Abstract: This article was aimed at extending the etic-emic hypothesis of cross-cultural differences of personality structure. The essentials of the differences between Chinese-Western personality structures was clarified by (1) hackling the theoretical hypothesis and empirical methods of the establishment of Big Five and Five Factor Model of Western personality, and the confirmation of Big Seven Model of Chinese personality model, and differences of Chinese-Western personality structures were explained by lexical and behavior classification hypothesis; (2) Attributing the etic-emic explanation of Chinese-Western personality differences as results of different standards of behavior classification for Chinese and Westerners, as the process of classification were influenced significantly by cultures; and (3) Reviewing empirical evidences for the etic-emic components of Chinese-Western personality structures. Further research directions in personality was also discussed.
In the first part of the article, a process model combined lexical and behavior classification hypothesis was proposed and was explained as underlying basis of both Chinese and Western personality structure exploration. After the complete collection of personality trait adjectives, personality structure were extracted along the ratings of subjects, and factor analysis were usually applied to extract the dimensions of personality. This process of personality exploration was a “bottom-up” fashion, and the Big Five model of Western personality was established this way. Another fashion of personality exploration was essentially “top-down”, that is, theorists proposed dimensions of, and factors included and typical behaviors for each factors of personality were also proposed. The Five Factor Model of Western personality was established this way. Meanwhile, the Chinese Seven Factor Model of personality were also established in the way of “bottom-up”.
It was proposed that implicit principles of behavior classification in “bottom-up” ways of personality exploration were adopted, while explicit principles of behavior classification was adopted in “top-down” ways. Both implicit and explicit principles could make the structure of Chinese-Western personality different significantly. Principles of behavior classification were influenced by the nature of cultures, and was discussed extensively elsewhere.
Accordingly, in the second and third part of the article, etic-emic components of Chinese-Western personality structure was proved theoretically and empirically. Behavior classification was based on the recognition of the meaning of specific behavior, and each behavior may have etic and emic meanings for both Chinese and Western subjects. Therefore, behaviors in each factors (dimensions) of personality implied sum of etics and sum of emics, and then means quite different descriptions of behavior patterns for Chinese and Western subjects. It was proposed, then, that the Chinese-Western personality structure might differed for every dimension (factor). Empirical evidences supported these inferences. For example, Chinese subjects fulfilled NEO PI-R and factor analysis revealed seven factors, which were quite similar with the Big Seven Model of Chinese personality.
In the final part of the article, behavior classification was discussed theoretically, and the implications of Chinese-Western personality difference were referred as models of indigenous psychological research

Key words: personality structure, etic-emic, behavior classification, Big-Five, Seven Factor structure of Chinese personality