1.北京中医药大学中医学院,北京市房山区阳光南大街与白杨东路交叉口北京中医药大学良乡校区,102488
2.国家心理健康和精神卫生防治中心
3.北京中医药大学东直门医院
tianfangwang2000@163.com
收稿:2023-05-08,
修回:2023-08-30,
纸质出版:2023-11-17
移动端阅览
韩鹏鹏,张靖,李宁等.基于结构方程模型探讨五态人格与卡特尔16种人格因素的关系[J].中医杂志,2023,64(22):2305-2309.
HAN Pengpeng,ZHANG Jing,LI Ning,et al.Study on the Relationship between Five-state Personality and Cattell's 16 Personality Factors Based on Structural Equation Model[J].Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine,2023,64(22):2305-2309.
韩鹏鹏,张靖,李宁等.基于结构方程模型探讨五态人格与卡特尔16种人格因素的关系[J].中医杂志,2023,64(22):2305-2309. DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2023.22.008.
HAN Pengpeng,ZHANG Jing,LI Ning,et al.Study on the Relationship between Five-state Personality and Cattell's 16 Personality Factors Based on Structural Equation Model[J].Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine,2023,64(22):2305-2309. DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2023.22.008.
目的
2
探讨五态人格与卡特尔16种人格因素的关系,验证五态人格测验的科学性和有效性。
方法
2
运用五态人格测验表和卡特尔16种人格因素问卷(16PF)对2020年11月至2021年1月在北京中医药大学招募的913例在校生的人格进行测评。比较研究对象与全国常模五态人格得分及研究对象不同性别五态人格得分;采用建立结构方程模型的方法,使用比较拟合指数(CFI)、塔克-刘易斯指数(TLI)、近似均方根误差(RMSEA)考察模型的拟合情况,并以五态人格(太阳、少阳、阴阳和平、太阴、少阴)分别作为结果变量,以16PF各因子为预测变量,依据标准化的参数估计结果,探索五态人格与16PF各因子的关系。
结果
2
共招募到在校生913名,最终获得有效样本756名。756名在校生五态人格太阳、少阳、太阴得分显著低于全国常模,阴阳和平得分显著高于全国常模(
P
<0.05或
P
<0.01);男性在太阳、少阳、阴阳和平、少阴维度得分显著高于女性(
P
<0.05或
P
<0.01)。五态人格各维度与16PF的关系:模型拟合结果中CFI、TLI值分别为0.993、0.980,RMSEA值为0.027,模型拟合较好。16PF因子恃强性、敢为性、怀疑性、有恒性、紧张性和稳定性正向预测太阳人格因素,世故性和忧虑性负向预测太阳人格因素(
P
<0.05或
P
<0.01);兴奋性、敢为性、恃强性和紧张性正向预测少阳人格因素,有恒性、忧虑性和世故性负向预测少阳人格因素(
P
<0.05或
P
<0.01);自律性、有恒性、稳定性和独立性正向预测阴阳和平人格因素,忧虑性负向预测阴阳和平人格因素(
P
<0.05或
P
<0.01);自律性、稳定性、独立性、有恒性和怀疑性正向预测少阴人格因素,恃强性、敢为性和兴奋性负向预测少阴人格因素(
P
<0.01);忧虑性、紧张性、怀疑性和独立性正向预测太阴人格因素,敢为性、有恒性和聪慧性负向预测太阴人格因素(
P
<0.05或
P
<0.01)。
结论
2
五态人格测验与16PF存在显著的相关性,16PF因素可预测五态人格因子,五态人格测验具有科学性和有效性。
Objective
2
To explore the relationship between five-state personality and Cattell's 16 personality factors.
Methods
2
A total of 913 students recruited from Beijing University of Chinese Medicine from November 2020 to January 2021 were assessed by using the Five-state Personality Test Form and the 16 Personality Factors Questionnaire (16PF). The five-state personality scores were compared with national norms and gender differences were examined. Additionally, a structural equation model was established and the model fit was assessed using comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). The five-state personality (Taiyang, Shaoyang, Yin-yang balance, Shaoyin and Taiyin) was used as individual outcome variables while the 16PF factors was employed as predictor variables. Based on standardized parameter estimation results, we explored the relationships between the five-state personality and 16PF.
Results
2
A total of 913 students were recruited, and 756 valid samples were obtained after excluding unqualified questionnaires. Among these, the scores of Taiyang, Shaoyang and Taiyin in the 756 school students were significantly lower than the national norms, while the scores of Yin-yang balance was significantly higher (
P
<0.05 or
P
<0.01). The scores of Taiyang, Shaoyang, Yin-yang balance and Shaoyin were significantly higher than in males compared to females (
P
<0.05 or
P
<0.01). Regarding the relationship between the dimensions of five-state personality and 16PF, the model demonstrated a good fit with CFI and TLI values of 0.993 and 0.980, respectively, and an RMSEA value of 0.027. The 16PF factors, including dominance, social boldness, vigilance, rule-consciousness, tension, and emotional stability, positively predicted the Taiyang personality traits, while privateness and apprehension negatively predicted the Taiyang personality traits (
P
<0.05 or
P
<0.01). For Shaoyang personality traits, factors such as liveliness, social boldness, dominance, and tension positively predicted them, while rule-consciousness, apprehension, and privateness negatively predicted Shaoyang perso-nality traits (
P
<0.05 or
P
<0.01). In the case of Yin-yang balance personality traits, perfectionism, rule-consciousness, emotional stability, and self-reliance positively predicted them, while apprehension negatively predicted Yin-yang balance personality traits (
P
<0.05 or
P
<0.01). Regarding Shaoyin personality traits, perfectionism, emotional stability, self-reliance, rule-consciousness, and vigilance positively predicted them, while dominance, social boldness, and liveliness negatively predicted Shaoyin personality traits (
P
<0.01). Apprehension, tension, vigilance, and self-reliance positively predicted Taiyin personality traits, while social boldness, rule-consciousness, and intelligence negatively predicted Taiyin personality traits (
P
<0.05 or
P
<0.01).
Conclusion
2
There is a significant correlation between five-state personality test and 16PF with 16PF factors capable of predicting five-state personality factors. The five-state personality demonstrates scientific validity and effectiveness.
杨秋莉 , 薛崇成 . 中医学心理学的个性学说与五态人格测验 [J]. 中国中医基础医学杂志 , 2006 , 12 ( 10 ): 777 - 779 .
李黎 , 王昊 , 杜渐 , 等 . 五态人格测验的应用情况研究 [J]. 世界中医药 , 2015 , 10 ( 5 ): 801 - 804 .
金瑜 . 心理测量 [M]. 2版 . 上海 : 华东师范大学出版社 , 2005 : 90 - 100 .
王爱平 , 许燕 , 刘云 . 五态性格测验对大学生人格测量的适用性:与16PF 的对比研究 [J]. 中国健康心理学杂志 , 2008 ( 7 ): 737 - 740 .
程开明 . 结构方程模型的特点及应用 [J]. 统计与决策 , 2006 ( 10 ): 22 - 25 .
王昊 . 基于五态人格测验与五五体质检测探讨中医人格与体质关系的研究 [D]. 北京 : 中国中医科学院 , 2013 .
薛崇成 , 杨秋莉 . 五态性格测验表手册 [M]. 北京 : 中国中医研究院针灸研究所 , 1988 : 47 .
刘菲 , 李学智 , 杨晓光 , 等 . 大学生中医体质与五态人格的相关研究 [J]. 时珍国医国药 , 2017 , 28 ( 6 ): 1530 - 1533 .
巩亚男 . 阴阳维度下典型五态人“喜”、“忧”情志激活后的事件相关电位(ERPs)差异研究 [D]. 济南 : 山东中医药大学 , 2017 .
0
浏览量
5
下载量
1
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010102007558号