perspectives in the study of personality across cultures. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 441-449. doi:10.1177/1745691610375559
19.
CostaP. T.Jr.McCraeR. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-RTM) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
20.
De RaadB.BareldsD.LevertE.OstendorfF.MlačićB.BlasL. D.. . . KatigbakM. S. (2010). Only three factors of personality description are fully replicable across languages: A comparison of 14 trait taxonomies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 160-173. doi:10.1037/a0017184
21.
HellerD.WatsonD.KomarJ.MinJ.-A.PerunovicW. Q. E. (2007). Contextualized personality: Traditional and new assessment procedures. Journal of Personality, 75, 1229-1253.
HoD. Y. F. (1976). On the concept of face. The American Journal of Sociology, 81, 867-884.
24.
HoD. Y. F. (1995). Selfhood and identity in Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism: Contrasts with the West. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 25, 115-139. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1995.tb00269.x
25.
HoD. Y. F.PengS. Q.LaiA. C.ChanS. F. (2001). Personality across cultural traditions. Journal of Personality, 69, 925-954.
26.
HofsteeW. K. B. (1990). The use of everyday personality language for scientific purposes. European Journal of Personality, 4, 77-88. doi:10.1002/per.2410040203
HowardP. J.HowardJ. M. (2001). The WorkPlace Big Five ProFile professional manual. Charlotte, NC: Center for Applied Cognitive Studies.
29.
HowardP. J.HowardJ. M. (2009). The WorkPlace Big Five ProFileTM Version 4.0 Professional Manual. Charlotte, NC: Center for Applied Cognitive Studies.
30.
HwangK. (1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 944-974.
31.
HwangK. (2005). 華人社會中的臉面觀 [Face in Chinese societies]. In YangK.HwangK.YangC. F. (Eds.), 華人本土心理學上 [Indigenous psychology in Chinese societies Part I] (pp. 365-405). Taipei, Taiwan: Yuan-Liou.
32.
JoreskogK. G.GoldbergerA. S. (1975). Estimation of a model with multiple indicators and multiple causes of a single latent variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 631-639.
33.
JudgeT. A.HellerD.MountM. K. (2002). Five-Factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530-541. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.873.3.530
34.
JudgeT. A.HigginsC. A.ThoresenC. J.BarrickM. R. (1999). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52, 621-652.
35.
JudgeT. A.IliesR. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 797-807.
36.
KatigbakM. S.ChurchA. T.AkamineT. X. (1996). Cross-cultural generality of personality dimensions: Relating indigenous and imported dimensions in two cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 99-114.
37.
KatigbakM. S.ChurchA. T.Guanzon-LapeñaM. A.CarlotaA. J.del PilarG. H. (2002). Are indigenous personality dimensions culture specific? Philippine inventories and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 89-101. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.89
38.
KwongJ. Y.CheungF. M. (2003). Prediction of performance facets using specific personality traits in the Chinese context. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 99-110. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00021-0
39.
LeeK.AshtonM. (2007). Factor analysis in personality research. In RobinsR. W.FraleyR. C.KruegersR. F. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 424-443). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
40.
LiuL. A.FriedmanR. A.ChiS.-C. (2005). “Ren Qing” versus the “Big Five”: The role of culturally sensitive measures of individual difference in distributive negotiations. Management and Organization Review, 1, 225-247. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2005.00010.x
41.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509-516.
42.
McCraeR. R.ZondermanA. B.CostaP. T.BondM. H.PaunonenS. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552-566.
NormanW. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574-583. doi:10.1037/h0040291
45.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Validity. In NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (Eds.), Psychometric theory (pp. 83-113, 3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
46.
OrtizF. A.ChurchA. T.Varggas-FloresJ.Ibanez-ReyesJ.Flores-GalazM.Iuit-BricenoJ. I.EscamillaJ. M. (2007). Are indigenous personality dimensions culture-specific? Mexican inventories and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 618-649. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.07.002
47.
PloyhartR. E. (2008). The measurement and analysis of motivation. In KanferR.ChenG.PritchardR. (Eds.), Work motivation: Past, present, and future (pp. 17-61). New York, NY: Taylor Francis.
48.
RynesS. L.BrownK. G.ColbertA. E. (2002). Seven common misconceptions about human resource practices: Research findings versus practitioner beliefs. Academy of Management Executive, 16(3), 92-103.
49.
SalgadoJ. F.ViswesvaranC.OnesD. S. (2001). Predictors used for personnel selection: An overview of constructs, methods and techniques. In AndersonN.OnesD. S.SinangilH. K.ViswesvaranC. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 165-199). London, England: SAGE.
50.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262
51.
SlatcherR. B.VazireS. (2009). Effects of global and contextualized personality on relationship satisfaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 624-633. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.02.012
52.
SteenkampJ.-B. E. M.BaumgartnerH. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78-90. doi:10.1086/209528
53.
SueS.ChangJ. (2003). The state of psychological assessment in Asia. Psychological Assessment, 15, 306-310. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.15.3.306
54.
ThompsonB. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
55.
TriandisH. C.SuhE. M. (2002). Cultural influences on personality. Annual Reviews, 53, 133-160. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135200
56.
TsaiM.-H.ChiS.-C.HuH.-H. (2009). Salespeople’s renqing orientation, self-esteem, and selling behaviors: An empirical study in Taiwan. Journal of Business Psychology, 24, 193-200. doi:10.1007/s10869-009-9099-z
57.
TsuiA. S.NifadkarS. S.OuA. Y. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations. Journal of Management, 33, 426-478. doi:10.1177/0149206307300818
58.
VandenbergR. J. (2002). Toward a future understanding of and improvement in measurement invariance methods and procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 139-158. doi:10.1177/1094428102005002001
59.
Van de VijverF.LeungK. (1997a). Methods and data analysis of comparative research. In BerryJ. W.PoortingaY. H.PandeyJ. (Eds.), Theory and method: Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd ed., pp. 257-300). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
60.
Van de VijverF.LeungK. (1997b). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
61.
YangC. F. (2001). 有關關係與人情構念化之綜述 [The conceptualization of quanxi and renqing]. In YangC. F. (Ed.), 中國人的人際關係、情感與信任 [Interpersonal relations, affect, and trust in Chinese societies] (pp. 3-25). Taipei, Taiwan: Yuan-Liou.
62.
YangK.BondM. H. (1990). Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1087-1095. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1087
63.
ZhangZ.YangC. F. (2001). 關於人情概念的一項研究 [A study of the ren qing concept]. In YangC. F. (Ed.),中國人的人際關係、情感與信任 [Interpersonal relations, affect, and trust in Chinese societies] (pp. 223-246). Taipei, Taiwan: Yuan-Liou.
