Please wait a minute...
Acta Psychologica Sinica    2019, Vol. 51 Issue (10) : 1128-1142     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01128
Reports of Empirical Studies |
Good and evil in Chinese culture: Personality structure and connotation
JIAO Liying1,YANG Ying1,XU Yan1(),GAO Shuqing1,ZHANG Heyun2
1 Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology, National Demonstration Center for Experimental Psychology Education (Beijing Normal University), Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
2 School of Government, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai 201701, China
Download: PDF(1030 KB)   HTML Review File (1 KB) 
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks     Supporting Info
Guide   
Abstract  

The ideas of good and evil characteristics have a long history in Chinese language and culture, with these characteristics considered to be two aspects of the Chinese personality. Abundant descriptions of good and evil characteristics can be found in human nature. However, the specific structures of good and evil concepts have not yet been delineated clearly and detailed studies on these concepts are limited. A careful definition is important with regard to what comprises a good or evil personality and to understand the psychological structure of the two concepts.

A lexical approach was applied to determine constitutes a good or evil personality in Chinese culture. In Study 1, a set of 3, 240 good and evil personality descriptors was selected from The Contemporary Chinese Dictionary and accompanied by daily life expressions. The list was condensed into 62 good and 65 evil items following evaluation and selection by 12 psychology graduates. In Study 2, we explored the dimensions of a good personality using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with Sample 1 (n = 313) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with Sample 2 (n = 518). Results revealed that good personality contained four dimensions: conscientiousness and integrity, altruism and dedication, benevolence and amicability, and tolerance and magnanimity. We refined the four-dimensions good personality lexical rating scale, which contained 27 items. In Study 3, we used the same method as in Study 2 to explore the structure of an evil personality (EFA: Sample 1, n = 367; CFA: Sample 2, n = 269). Results showed the evil personality contained four dimensions: atrociousness and mercilessness, mendacity and hypocrisy, calumniation and circumvention, and faithlessness and treacherousness. Thus, we employed a 28-item evil personality lexical rating scale. The internal consistency, reliability, and criterion-related validity of the two scales were verified.

The study found four-factor structures of good and evil personalities using the lexical approach and psychometrics methods, which contributes to knowledge on personality. In China, Confucius regarded benevolence as the highest moral principle for a person. Therefore, good and evil traits are embedded naturally in the personality structure of Chinese people. Understanding the structure of good and evil is useful for researchers interested in Chinese culture and for studies in Chinese indigenous psychology.

Keywords good      evil      personality structure      lexical method      Chinese culture     
ZTFLH:  B848  
Fund: 
Corresponding Authors: Yan XU     E-mail: xuyan@bnu.edu.cn
Issue Date: 19 August 2019
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
JIAO Liying
YANG Ying
XU Yan
GAO Shuqing
ZHANG Heyun
Cite this article:   
JIAO Liying,YANG Ying,XU Yan, et al. Good and evil in Chinese culture: Personality structure and connotation[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2019, 51(10): 1128-1142.
URL:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01128     OR     http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/EN/Y2019/V51/I10/1128
题目 因子1 因子2 因子3 因子4 共同度
A23守信的 0.71 0.42
A6可信任的 0.71 0.44
A54诚信的 0.70 0.48
A42尽责的 0.69 0.40
A5真诚的 0.66 0.45
A4诚实的 0.59 0.41
A39正义的 0.55 0.44
A24坦诚的 0.51 0.40
A40正直的 0.46 0.37
A62至诚的 0.44 0.37
A60品行良好的 0.44 0.33
A48肯牺牲的 0.87 0.60
A21舍己为人 0.81 0.59
A9大公无私 0.69 0.53
A14见义勇为 0.64 0.40
A30无私的 0.63 0.51
A55雪中送炭 0.63 0.40
A32以德报怨 0.56 0.33
A12肯奉献的 0.54 0.43
A52热心公益的 0.53 0.52
A36有同情心的 0.71 0.50
A1仁爱的 0.53 0.36
A51重感情的 0.45 0.37
A29为人着想的 0.44 0.37
A44善解人意的 0.42 0.38
A33友善的 0.33 0.36
A43宽宏大量的 0.69 0.62
A8大度的 0.68 0.44
A2有包容力的 0.55 0.31
A15心胸开阔的 0.45 0.40
特征值 9.53 2.96 1.36 1.30
贡献率% 31.78 9.86 4.54 4.34
累积贡献率% 31.20 41.64 46.18 50.51
  
  
模型 c2 df c2/df CFI TLI RESEA SRMR
单因子模型 1227.30 324 3.79 0.81 0.80 0.07 0.06
三因子模型 666.20 321 2.08 0.93 0.92 0.05 0.05
四因子模型 603.81 318 1.90 0.94 0.94 0.04 0.04
  
人格维度 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1. 善人格 1
2. 尽责诚信 0.85** 1
3. 利他奉献 0.84** 0.50** 1
4. 仁爱友善 0.86** 0.74** 0.62** 1
5. 包容大度 0.80** 0.57** 0.64** 0.60** 1
6. 外倾性 0.22** 0.09* 0.27** 0.16** 0.20** 1
7. 宜人性 0.49** 0.40** 0.40** 0.47** 0.40** 0.38** 1
8. 责任心 0.37** 0.42** 0.20** 0.32** 0.31** 0.20** 0.41** 1
9. 神经质 -0.24** -0.21** -0.19** -0.12** -0.28** -0.28** -0.29** -0.49** 1
10. 想象力 0.28** 0.19** 0.25** 0.30** 0.21** 0.19** 0.36** 0.18** -0.04 1
11. 利他人格 0.46** 0.31** 0.49** 0.40** 0.33** 0.27** 0.39** 0.19** -0.21** 0.26** 1
12. 社会责任 0.45** 0.31** 0.46** 0.41** 0.31** 0.21** 0.37** 0.17** -0.14** 0.27** 0.90** 1
13. 人际信任 0.40** 0.26** 0.44** 0.35** 0.27** 0.29** 0.35** 0.15** -0.17** 0.22** 0.86** 0.71** 1
14. 移情 0.37** 0.24** 0.38* 0.30** 0.30** 0.24** 0.32** 0.19** -0.22** 0.16** 0.81** 0.60** 0.60** 1
15. 社交兴趣 0.28** 0.20** 0.31** 0.20** 0.19** 0.15** 0.26** 0.13** -0.190** 0.18** 0.73** 0.50** 0.52** 0.59** 1
  
题目 因子1 因子2 因子3 因子4 共同度
A58 凶残的 0.95 0.77
A5 残暴的 0.95 0.66
A34 凶恶的 0.92 0.74
A11 残忍的 0.87 0.66
A56 心狠手辣的 0.85 0.62
A50 无恶不作的 0.79 0.69
A37 十恶不赦的 0.79 0.69
A31 好虐待的 0.78 0.59
A14 歹毒的 0.77 0.65
A19 恶毒的 0.71 0.63
A55 邪恶的 0.67 0.61
A36 伤天害理的 0.67 0.64
A45 为非作歹 0.62 0.60
A33 好侵犯的 0.55 0.48
A22 黑心的 0.42 0.53
A23 胡作非为 0.41 0.48
A9 好剥削的 0.31 0.32
A15 道貌岸然 0.77 0.53
A16 表里不一 0.72 0.63
A52 伪善的 0.71 0.55
A59 虚伪的 0.68 0.51
A65 善于作假的 0.42 0.47
A26 狡诈的 0.38 0.50
A42 好挑拨的 0.87 0.60
A24 爱嫁祸于人的 0.71 0.61
A48 好污蔑的 0.71 0.61
A62 栽赃陷害的 0.66 0.66
A17 好诋毁他人的 0.64 0.55
A29 落井下石的 0.60 0.51
A18 好刁难的 0.47 0.37
A54 好陷害他人的 0.45 0.51
A1 好暗算的 0.35 0.40
A44 忘恩负义 0.76 0.66
A8 背信弃义 0.72 0.59
A7 好背叛的 0.47 0.46
A25 见利忘义 0.47 0.48
A20 恩将仇报 0.45 0.51
特征值 16.18 4.30 1.20 1.08
贡献率% 43.72 11.62 3.25 2.92
累积贡献率% 43.72 55.34 58.59 61.51
  
模型 c2 df c2/df CFI TLI RESEA SRMR
单因子模型 1649.99 350 4.71 0.79 0.76 0.12 0.07
三因子模型 835.39 347 2.41 0.92 0.92 0.07 0.04
四因子模型 757.59 344 2.20 0.93 0.93 0.07 0.04
  
  
人格维度 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. 恶人格 1
2. 凶恶残忍 0.92** 1
3. 虚假伪善 0.81** 0.63** 1
4. 污蔑陷害 0.92** 0.74** 0.74** 1
5. 背信弃义 0.85** 0.66** 0.75** 0.79** 1
6. 善良友好 -0.70** -0.63** -0.58** -0.66** -0.61** 1
7. 马基雅维利主义 0.81** 0.66** 0.76** 0.80** 0.74** -0.68** 1
8. 精神病态 0.81** 0.79** 0.68** 0.67** 0.67** -0.72** 0.71** 1
9. 自恋 0.68** 0.54** 0.61** 0.71** 0.61** -0.67** 0.78** 0.60** 1
  
[1] Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. ( 1936). Trait-names: A psycho- lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47( 1), i-171.
[2] Ashton, M. C., & Lee, B. ( 2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11( 2), 150-166.
[3] Ashton M. C., Lee K., & de Vries, R. E. ( 2014). The HEXACO honesty-humility, agreeableness, and emotionality factors: A review of research and theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18( 2), 139-152.
[4] Boyle G. J., Saklofske D. H. , & Matthews, G. (Eds.).( 2014). Measures of personality and social psychological constructs. Academic Press..
[5] Brambilla, M., & Leach, C. W. ( 2014). On the importance of being moral: The distinctive role of morality in social judgment. Social Cognition, 32( 4), 397-408.
[6] Buckels E. E., Jones D. N., & Paulhus D. L. ( 2013). Behavioral confirmation of everyday sadism. Psychological Science, 24( 11), 2201-2209.
[7] Cao H. B., Xu Y., & Xin X . ( 2012). Schadenfreude: Malicious joy at the base of human nature. Advances in Psychological Science, 20( 3), 443-456.
[7] [ 曹红蓓, 许燕, 辛霞 . ( 2012). 幸灾乐祸: 人性“底部”的邪恶快感. 心理科学进展, 20( 3), 443-456.]
[8] Cawley M. J., Martin J. E., & Johnson J. A. ( 2000). A virtues approach to personality . Personality and Individual Differences, 28( 5), 997-1013.
[9] Cheung F. M., Leung K., Fan R. M., Song W. Z., Zhang J. X., & Zhang J. P. ( 1996). Development of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27( 2), 181-199.
[10] Donnellan M. B., Oswald F. L., Baird B. M., & Lucas R. E. ( 2006). The Mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18( 2), 192-203.
[11] Fei, D. Y . ( 2017). On good and evil aspects in "human nature". Journal of Bohai University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 39( 3), 121-125.
[11] [ 费丹乙 . ( 2017). “人性”何以言道德善恶. 渤海大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 39( 3), 121-125.]
[12] Fromm, E. ( 2013). Appendix: Character and the social process. In Escape from freedom. New York: Open Road Integrated Media.
[13] Geng Y. G., Sun Q. B., Huang J. Y., Zhu Y. Z., & Han X. H . ( 2015). Dirty dozen and short dark triad: a Chinese validation of two brief measures of the dark triad. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23( 2), 246-250.
[13] [ 耿耀国, 孙群博, 黄婧宜, 朱远征, 韩晓红 . ( 2015). 黑暗十二条与短式黑暗三联征量表: 两种黑暗三联征测量工具中文版的检验. 中国临床心理学杂志, 23( 2), 246-250.]
[14] Goldberg, L. R. ( 1992). The development of markers for the big-five structure. Psychological Assessment, 4( 1), 26-42.
[15] Goodboy, A. K., & Martin, M. M. ( 2015). The personality profile of a cyberbully: Examining the Dark Triad. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 1-4.
[16] Goodwin, G. P. ( 2015). Moral character in person perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24( 1), 38-44.
[17] Goodwin G. P., Piazza J., & Rozin P. ( 2014). Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106( 1), 148-168.
[18] Gorbaniuk O., Budzińska A., Owczarek M., Bo?ek E., & Juros K. ( 2013). The factor structure of polish personality- descriptive adjectives: an alternative psycho-lexical study. European Journal of Personality, 27( 3), 304-318.
[19] Guo Y. Y. ( 2016). Personality research. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press.
[19] [ 郭永玉 . ( 2016). 人格研究. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.]
[20] He, J. H . ( 2015). The revision of Mini International Personality five factor scale (Mini-IPIP). Journal of Chizhou University, 29( 6), 93-95.
[20] [ 何剑骅 . ( 2015). 迷你国际人格五因素量表(Mini-IPIP)的修订. 池州学院学报, 29( 6), 93-95.]
[21] Hill, P. L., & Roberts, B. W. ( 2010). Propositions for the study of moral personality development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19( 6), 380-383.
[22] Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. ( 1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6( 1), 1-55.
[23] Jia F. M. ( 2009). Personal pedagogy. Nanjing: Jiangsu Education Press.
[23] [ 贾馥茗 . ( 2009). 人格教育学. 南京: 江苏教育出版社.]
[24] Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. ( 2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 22( 2), 420-432.
[25] Jonason P. K., Zeigler-Hill V., & Okan C. ( 2017). Good v. Evil: Predicting sinning with dark personality traits and moral foundations. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 180-185.
[26] Jones, D. N., & Neria, A. L. ( 2015). The Dark Triad and dispositional aggression. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 360-364.
[27] John O. P., Naumann L. P. , & Soto, C. J.( 2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (Third Ed., pp. 114-158). New York: Guilford Press.
[28] Kaufman S. B., Yaden D. B., Hyde E., & Tsukayama E. ( 2019). The light vs. dark triad of personality: Contrasting two very different profiles of human nature. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-26.
[29] Krueger R. F., Hicks B. M., & McGue M. ( 2001). Altruism and antisocial behavior: Independent tendencies, unique personality correlates, distinct etiologies. Psychological Science, 12( 5), 397-402.
[30] Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. ( 2017). Personality Psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
[31] Marcus D. K., Zeigler-Hill V., Mercer S. H., & Norris A. L. ( 2014). The psychology of spite and the measurement of spitefulness. Psychological Assessment, 26( 2), 563-574.
[32] Melnikoff, D. E., & Bailey, A. H. ( 2018). Preferences for moral vs. immoral traits in others are conditional. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115( 4), E592-E600.
[33] Miller C. B. ( 2014). Character and moral psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[34] Mu, S. K . ( 2007). The development of Virtues Adjective Rating Scale and its applied study (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Shanghai Normal University.
[34] [ 沐守宽 . ( 2007). 美德形容词评定量表的建立及其应用研究 (博士学位论文). 上海师范大学.]
[35] Piazza J., Goodwin G. P., Rozin P., & Royzman E. B. ( 2014). When a virtue is not a virtue: Conditional virtues in moral evaluation. Social Cognition, 32( 6), 528-558.
[36] Qin, F., Xu, F. ( 2013). Review on the Studies of the Dark Triad. Advances in Psychological Science, 21( 7), 1248-1261.
[36] [ 秦峰, 许芳 . ( 2013). 黑暗人格三合一研究述评. 心理科学进展, 21( 7), 1248-1261.]
[37] Rushton J. P., Chrisjohn R. D., & Fekken G. C. ( 1981). The altruistic personality and the self-report altruism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 2( 4), 293-302.
[38] Saxton, C. ( 2006). The social psychology of good and evil. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 194( 4), 306-307.
[39] Shryack J., Steger M. F., Krueger R. F., & Kallie C. S. ( 2010). The structure of virtue: An empirical investigation of the dimensionality of the virtues in action inventory of strengths. Personality and Individual Differences, 48( 6), 714-719.
[40] Shu, Y. Z . ( 2008). The theory of human nature’s good and evil directly referring to the human heart - A hierarchical analysis of Kant's theory of human nature’s good and evil. Philosophical Researches,( 4), 60-66.
[40] [ 舒远招 . ( 2008). 直指人心的人性善恶论——康德人性善恶论的层次分析. 哲学研究, ( 4), 60-66.]
[41] Staub, E. ( 2003). The psychology of good and evil: Why children, adults, and groups help and harm others. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[42] Tang, S. J., & Guo, Y. Y . ( 2015). The structure of Chinese Machiavellian personality and questionnaire development. Psychological Exploration, 35( 1), 72-77.
[42] [ 汤舒俊, 郭永玉 . ( 2015). 中国人厚黑人格的结构及其问卷编制. 心理学探新, 35( 1), 72-77.]
[43] Tang S. J., Shu B., & Zhang W. Y . ( 2015). Revision of self-report altruism scale in Chinese college students. Journal of Yangtze University (Social Sciences), ( 7), 87-89.
[43] [ 汤舒俊, 舒博, 张文渊 . ( 2015). 《利他人格自陈量表》在大学生群体中的修订. 长江大学学报(社会科学版), ( 7), 87-89.]
[44] Walker, L. J., & Frimer, J. A. ( 2007). Moral personality of brave and caring exemplars. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93( 5), 845-860.
[45] Wan J. R. ( 2011). History of modern western ethics. Beijing: China Renmin University Press.
[45] [ 万俊人 . ( 2011). 现代西方伦理学史. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社]
[46] Wang, D. F., & Cui. H . ( 2000). Culture, language, and personality structure. Journal of Peking University: Humanities and Social Sciences, 37( 4), 38-46.
[46] [ 王登峰, 崔红 . ( 2000). 文化, 语言, 人格结构. 北京大学学报: 哲学社会科学版, 37( 4), 38-46.]
[47] Wang, D. F., & Cui. H . ( 2005 a). Personality characteristics of the Chinese (Ⅱ): kindness. Psychology Exploration, 25( 3), 52-58.
[47] [ 王登峰, 崔红 . ( 2005 a). 中国人的人格特点(Ⅱ):善良. 心理学探新, 25( 3), 52-58.]
[48] Wang, D. F., & Cui. H . ( 2005 b). Exploring personality structure of the Chinese. Journal of South West China Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 31( 5), 5-16.
[48] [ 王登峰, 崔红 . ( 2005 b). 对中国人人格结构的探索--中国人个性量表与中国人人格量表的交互验证. 西南师范大学学报(人文社会科学版), 31( 5), 5-16.]
[49] Wang D. F. , & Cui. H. (2005c). Explorations of Chinese personality. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press (China).
[49] [ 王登峰, 崔红 . ( 2005c). 解读中国人的人格. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社.]
[50] Wang, F. Y., & Zheng, H. ( 2008). Thirteen standards Confucius defined on the gentleman and the villain. Morality and Civilization,( 4), 46-51.
[50] [ 汪凤炎, 郑红 . ( 2008). 孔子界定"君子人格"与"小人人格"的十三条标准. 道德与文明, ( 4), 46-51.]
[51] Wang, Y. Q . ( 2009). Research on the structure, characteristics and intervention of undergraduates' moral personality (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Nanjing Normal University.
[51] [ 王云强 . ( 2009). 大学生道德人格的结构、特点及其干预研究(博士学位论文). 南京师范大学.]
[52] Wang, Y. Q., & Guo, B. Y . ( 2011). A preliminary study on the characteristics of undergraduates’ moral personality. Journal of Psychological Science, 34( 6), 1436-1440.
[52] [ 王云强, 郭本禹 . ( 2011). 大学生道德人格特点的初步研究. 心理科学, 34( 6), 1436-1440.]
[53] Wu, S. T . ( 2011). General belief in a just world of Chinese and its function in psychological adaptation (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Chinese Academy Sciences, Beijing.
[53] [ 吴胜涛 . ( 2011). 中国人的一般世道正义观及其心理适应功能(博士学位论文). 中国科学院研究生院, 北京.]
[54] Xiong M. M., Wang F. Y., & Cai R. X. ( 2018). Development and validation of the Chinese Modesty Scale (CMS). Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1-14.
[55] Xu, Y. ( 2009). Personality psychology. Beijing, China: Beijing Normal University Publishing Group.
[55] [ 许燕 . ( 2009). 人格心理学. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社.]
[56] Xu, Y. & Wang, P. P . ( 2011, Oct). Verb-based analysis to explore the Chinese model of personality structure. Paper presented at the meeting of the 90th Anniversary Conference of the Chinese Psychological Society and the 14th National Psychological Conference, Beijing, China.
[56] [ 许燕, 王萍萍 . ( 2011, 10月). 基于动词分析的中国人人格结构模型探索. 增强心理学服务社会的意识和功能——中国心理学会成立90周年纪念大会暨第十四届全国心理学学术会议论文摘要集, 北京.]
[57] Yang, B. ( 1999). Chinese personality structure. Beijing: Xinhua Publishing House.
[57] [ 杨波 . ( 1999). 中国人的人格结构. 北京: 新华出版社.]
[58] Yang, B. ( 2005). A factor analysis of the ancient Chinese personality structure. Journal of Psychological Science, 28( 3), 668-672.
[58] [ 杨波 . ( 2005). 古代中国人人格结构的因素探析. 心理科学, 28( 3), 668-672.]
[59] Yang F., Xia Z. C., Chen B. B., & Wu J. X . ( 2015). The characteristics of Chinese people’s honesty-humility personality and its implicit and explicit relationships. Journal of Psychological Science, 38( 5), 1162-1169.
[59] [ 杨帆, 夏之晨, 陈贝贝, 吴继霞 . ( 2015). 中国人诚实-谦虚人格的特点及其内隐外显关系. 心理科学, 38( 5), 1162-1169.]
[60] Yang, K. S., & Bond, M. H. ( 1990). Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58( 6), 1087-1095.
[61] Yang. Z. F . ( 1991). From China's "social psychology" to "Chinese social psychology"——Trying to clarify some misconceptions about indigenization. Sociological Studies,( 1), 32-38.
[61] [ 杨中芳 . ( 1991). 由中国“社会心理学”迈向“中国社会心理学”——试图澄清有关“本土化”的几个误解. 社会学研究, ( 1), 32-38.]
[62] Zhang, H. Y . ( 2016). Research on the structure, cognitive processing characteristics of virtuous personality and its influence on the exhibition of virtuous deeds (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Beijing Normal University.
[62] [ 张和云 . ( 2016). 善良人格的结构、认知加工特点及其对善行表达的影响研究(博士学位论文). 北京师范大学.]
[63] Zhang H. Y., Zhao H. H., & Xu Y . ( 2018). The structure of Chinese virtuous personality and questionnaire development. Psychological Exploration, 38( 3), 221-227.
[63] [ 张和云, 赵欢欢, 许燕 . ( 2018). 中国人善良人格的结构研究. 心理学探新, 38( 3), 221-227.]
[64] Zhang, J. X., & Zhou, M. J . ( 2006). Searching for a personality structure of Chinese: A theoretical hypothesis of a six factor model of personality traits. Advances in Psychological Science, 14( 4), 574-585.
[64] [ 张建新, 周明洁 . ( 2006). 中国人人格结构探索——人格特质六因素假说. 心理科学进展, 14( 4), 574-585.]
[65] Zuo S. J., Wang F., Xu Y., Wang F. X., & Zhao X. T. ( 2016). The fragile but bright facet in the Dark Gem: Narcissism positively predicts personal morality when individual's self-esteem is at low level. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 272-276.
[1] DOU Kai, LIU Yaozhong, WANG Yujie, NIE Yangang.  Willingness to cooperate: Emotion enhancement mechanism of perceived social mindfulness on cooperative behaviour[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(1): 101-114.
[2] ZHANG Shuwei.  Social justice, institutional trust and public cooperation intention[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(6): 794-813.
[3] CUI Liying, HE Xing, LUO Junlong, HUANG Xiaojiao, CAO Weijia, CHEN Xiaomei.  The effects of moral punishment and relationship punishment on junior middle school students’ cooperation behaviors in public goods dilemma[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(10): 1322-1333.
[4] YU Haibo;ZHENG Xiaoming;XU Chunyan;YAN Changli. The Relationships between University Student’s Employability with Subjective and Objective Job-search Performance:Liner and Invert-U Relationships[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(6): 807-822.
[5] WANG Pei,CHEN Li. The Effects of Sanction and Social Value Orientation on Trust and Cooperation in Public Goods Dilemmas[J]. , 2011, 43(01): 52-64.
[6] JIN Sheng-Hua,ZHENG Jian-Jun,XIN Zhi-Yong. The Structure and Characteristics of Contemporary Chinese Values[J]. , 2009, 41(10): 1000-1014.
[7] Wang Dengfeng,Cui Hong. An Extension of etic-emic Hypothesis of Chinese-Western Personality Constructs: Evidences From QZPS and NEO PI-R[J]. , 2008, 40(03): 327-338.
[8] Cui-Hong,Wang Dengfeng. An Analysis of the Contents of Chinese and Western Extroversion Dimension[J]. , 2006, 38(03): 414-421.
[9] Jing-Huaibin. Confucian Coping and Its Role to Mental Health[J]. , 2006, 38(01): 126-134.
[10] Zheng Quanquan,Zheng Bo,Zheng Xining,Xu Yuejin. COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON DECISION-MAKING OF GROUPS USING MULTI-METHOD UNDER MULTI-COMMUNICATION CONDITIONS[J]. , 2005, 37(02): 246-252.
[11] Wang Dengfeng,Cui Hong. PROCESSES AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHINESE PERSONALITY SCALE(QZPS)[J]. , 2003, 35(01): 127-136.
[12] Jing Huaibin(Department of psychology, Department of philosophy, Zhongshan University, Guangzhou 510275). THREE APPROACHES TO MENTAL HEALTH IN TRADITINAL CHINESE CULTURE[J]. , 2002, 34(03): 107-112.
[13] Yan Liangshi(Psychology Department, Education Science Institute, Changsha, Hunan 410081). PSYCHOLOGICAL THOUGHTS OF NATUREAND HABIT DURING HAN DYNASTY[J]. , 2001, 33(05): 78-83.
[14] Zhang Weidong (Department of Psychology, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062). STUDY ON THE DIMENSIONALITY OF THE COPING INVENTORY(COPE)[J]. , 2001, 33(01): 55-62.
[15] Xie Bo, Qian Mingyi(Beijing Univerity,Beijing 100871). PHENOMENOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SHAME AND GUILT AMONG CHINESE COLLEGE STUDENTS[J]. , 2000, 32(01): 105-109.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
Copyright © Acta Psychologica Sinica
Support by Beijing Magtech