Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.

Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.

El objetivo de este estudio fue obtener prototipos de personalidad en población general de México y comparar la salud subjetiva entre ellos. En total, participaron 994 individuos de 14 a 63 años de edad. Se evaluaron cinco rasgos de personalidad (Neuroticismo, Extraversión, Apertura, Responsabilidad y Amabilidad) con el NEO-FFI, y la salud subjetiva con el GHQ-12 y una pregunta sobre el estado de salud. Para corroborar la consistencia de los prototipos se dividió la muestra en dos grupos de edad: joven (de 14 a 25 años) y maduro (de 26 a 63 años). Y como resultado se recuperaron tres prototipos en ambos grupos: las personas Resilientes bajo neuroticismo y alto en el resto de los rasgos, quienes tuvieron la mejor sa... Ver más

Guardado en:

Acta Colombiana de Psicología

0123-9155

1909-9711

Juárez Rodríguez, Pedro

Palomera Chávez, Andrés

Moreno Jiménez, Bernardo

Meda Lara, Rosa Martha

Solís-Cámara, Pedro

UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE COLOMBIA

10.14718/ACP.2017.20.2.10

20

2017-07-01

200

213

Colombia

Resiliente

Disciplinado

Resiliente

Protótipos

Personalidade

Não resiliente

Disciplinado

Salud

Prototipos

Personalidad

No-resiliente

Saúde

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Pedro Solís-Cámara - 2017

id 11903128e889c964fc5cc7d9fe09b602
record_format ojs
spelling Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
Hankins, M. (2008). The reliability of the twelve-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) under realistic assumptions. BMC Public Health, 8, 355.
McDowell, I. (2006). Measuring health? a guide to rating scales and questionnaires (3ª.ed.). New York: Oxford Press.
Klimstra, T. A., Hale, W. W.. III, Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., Branje, S. J. T. & Meeus, W. H. J. (2010). A developmental typology of adolescent personality. European Journal of Personality, 24, 309-323.
Kinnunen, M. L., Metsäpelto, R. L., Feldt, T., Kokko, K., Tolvanen, A., Kinnunen, U., Leppänen, E., et al. (2012). Personality profiles and health: Longitudinal evidence among Finnish adults. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 512-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00969.x
Kaleta, D., PolaTska, K., Dziankowska-Zaborszcsyk, E., Hanke, W. & Drygas, W. (2009). Factors influencing self-perception of health status. Central European Journal of Public Health, 17(3), 122-127.
Isler, L., Liu, J. H., Sibley, C. G. & Fletcher, G. J. O. (2016). Self-Regulation and personality profiles: Empirical development, longitudinal stability and predictive ability. European Journal of Personality, 30(3), 274-287. doi: 10.1002/per.2054
Hoyle, R. H. (2010). Personality and self-regulation. En Rick H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of personality and self-regulation (pp. 1-18). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Herzberg, P. Y. & Roth, M. (2006). Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? An extension of personality prototype research. European Journal of Personality, 20, 5-28. doi: 10.1002/per.557
Herzberg, P. Y. (2009). Beyond accident-proneness: Using five-factor model prototypes to predict driving behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 1096-1100. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.08.008
Hernández, R., Fernández, C. & Baptista, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación. (5ta. ed.). Peru: McGraw-Hill.
Hart, D., Burock, D., London, B., Atkins, R. & Bonilla-Santiago, G. (2005). The relation of personality types to physiological, behavioural, and cognitive processes. European Journal of Personality, 19, 391-407.
González, S., Tello, J., Silva, P., Lüders, C., Butelmann, S., Fristch, R., Solar, F., et al. (2012). Calidad de vida en pacientes con discapacidad motora según factores sociodemográficos y salud mental. Revista Chilena de Neuro-Psiquiatría, 50 (1), 23-34.
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N., Shiner, R., Caspi, A. & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313-345.
Goldberg, D. P. & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson.
García, O. Aluja, A. & García, L. F. (2004). Psychometric properties of the Goldberg's 50 Personality Markers for the Big Five Model: A study in Spanish language. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20(4), 310-319.
Ekehammar, B. & Akrami, N. (2003). The relation between personality and prejudice: A variable- and a person-centered approach. European Journal of Personality, 17, 449-464. doi: 10.1002/per.494
Donnellan, M. B. & Robins, R. W. (2010). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types: Issues and controversies. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 3, 1-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00313.x
Díaz-Guerrero, R. (2012). Psicología del Mexicano. Descubrimiento de la etnopsicología (6ta. ed., reimpresión). México, DF: Trillas.
De Fruyt, F., Mervielde, I. & Van Leeuwen, K. (2002). The consistency of personality type classification across samples and five-factor measures. European Journal of Personality, 16, s57-s72. doi: 10.1002/per.444
Chapman, B. P. & Goldberg, L. G. (2011). Replicability and 40-year predictive power of childhood ARC types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 593-606. doi: 10.1037/a0024289 Costa, P. T. Jr. & McCrae, R. (2008). Inventario de personalidad NEO Revisado (NEO PI-R). Inventario NEO Reducido de Cinco Factores (NEO-FFI). Manual Profesional (3ra. edición revisada y ampliada). Madrid, España: TEA Ediciones S. A.
Caspi, A. (1998). Personality development accross the life course. En W. Damon, & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 311-388). New York: Wiley.
Borkenau, P., Hrebícková, M., Kuppens, P., Realo, A. & Allik, J. (2013). Sex differences in variability in personality: A study in four samples. Journal of Personality, 81(1), 49-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00784.x
Boehm, B., Asendorpf, J. B. & Avia, M. D. (2002). Replicable types and subtypes of personality: Spanish NEO-PI samples. European Journal of Personality, 16, s25-s41.
Miller, J. D. (2012). Five-factor model personality disorder prototypes: A review of their development, validity, and comparison to alternative approaches. Journal of Personality, 80(6), 1565-1591.
Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E. & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 157-171.
Asendorpf, J. B., Borkenau, P., Ostendorpf, F. & van Aken, M. A. G. (2001). Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both child and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15, 169-198. doi: 10.1002/per.408
Xie, X., Chen,W., Lei, L., Xing, C. & Zhang, Y. (2016). The relationship between personality types and prosocial behavior and aggression in Chinese adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 56-61.
Text
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Zawadzki, B. & Strelau, J. (2003). Trzy podstawowe typy czy cztery struktury temperamentu’ [Three basic types or four structures of temperament?]. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 6, 271-285.
Weir, R. C. & Gjerde, P. F. (2002). Preschool personality prototypes: Internal coherence, cross-study replicability, and developmental outcomes in adolescence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1229-1241.
Roth, M. & von Collani, G. (2007). A head-to-head comparison of big five types and traits in the prediction of social attitudes: Further evidence for a five-cluster typology. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 138-149.
Van Leeuwen, K., De Fruyt, F. & Mervielde, I. (2004). A longitudinal study of the utility of the resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types as predictors of children’s and adolescents’ problem behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28, 210-220. http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/01650254.html
Urzúa, A., Caqueo-Urízar, A., Bargsted, M. & Irarrázaval, M. (2015). ¿Afecta la forma de puntuación la estructura factorial de GHQ-12? Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 31(6), 1305-1312.
Tuuliainen/Kirsi Sipilä, L., Mäki, P., Könönen, M. & Suominen, A. L. (2015). Association between clinical signs of temporomandibular disorders and psychological distress among an adult Finnish population. Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 29(4), 370-377. doi: 10.11607/ofph.1439
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J. & Rowinski, T. (2014). The circumplex of personality metatraits: A synthesizing model of personality based on the big five. Review of General Psychology 18, (4), 273-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000017
Steca, P., Alessandri, G. & Caprara, G. V. (2010). The utility of a well-known personality typology in studying successful aging: Resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers in old age. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 442-446. Steinley, D. (2003). Local optima in K-means clustering: What you don?t know may hurt you. Psychological Methods, 8, 294-304.
Solís-Cámara, P., Meda Lara, R. M., Moreno-Jiménez, B. & Juárez, P. (2016). Estructura factorial del Cuestionario de Salud General GHQ-12 en población general de México. Salud & Sociedad, 7(1), 62-76.
Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología. (2007). Código ÿtico del Psicólogo. México: Trillas.
Smith, A. B., Oluboyede, Y., West, R., Hewison, J. & House, A. O. (2013). The factor structure of the GHQ-12: the interaction between item phrasing, variance and levels of distress. Quality of Life Research, 22, 145-152.
Smith, T. W., Williams, P. G. & Segerstrom, S. C. (2015). Personality and physical health. En M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Editors-in-Chief), Handbook of personality and social psychology: Vol. 4. Personality processes and individual differences (pp. 639-661. Washington: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14343-029
Sánchez-López, M. P. & Dresch, V. (2008). The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): Reliability, external validity and factor structure in the Spanish population. Psicothema, 20 (4), 839-843.
Barbaranelli, C. (2002). Evaluating cluster analysis solutions: An application to the Italian NEO Personality Inventory. European Journal of Personality, 16, s43-s55.
Avdeyeva, T. V. & Church, A. T. (2005). The cross-cultural generalizability of personality types: A Philippine study. European Journal of Personality, 19, 475-499.
Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Donnellan, B. M., Eisenberg, N., Caprara G. V. & Cieciuch, J. (2014). On the cross-cultural replicability of the resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled personality types. Journal of Personality, 82(4), 340-353.
Resiliente
20
Disciplinado
Resiliente
Protótipos
Personalidade
Não resiliente
Disciplinado
Salud
Prototipos
Núm. 2 , Año 2017 :Vol.20, Núm. 2.
Personalidad
No-resiliente
Juárez Rodríguez, Pedro
Palomera Chávez, Andrés
Moreno Jiménez, Bernardo
Meda Lara, Rosa Martha
Solís-Cámara, Pedro
El objetivo de este estudio fue obtener prototipos de personalidad en población general de México y comparar la salud subjetiva entre ellos. En total, participaron 994 individuos de 14 a 63 años de edad. Se evaluaron cinco rasgos de personalidad (Neuroticismo, Extraversión, Apertura, Responsabilidad y Amabilidad) con el NEO-FFI, y la salud subjetiva con el GHQ-12 y una pregunta sobre el estado de salud. Para corroborar la consistencia de los prototipos se dividió la muestra en dos grupos de edad: joven (de 14 a 25 años) y maduro (de 26 a 63 años). Y como resultado se recuperaron tres prototipos en ambos grupos: las personas Resilientes bajo neuroticismo y alto en el resto de los rasgos, quienes tuvieron la mejor salud subjetiva; lasNo-Resilientes alto neuroticismo y bajo en el resto de los rasgos, que presentaron la peor salud subjetiva; y las personas disciplinadas alto en responsabilidad y promedio en los otros rasgos, que presentaron una salud subjetiva intermedia en comparación con los otros prototipos. Finalmente, la autodisciplina y la resiliencia fueron los rasgos que discriminaron mejor la buena salud. Los hallazgos se discuten en términos de la generalización de prototipos a través de culturas.
2
Saúde
Artículo de revista
Acta Colombiana de Psicología
Akse, J., Hale, W. W. III., Engels, R. C. M. E., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W. & Meeus, W. H. J. (2007). Co-occurrence of depression and delinquency in personality types. European Journal of Personality, 21, 235-256.
Akse, J., Hale, W. W. III, Engels, R. C. M. E., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W. & Meeus, W. H. J. (2004). Personality, perceived parental rejection and problem behavior in adolescence. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 39, 980-988.
Pedro Solís-Cámara - 2017
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Español
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/1115
Publication
Universidad Católica de Colombia
application/pdf
application/pdf
Prototypes
The objective of this study was to extract personality prototypes from general population of Mexico and to compare subjective health indicators between these prototypes. Participants were 994 individuals (aged 14 to 63 years). Five personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness) were assessed with the NEO-FFI. Subjective indicators of health (self-rated health and psychological distress) were assessed with a question regarding health status and the GHQ-12. To verify the consistency of the prototypes, the sample was divided into two age groups, young (14 to 25 years) and mature (26 to 63 years.). Three stable prototypes were recovered from both groups. Resilient individuals (low neuroticism and high in other traits) had the best subjective health; the Non-Resilient individuals (high neuroticism and low in other traits) had the worst subjective health; and Self-Disciplined individuals (high conscientiousness and medium scores in other traits) were in the middle of these extremes in subjective health. Self-discipline and resilience were most discriminative in terms of subjective health. Findings are discussed in terms of the generalization of prototypes across cultures.
Comparison of subjective health between personality prototypes extracted from general population of Mexico.
Non-resilient
Personality
Self diciplined
Resilient
Health
Journal article
0123-9155
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/1115/ENG
https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2017.20.2.10
10.14718/ACP.2017.20.2.10
2017-07-01
200
213
2017-07-01T00:00:00Z
1909-9711
2017-07-01T00:00:00Z
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/1115/esp
institution UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE COLOMBIA
thumbnail https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADCATOLICADECOLOMBIA/logo.png
country_str Colombia
collection Acta Colombiana de Psicología
title Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
spellingShingle Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
Juárez Rodríguez, Pedro
Palomera Chávez, Andrés
Moreno Jiménez, Bernardo
Meda Lara, Rosa Martha
Solís-Cámara, Pedro
Resiliente
Disciplinado
Resiliente
Protótipos
Personalidade
Não resiliente
Disciplinado
Salud
Prototipos
Personalidad
No-resiliente
Saúde
Prototypes
Non-resilient
Personality
Self diciplined
Resilient
Health
title_short Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
title_full Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
title_fullStr Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
title_full_unstemmed Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México.
title_sort comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de méxico.
title_eng Comparison of subjective health between personality prototypes extracted from general population of Mexico.
description El objetivo de este estudio fue obtener prototipos de personalidad en población general de México y comparar la salud subjetiva entre ellos. En total, participaron 994 individuos de 14 a 63 años de edad. Se evaluaron cinco rasgos de personalidad (Neuroticismo, Extraversión, Apertura, Responsabilidad y Amabilidad) con el NEO-FFI, y la salud subjetiva con el GHQ-12 y una pregunta sobre el estado de salud. Para corroborar la consistencia de los prototipos se dividió la muestra en dos grupos de edad: joven (de 14 a 25 años) y maduro (de 26 a 63 años). Y como resultado se recuperaron tres prototipos en ambos grupos: las personas Resilientes bajo neuroticismo y alto en el resto de los rasgos, quienes tuvieron la mejor salud subjetiva; lasNo-Resilientes alto neuroticismo y bajo en el resto de los rasgos, que presentaron la peor salud subjetiva; y las personas disciplinadas alto en responsabilidad y promedio en los otros rasgos, que presentaron una salud subjetiva intermedia en comparación con los otros prototipos. Finalmente, la autodisciplina y la resiliencia fueron los rasgos que discriminaron mejor la buena salud. Los hallazgos se discuten en términos de la generalización de prototipos a través de culturas.
description_eng The objective of this study was to extract personality prototypes from general population of Mexico and to compare subjective health indicators between these prototypes. Participants were 994 individuals (aged 14 to 63 years). Five personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness) were assessed with the NEO-FFI. Subjective indicators of health (self-rated health and psychological distress) were assessed with a question regarding health status and the GHQ-12. To verify the consistency of the prototypes, the sample was divided into two age groups, young (14 to 25 years) and mature (26 to 63 years.). Three stable prototypes were recovered from both groups. Resilient individuals (low neuroticism and high in other traits) had the best subjective health; the Non-Resilient individuals (high neuroticism and low in other traits) had the worst subjective health; and Self-Disciplined individuals (high conscientiousness and medium scores in other traits) were in the middle of these extremes in subjective health. Self-discipline and resilience were most discriminative in terms of subjective health. Findings are discussed in terms of the generalization of prototypes across cultures.
author Juárez Rodríguez, Pedro
Palomera Chávez, Andrés
Moreno Jiménez, Bernardo
Meda Lara, Rosa Martha
Solís-Cámara, Pedro
author_facet Juárez Rodríguez, Pedro
Palomera Chávez, Andrés
Moreno Jiménez, Bernardo
Meda Lara, Rosa Martha
Solís-Cámara, Pedro
topicspa_str_mv Resiliente
Disciplinado
Resiliente
Protótipos
Personalidade
Não resiliente
Disciplinado
Salud
Prototipos
Personalidad
No-resiliente
Saúde
topic Resiliente
Disciplinado
Resiliente
Protótipos
Personalidade
Não resiliente
Disciplinado
Salud
Prototipos
Personalidad
No-resiliente
Saúde
Prototypes
Non-resilient
Personality
Self diciplined
Resilient
Health
topic_facet Resiliente
Disciplinado
Resiliente
Protótipos
Personalidade
Não resiliente
Disciplinado
Salud
Prototipos
Personalidad
No-resiliente
Saúde
Prototypes
Non-resilient
Personality
Self diciplined
Resilient
Health
citationvolume 20
citationissue 2
citationedition Núm. 2 , Año 2017 :Vol.20, Núm. 2.
publisher Universidad Católica de Colombia
ispartofjournal Acta Colombiana de Psicología
source https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/1115
language Español
format Article
rights http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Pedro Solís-Cámara - 2017
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
references Hankins, M. (2008). The reliability of the twelve-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) under realistic assumptions. BMC Public Health, 8, 355.
McDowell, I. (2006). Measuring health? a guide to rating scales and questionnaires (3ª.ed.). New York: Oxford Press.
Klimstra, T. A., Hale, W. W.. III, Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., Branje, S. J. T. & Meeus, W. H. J. (2010). A developmental typology of adolescent personality. European Journal of Personality, 24, 309-323.
Kinnunen, M. L., Metsäpelto, R. L., Feldt, T., Kokko, K., Tolvanen, A., Kinnunen, U., Leppänen, E., et al. (2012). Personality profiles and health: Longitudinal evidence among Finnish adults. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 512-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00969.x
Kaleta, D., PolaTska, K., Dziankowska-Zaborszcsyk, E., Hanke, W. & Drygas, W. (2009). Factors influencing self-perception of health status. Central European Journal of Public Health, 17(3), 122-127.
Isler, L., Liu, J. H., Sibley, C. G. & Fletcher, G. J. O. (2016). Self-Regulation and personality profiles: Empirical development, longitudinal stability and predictive ability. European Journal of Personality, 30(3), 274-287. doi: 10.1002/per.2054
Hoyle, R. H. (2010). Personality and self-regulation. En Rick H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of personality and self-regulation (pp. 1-18). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Herzberg, P. Y. & Roth, M. (2006). Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? An extension of personality prototype research. European Journal of Personality, 20, 5-28. doi: 10.1002/per.557
Herzberg, P. Y. (2009). Beyond accident-proneness: Using five-factor model prototypes to predict driving behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 1096-1100. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.08.008
Hernández, R., Fernández, C. & Baptista, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación. (5ta. ed.). Peru: McGraw-Hill.
Hart, D., Burock, D., London, B., Atkins, R. & Bonilla-Santiago, G. (2005). The relation of personality types to physiological, behavioural, and cognitive processes. European Journal of Personality, 19, 391-407.
González, S., Tello, J., Silva, P., Lüders, C., Butelmann, S., Fristch, R., Solar, F., et al. (2012). Calidad de vida en pacientes con discapacidad motora según factores sociodemográficos y salud mental. Revista Chilena de Neuro-Psiquiatría, 50 (1), 23-34.
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N., Shiner, R., Caspi, A. & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313-345.
Goldberg, D. P. & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson.
García, O. Aluja, A. & García, L. F. (2004). Psychometric properties of the Goldberg's 50 Personality Markers for the Big Five Model: A study in Spanish language. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20(4), 310-319.
Ekehammar, B. & Akrami, N. (2003). The relation between personality and prejudice: A variable- and a person-centered approach. European Journal of Personality, 17, 449-464. doi: 10.1002/per.494
Donnellan, M. B. & Robins, R. W. (2010). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types: Issues and controversies. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 3, 1-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00313.x
Díaz-Guerrero, R. (2012). Psicología del Mexicano. Descubrimiento de la etnopsicología (6ta. ed., reimpresión). México, DF: Trillas.
De Fruyt, F., Mervielde, I. & Van Leeuwen, K. (2002). The consistency of personality type classification across samples and five-factor measures. European Journal of Personality, 16, s57-s72. doi: 10.1002/per.444
Chapman, B. P. & Goldberg, L. G. (2011). Replicability and 40-year predictive power of childhood ARC types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 593-606. doi: 10.1037/a0024289 Costa, P. T. Jr. & McCrae, R. (2008). Inventario de personalidad NEO Revisado (NEO PI-R). Inventario NEO Reducido de Cinco Factores (NEO-FFI). Manual Profesional (3ra. edición revisada y ampliada). Madrid, España: TEA Ediciones S. A.
Caspi, A. (1998). Personality development accross the life course. En W. Damon, & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 311-388). New York: Wiley.
Borkenau, P., Hrebícková, M., Kuppens, P., Realo, A. & Allik, J. (2013). Sex differences in variability in personality: A study in four samples. Journal of Personality, 81(1), 49-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00784.x
Boehm, B., Asendorpf, J. B. & Avia, M. D. (2002). Replicable types and subtypes of personality: Spanish NEO-PI samples. European Journal of Personality, 16, s25-s41.
Miller, J. D. (2012). Five-factor model personality disorder prototypes: A review of their development, validity, and comparison to alternative approaches. Journal of Personality, 80(6), 1565-1591.
Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E. & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 157-171.
Asendorpf, J. B., Borkenau, P., Ostendorpf, F. & van Aken, M. A. G. (2001). Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both child and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15, 169-198. doi: 10.1002/per.408
Xie, X., Chen,W., Lei, L., Xing, C. & Zhang, Y. (2016). The relationship between personality types and prosocial behavior and aggression in Chinese adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 56-61.
Zawadzki, B. & Strelau, J. (2003). Trzy podstawowe typy czy cztery struktury temperamentu’ [Three basic types or four structures of temperament?]. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 6, 271-285.
Weir, R. C. & Gjerde, P. F. (2002). Preschool personality prototypes: Internal coherence, cross-study replicability, and developmental outcomes in adolescence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1229-1241.
Roth, M. & von Collani, G. (2007). A head-to-head comparison of big five types and traits in the prediction of social attitudes: Further evidence for a five-cluster typology. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 138-149.
Van Leeuwen, K., De Fruyt, F. & Mervielde, I. (2004). A longitudinal study of the utility of the resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types as predictors of children’s and adolescents’ problem behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28, 210-220. http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/01650254.html
Urzúa, A., Caqueo-Urízar, A., Bargsted, M. & Irarrázaval, M. (2015). ¿Afecta la forma de puntuación la estructura factorial de GHQ-12? Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 31(6), 1305-1312.
Tuuliainen/Kirsi Sipilä, L., Mäki, P., Könönen, M. & Suominen, A. L. (2015). Association between clinical signs of temporomandibular disorders and psychological distress among an adult Finnish population. Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 29(4), 370-377. doi: 10.11607/ofph.1439
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J. & Rowinski, T. (2014). The circumplex of personality metatraits: A synthesizing model of personality based on the big five. Review of General Psychology 18, (4), 273-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000017
Steca, P., Alessandri, G. & Caprara, G. V. (2010). The utility of a well-known personality typology in studying successful aging: Resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers in old age. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 442-446. Steinley, D. (2003). Local optima in K-means clustering: What you don?t know may hurt you. Psychological Methods, 8, 294-304.
Solís-Cámara, P., Meda Lara, R. M., Moreno-Jiménez, B. & Juárez, P. (2016). Estructura factorial del Cuestionario de Salud General GHQ-12 en población general de México. Salud & Sociedad, 7(1), 62-76.
Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología. (2007). Código ÿtico del Psicólogo. México: Trillas.
Smith, A. B., Oluboyede, Y., West, R., Hewison, J. & House, A. O. (2013). The factor structure of the GHQ-12: the interaction between item phrasing, variance and levels of distress. Quality of Life Research, 22, 145-152.
Smith, T. W., Williams, P. G. & Segerstrom, S. C. (2015). Personality and physical health. En M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Editors-in-Chief), Handbook of personality and social psychology: Vol. 4. Personality processes and individual differences (pp. 639-661. Washington: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14343-029
Sánchez-López, M. P. & Dresch, V. (2008). The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): Reliability, external validity and factor structure in the Spanish population. Psicothema, 20 (4), 839-843.
Barbaranelli, C. (2002). Evaluating cluster analysis solutions: An application to the Italian NEO Personality Inventory. European Journal of Personality, 16, s43-s55.
Avdeyeva, T. V. & Church, A. T. (2005). The cross-cultural generalizability of personality types: A Philippine study. European Journal of Personality, 19, 475-499.
Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Donnellan, B. M., Eisenberg, N., Caprara G. V. & Cieciuch, J. (2014). On the cross-cultural replicability of the resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled personality types. Journal of Personality, 82(4), 340-353.
Akse, J., Hale, W. W. III., Engels, R. C. M. E., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W. & Meeus, W. H. J. (2007). Co-occurrence of depression and delinquency in personality types. European Journal of Personality, 21, 235-256.
Akse, J., Hale, W. W. III, Engels, R. C. M. E., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W. & Meeus, W. H. J. (2004). Personality, perceived parental rejection and problem behavior in adolescence. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 39, 980-988.
type_driver info:eu-repo/semantics/article
type_coar http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
type_version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
type_coarversion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
type_content Text
publishDate 2017-07-01
date_accessioned 2017-07-01T00:00:00Z
date_available 2017-07-01T00:00:00Z
url https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/1115
url_doi https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2017.20.2.10
issn 0123-9155
eissn 1909-9711
doi 10.14718/ACP.2017.20.2.10
citationstartpage 200
citationendpage 213
url2_str_mv https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/1115/ENG
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/1115/esp
_version_ 1797158960384442368

Código QR

Estadísticas y Métricas Alternativas

Títulos similares