Is there credible, peer-reviewed basis for the Big Five/Five Factor personality model? It seems to really resemble the (totally non-scientific) Meyers-Briggs or similar measures, but so many big-deal people in Silicon Valley take it very seriously, and I find that mystifying.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @anildash
The FFM is part of a body of scientific work on language and personality stretching back more than a century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_hypothesis …
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jjg
Yeah, given the history of biases displayed by work of that vintage, that counts as much as a demerit as it does a credential.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @anildash
Understood. My understanding is that the FFM has been validated extensively in cross-cultural studies:https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol4/iss4/1/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Yes, some of the "classes of emotions" models (FFM only one) have been evaluated cross-culturally. It's also important to note that these models rely on emergent statistical clusters - humans see the patterns then name them, so they are our applied interpretation. Face validity?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.