Türkçe’de Psikolojik Sözcük Temelli Yaklaşımla Kişilik Tanımlayan Terimlerin Belirlenmesi

Author :  

Year-Number: 2020-27
Language : null
Konu :
Number of pages: 82-114
Mendeley EndNote Alıntı Yap

Abstract

Psikolojideki kişilik çalışmalarında psikolojik sözcük temelli yaklaşımın temel mantığı olarak dilin, kişilik tanımlayan terimleri belirleme fırsatı sağladığı ilgili alanyazında sıklıkla tanımlanmıştır. Psikolojik sözcük temelli alanyazın temel olarak kişilik özelliklerinin sınıflandırılmasına ve yapıların ya da faktörlerin kültürler arası tekrarlanabilirliğine odaklanmıştır. Diğer taraftan Türkçe psikolojik sözcük temelli çalışmaların sayısı yetersiz görünmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı Türkçe’deki kişilik tanımlayan terimleri ve çeşitliliğini belirlemektir. Bu amaçla psikolojik sözcük temelli yaklaşım kabul edilmiş ve dokuz farklı sözlük, bir sözlük dizini ve iki yazım kılavuzu kullanılarak, isimler, sıfatlar, fiiller, zarflardan ve diğer dil yapılarından oluşan 4164 kişilik tanımlayan sözcük ya da terim seçilmiştir. Bu çalışmada elde edilen sonuçlar ve bu psikolojik sözcük temelli çalışmada Türkçe kişilik tanımlayan terimlerin sayısı, daha fazla sayıda benzer çalışmalara ihtiyaç duyulduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Abstract

The main rationale of the psycho-lexical approach to the study of personality in psychology has been frequently defined in related literature that language provides an opportunity to identify the descriptive terms that defines personality. The dispute in the psycho-lexical literature focused mainly on the personality trait-taxonomy and on cross-cultural replicability of structures or factors. On the other hand, the number of psycho-lexical studies in Turkish seems to be insufficient. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the variety of personality descriptive terms in the Turkish language. To accomplish this aim, a psycho-lexical approach was adopted, and 4164 personality descriptive words or terms were selected using nine dictionaries, one dictionary directory and two spelling manual. The results of the study and the psycho-lexical approach used in the study showed that much more similar studies were needed for personality descriptive terms in Turkish.

Keywords


  • Ağakay, M. A. (1982). Türkçe sözlük (6. baskı). Ankara: Maya Matbaacılık Yayıncılık.

  • Ağakay, M. A. (1982). Türkçe sözlük (6. baskı). Ankara: Maya Matbaacılık Yayıncılık.

  • Aksoy, Ö. A. ve Dilçin, D. (2009). Tarama sözlüğü VIII Dizin (3. baskı). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.

  • Aktunç, H. (1998). Türkçenin büyük argo sözlüğü (tanıklarıyla). İstanbul: YKY.

  • Almagor, M., Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (1995). The Big Seven model: A cross-culturalreplication and further exploration of the basic dimensions of natural language trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 300-307.

  • 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(2), 89-118.

  • Ashton, M. C. & Lee, K. (2005). A defence of the lexical approach to the study of personality structure. European Journal of Personality, 19(1), 5-24.

  • Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2004). A hierarchical analysis of 1,710 Englishpersonality-descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 707-721.

  • Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., di Blas, L., Boies, K., & De Raad,B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 356-366.

  • Ayverdi, İ. (2011). Asırlar boyu tarihi seyri içinde misalli büyük Türkçe sözlük (3 cilt). İstanbul: Kubbealtı Neşriyatı.

  • Barelds, D. P. H. & de Raad, B. (2015). The role of word-categories in trait-taxonomy: evidencefrom the Dutch personality taxonomy. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 1(1), 15- 25.

  • Benet, V., & Waller, Niels G. (1995). The Big Seven factor model of personality description:evidence for its cross-cultural generality in a Spanish sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 701-718.

  • Benet-Martinez, V., & Waller, N. G. (1997). Further evidence for the cross-cultural generality ofthe Big Seven factor model: indigenous and imported Spanish personality constructs. Journal of Personality, 65(3), 567-598.

  • Boies, K., Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., Pascal, S., & Nicol, A. A. (2001). The structure of the French personality lexicon. European Journal of Personality, 15(4), 277-295.

  • Borgatta, E. F. (1964). The structure of personality characteristics. Behavioral Science, 9(1), 8-17.

  • Burtaverde, V., & de Raad, B. (2017). Taxonomy and structure of the Romanian personality lexicon. International Journal of Psychology, 54(3), 377-387.

  • Cattell, R. B. (1945). The description of personality: principles and findings in a factor analysis. The American Journal of Psychology, 58(1), 69-90.

  • Church, A. T., & Burke, P. J. (1994). Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the Big Five andTellegen’s three- and four-dimensional models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 93-114.

  • Çağbayır, Y. (2007). Ötüken Türkçe sözlük: Orhun yazıtlarından günümüze Türkiye Türkçesinin söz varlığı (5 cilt). İstanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat.

  • Daouk-Öyry, L., Zeinoun, P., Choueiri, L., & van de Vijver, F. J. (2016). Integrating global andlocal perspectives in psycholexical studies: A GloCal approach. Journal of Research in Personality, 62, 19-28.

  • de Raad, B. (1998). Five big, big five issues: rationale, content, structure, status, and crosscultural assessment. European Psychologist, 3(2), 113-124.

  • de Raad, B. (2000). The Big Five personality factors. Seattle: Hogrefe and Huber Publisher.

  • de Raad, B. (2009). Structural models of personality. In P. J. Corr & G. Matthews (Eds.), TheCambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology (p. 127-147). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • de Raad, B., & Barelds, D. P. H. (2008). A new taxonomy of Dutch personality traits based on acomprehensive and unrestricted list of descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2) 347-364.

  • de Raad, B., & Mlacic, B. (2017). The lexical foundation of the big five factor model. The Oxford Handbook of The Five Factor Model 191-216.

  • de Raad, B., & Renner, W. (2011). German-Dutch comparison of factors of psycholexically derived values. Journal of Individual Differences, 32(4),189-200.

  • de Raad, B., Barelds, D. P., Timmerman, M. E., De Roover, K., Mlacic, B., & Church, A. T.(2014). Towards a pan-cultural personality structure: input from 11 psycholexical studies. European Journal of Personality, 28(5), 497-510.

  • de Raad, B., Smederevac, S., Colovic, P., & Mitrovic, D. (2018). Personality traits in the Serbian language: structure and procedural effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 73, 93-110.

  • Devellioğlu, F. (1980). Türk argosu (6. basım). Ankara: Aydın Kitabevi.

  • di Blas, L. (2005). Personality-relevant attribute-nouns: a taxonomic study in the Italian language. European Journal of Personality, 19(7), 537-557.

  • di Blas, L., & Forzi, M. (1999). Refining a descriptive structure of personality attributes in theItalian language: the abridged Big Three circumplex structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 451-481.

  • Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review ofDigman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and SocialDigman, J. M., & Takemoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of personality: re-analysis, comparison, and interpretation of six major studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 16(2), 149-170.

  • Erdle, S., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2009). Does self-esteem account for the higher-order factors of the Big Five?. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(5), 921-922.

  • Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44(3), 329-344.

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: the search for universals in personality lexicons. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 141-165.

  • 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, p. 203-234). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216-1229.

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26-42.

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48(1), 26-34.

  • Gorbaniuk, O., Budzinska, A., Owczarek, M., Bozek, E., & Juros, K. (2013). The factor structure ofPolish personality-descriptive adjectives: an alternative psycho-lexical study. European Journal of Personality, 27(3), 304-318.

  • Guilford, J. P. (1975). Factors and factors of personality. Psychological Bulletin, 82(5), 802-814. Gürsoy-Naskali, E. ve Sağol, G. (2002). Türk kültüründe argo. Haarlem, Hollanda: Sota.

  • Hogan, J., Hogan, R., & Busch, C. M. (1984). How to measure service orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 167-173.

  • Hrebickova, M. (2007). The lexical approach to personality description in the Czech context. Ceskoslovenska Psychologie, 51, 50-61.

  • Ivanova, A., Gorbaniuk, O., Blekaityte, D., Dovydaityte, E., Cepuliene, A. A., Mastauskaite, G.,Ramanauskas, R., Jurgelyte, U., & Slapsinskaite, R. (2018). Do adjectives exhaust the personalitylexicon? A psycholexical study of the Lithuanian language. Current Issues in PersonalityJohn, O. P., Angleitner, A., & Ostendorf, F. (1988). The lexical approach to personality: A historical review of trait taxonomic research. European journal of Personality, 2(3), 171-203.

  • John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 3(2), 114-158.

  • Kihlstrom, J. F., & Klein, S. B. (1994). The self as a knowledge structure. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. S. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Cognition (p. 153-208). London: Taylor and Francis Group.

  • McCrae, R. R. (1994). Openness to experience: expanding the boundaries of factor V. European Journal of Personality, 8(4), 251-272.

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81-90.

  • McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications.McDougall, W. (1932). Of the words character and personality. Character and Personality, 1(1), 3- 16.

  • Mlacic, B., & Ostendorf, F. (2005). Taxonomy and structure of Croatian personality-descriptive adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 19(2), 117-152.

  • Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of person-ality attributes: Replicated factorstructure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(6), 574-583.

  • Norman, W. T. (1967). 2800 personality trait descriptors: Normative operating characteristics fora university population. Unpublished manuscript. Ann Arbor: Department of Psychology, University of Michigan.

  • Özkan, A. (1982). Resimli ansiklopedik büyük sözlük (10 cilt). İstanbul: Ansiklopedik Yayıncılık.

  • Peabody, D., & de Raad, B. (2002). The substantive nature of psycholexical personality factors: a comparison across languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 983-997.

  • Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality- trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 552-567.

  • Revelle, W. (2015). Galton, Sir Francis (1822-1911). In R. L. Cautin & S. O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology (Vol. 5, p. 1305-1308). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

  • Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1996). Evidence for the Big Five in analyses of familiar English personality adjectives. European Journal of Personality, 10(1), 61-77.

  • Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (2001). Lexical studies of indigenous personality factors: premises, products, and prospects. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 847-879.

  • Saucier, G., Georgiades, S., Tsaousis, I., & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). The factor structure of Greek personality adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 856-875.

  • Saucier, G., Ostendorf, F., & Peabody, D. (2001). The non-evaluative circumplex of personality adjectives. Journal of Personality, 69(4), 537-582.

  • Singh, J. K., Misra, G., & De Raad, B. (2013). Personality structure in the trait lexicon of Hindi, a major language spoken in India. European Journal of Personality, 27(6), 605-620.

  • Tatar, A. (2018). Çok Boyutlu Kişilik Envanterinin geliştirilmesi: madde seçimi ve faktör yapısının oluşturulması. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 19(Ek sayı.2), 5-13.

  • Tatar, A., Çelikbaş, B., & Özdemir, H. (2019). Büyük Beş Envanteri-35 Türkçe formununpsikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Journal of Social, Humanities and Administrative Sciences, Teres, E. (2009). Türkçe yazım kılavuzu. İstanbul: Altın Bilgi Basım Yayın.

  • Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. C. (1961). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings (Tech. Rep.). Lackland Air Force Base, TX: USAF.

  • Türk Dil Kurumu (TDK) (2005). Yazım kılavuzu (24. baskı). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.

  • Türk Dil Kurumu (TDK) (2009). Tarama sözlüğü (4. baskı, 7 cilt). Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.

  • Türk Dil Kurumu (TDK) Türk Dil Kurumu atasözleri ve deyimler sözlüğü http://sozluk.gov.tr/ (Erişim Tarihi: 30.08.2019).

  • Wiggins, J. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: the interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(3), 395-412.

  • Wood, D. (2015). Testing the lexical hypothesis: are socially important traits more densely reflected in the English lexicon?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(2), 317-335.

  • Yang, Y., Read, S. J., & Miller, L. C. (2006). A taxonomy of situations from Chinese idioms. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(5), 750-778.

                                                                                                                                                                                                        
  • Article Statistics