Wyniki wyszukiwania

Filtruj wyniki

  • Czasopisma
  • Autorzy
  • Słowa kluczowe
  • Data
  • Typ
  • Język

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Wyników: 19
Wyników na stronie: 25 50 75
Sortuj wg:

Abstrakt

The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between Big-Five personality traits, perceived self-efficacy (GSES) and dimensions of occupational burnout in accordance with Christina Maslach’s three-factor burnout model (emotional burnout, depersonalization, perceived lack of own accomplishments). Data collected among 271 teachers (82% female) aged 20–68 confirmed findings from previous research that four personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) are correlated with burnout and that they are significant predictors for all dimensions of burnout. In addition, it was shown that GSES plays a moderating role as a buffer that protects people with high levels of neuroticism from a sense of lack of own accomplishments. It was also found that GSES plays a mediating role for the relationship between Extraversion, Conscientiousness and Neuroticism and perceived lack of own accomplishments and that it is a suppressor for the relationship of neuroticism with emotional exhaustion. The results are discussed in the context of personality theories and their possible applications.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Agnieszka Sylwia Zawadzka
Maciej Kościelniak
Anna Maria Zalewska

Abstrakt

Subjective Well-Being is related to the Big-Five and to Individualistic and Collectivistic beliefs of Polish adolescents. In the present study, we examined whether Individualism and Collectivism beliefs mediate between the Big-Five and Subjective Well-being among adolescents, young and middle-aged adults. Adolescents (N = 174, 36% men, aged 14–18), young (N = 254, 45% men, aged 19–24) and middle-aged adults (N = 252, 54% men, aged 40–55) completed the NEO-FFI, the Ind-Col20, and measures of Subjective Well-being. The three groups differed on all dimensions. Adolescents reported the highest Neuroticism, the lowest Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, the highest Individualism and Collectivism beliefs and lowest SWB. Among adolescents, SEM analyses indicated that Subjective Well-being was negatively related to Neuroticism and Agreeableness, positively to Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Horizontal Individualism, Horizontal and Vertical Collectivism. Among young and middle-aged adults Subjective Well-being was negatively related to Neuroticism and Horizontal Collectivism, positively to Openness, Conscientiousness, Horizontal and Vertical Individualism. Beliefs partially mediated the effects of traits. Relationships were different for cognitive and affective Subjective Well-being indices.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Anna M. Zalewska
Słowa kluczowe encyclopedia big data Wikipedia

Abstrakt

Wikipedia, one of the world’s most popular websites, owes its success to its authors – i.e. to all of us. But how do we know if the information it offers is reliable?
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Włodzimierz Lewoniewski
1

  1. Department of Information SystemsPoznań University of Economics and Business
Słowa kluczowe statistics herbaria big data

Abstrakt

Mathematics offers tools renowned for their objectivity, which is a cornerstone of scientific inquiry. Yet the question arises: how accurately do statistical methods really reflect the complexities of the real world?
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Dominik Tomaszewski
1

  1. PAS Institute of Dendrology in Kórnik

Abstrakt

W artykule opisuję fenomen big data i jak ma się on do pracy badawczej realizowanej w ramach nauk eksperymentalnych. Poszukuję odpowiedzi na dwa ważne pytania. Czy metody badawcze zaproponowane w ramach paradygmatu big data mają zastosowanie w naukach eksperymentalnych? Czy zastosowanie metod badawczych z paradygmatu big data w konsekwencji prowadzi do nowego rozumienia tego, czym jest nauka?

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Sławomir Leciejewski

Abstrakt

In the heterogeneous economic space, big cities are development poles that are usually characterized by the best conditions for running a business and the highest level and living conditions. Their role in development processes is the subject of many discussions. On 23 October 2017, at the invitation of the Mayor of Cracow, J. Majchrowski, an external Plenary meeting of the Committee for Spatial Development of the Polish National Academy of Sciences was held in Cracow, the aim of which was to discuss the role of big cities in Poland›s socio-economic development. This article presents the author›s opinions in a synthetic way, presenting the most important issues raised by him during the panel on the importance of Polish metropolises in shaping the development potential of the country and the region. In addition to the fundamental terminological and problematic discussion, the article describes the experience of Poznań as an agglomeration signifi cantly aff ecting the development of the region, formulating in the summary recommendations referring to the practice of regional policy.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Paweł Churski

Abstrakt

This research analyzes factors affecting the scientific success of
central bankers. We combine data from the RePEc and EDIRC databases,
which contain information about economic publications of authors from
182 central banks. We construct a dataset containing information about
3312 authors and almost 80,000 scientific papers published between 1965
and 2020. The results from Poisson regressions of citation impact
measure (called the h-index) on a number of research features
suggest that economists from the U.S. Federal Reserve Banks,
international financial institutions, and some eurozone central banks
are cited more frequently than economists with similar characteristics
from central banks located in emerging markets. Researchers from some
big emerging economies like Russia or Indonesia are cited particularly
infrequently by the scientific community. Beyond these outcomes, we
identify a significant positive relationship between research networking
and publication success. Moreover, economists cooperating with highly
cited scientists also obtain a high number of citations even after
controlling for the size of their research networks.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jakub Rybacki
1
Dobromił Serwa
2

  1. Polish Economic Institute, Poland
  2. SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, Warsaw, Poland

Abstrakt

Power big data contains a lot of information related to equipment fault. The analysis and processing of power big data can realize fault diagnosis. This study mainly analyzed the application of association rules in power big data processing. Firstly, the association rules and the Apriori algorithm were introduced. Then, aiming at the shortage of the Apriori algorithm, an IM-Apriori algorithm was designed, and a simulation experiment was carried out. The results showed that the IM-Apriori algorithm had a significant advantage over the Apriori algorithm in the running time. When the number of transactions was 100 000, the running of the IM-Apriori algorithm was 38.42% faster than that of the Apriori algorithm. The IM-Apriori algorithm was little affected by the value of supportmin. Compared with the Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), the IM-Apriori algorithm had better accuracy. The experimental results show the effectiveness of the IM-Apriori algorithm in fault diagnosis, and it can be further promoted and applied in power grid equipment.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Jianguo Qian
Bingquan Zhu
Ying Li
Zhengchai Shi

Abstrakt

With the rapid development of remote sensing technology, our ability to obtain remote sensing data has been improved to an unprecedented level. We have entered an era of big data. Remote sensing data clear showing the characteristics of Big Data such as hyper spectral, high spatial resolution, and high time resolution, thus, resulting in a significant increase in the volume, variety, velocity and veracity of data.This paper proposes a feature supporting, salable, and efficient data cube for timeseries analysis application, and used the spatial feature data and remote sensing data for comparative study of the water cover and vegetation change. In this system, the feature data cube building and distributed executor engine are critical in supporting large spatiotemporal RS data analysis with spatial features. The feature translation ensures that the geographic object can be combined with satellite data to build a feature data cube for analysis. Constructing a distributed executed engine based on dask ensures the efficient analysis of large-scale RS data. This work could provide a convenient and efficient multidimensional data services for many remote sens-ing applications.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Yassine Sabri
1
Fadoua Bahja
1
Henk Pet
2

  1. Laboratory of Innovation in Management and Engineering for Enterprise (LIMIE), ISGA Rabat, 27 Avenuel Oqba, Agdal, Rabat, Morocco
  2. Terra Motion Limited, 11 Ingenuity Centre, Innovation Park, Jubilee Campus, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK

Abstrakt

Potoczna obserwacja codzienności ujawnia rosnące znaczenie metod nauki o danych (data science), które w coraz większym stopniu stają się częścią głównego nurtu wiedzotwórczego. Cyfrowe technologie i ich potencjał gromadzenia oraz przetwarzania danych zapoczątkował narodziny „czwartego paradygmatu” nauki, opartego na danych dużych rozmiarów (big data). Kluczowe dla tych przemian są procesy datafikacji oraz eksploracji danych, pozwalające na odkrywanie wiedzy z danych „zanieczyszczonych”. Głównym celem rozważań jest opis zjawisk składających się na te procesy oraz wskazanie ich możliwych konsekwencji epistemologicznych. Założono, że nasilające się tendencje datafikacyjne mogą spowodować ukonstytuowanie się datacentrycznego sposobu postrzegania wszystkich aspektów rzeczywistości, czyniąc z danych oraz metod ich przetwarzania rodzaj „wyższej instancji” kształtującej ludzki sposób myślenia o świecie. Badania mają charakter teoretyczny – przeanalizowano takie zagadnienia jak proces datafikacji, pojęcie data science, wskazano także obszary rodzące wątpliwości wobec prawomocności tej formy poznania.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Grażyna Osika
Pobierz PDF Pobierz RIS Pobierz Bibtex

Abstrakt

The current literature on personality types—understood as basic configurations of the Big Five’s personality traits—provides inconsistent results. The most commonly reported, three-type RUO (Resilient-Undercontrolled- Overcontrolled) solution is not definitive, as other solutions are also" often obtained. The current paper starts from reviewing and discussing the inconsistencies found in the previous results as well as in the RUO typology itself. The prevalence of an exploratory orientation in research on personality type was interpreted as the main cause of these problems. Then, we proposed a solution by using the Two Factor Model of personality and its extension—the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits—as the theoretical foundation for a four-type RUNO typology (Resilient- Undercontrolled-Nonresilient-Overcontrolled). The paper presents the RUNO personality typology and its theoretical consequences – in particular, we argue that the RUNO (a) is the most theoretically justified, and therefore, empirically expected solution, (b) allows us to explain why the three-type RUO solution is so commonly obtained, and (c) helps to solve some other problems that have arisen in the literature (e.g., with “typeness”).
Przejdź do artykułu

Bibliografia


Alessandri, G., & Vecchione, M. (2017). Resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled personality types across cultures. In A. T. Church (Ed.), The Praeger handbook of personality across cultures: Culture and characteristic adaptations (pp. 211-246). Santa Barbara, CA, US: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.
Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Donnellan, B. M., Eisenberg, N., Caprara, G. V., & Cieciuch, J. (2013). On the Cross-Cultural Replicability of the Resilient, Undercontrolled, and Overcontrolled Personality Types: Replicability of the RUO Types. Journal of Personality, 82(4), 340–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12065
Anusic, I., Schimmack, U., Pinkus, R., & Lockwood, P. (2009). The nature and structure of correlations among big five ratings: The Halo- Alpha-Beta model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1142–1156. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017159
Asendorpf, J. B. (2002). Editorial: The Puzzle of Personality Types. European Journal of Personality, 16, S1–S5. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.446
Asendorpf, J. B. (2006). Typeness of personality profiles: A continuous person-centred approach to personality data. European Journal of Personality, 20, 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.575
Asendorpf, J. B., Borkenau, P., Ostendorf, F., & Van Aken, M. A. G. (2001). Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15(3), 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.408
Avdeyeva, T. V., & Church, A. T. (2005). The cross-cultural general-izability of personality types: a Philippine study. European Journal of Personality, 19(6), 475–499. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.555
Barbaranelli, C. (2002). Evaluating cluster analysis solutions: an application to the Italian NEO personality inventory. European Journal of Personality, 16, S43–S55. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.449
Becker, P. (1998). Special feature: A multifacet circumplex model of personality as a basis for the description and therapy of personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 12(3), 213-225. https:// doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1998.12.3.213
Becker, P. (1999). Beyond the Big Five. Personality and Individual Differences,26, 511–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00168-8
Berry, J. W., Elliott, T. R., & Rivera, P. (2007). Resilient, Under-controlled, and Overcontrolled Personality Prototypes Among Persons With Spinal Cord Injury. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89(3), 292–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701629813
Block, J. (1971). Lives through time. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft Book. Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 177, 187–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117
Block, J. (2010). The five-factor framing of personality and beyond: Some ruminations. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478401003596626
Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1980). The role of ego-control and ego- resiliency in the organization of behavior. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Development of cognition, affect and social relations: The Minnesota symposia on child psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39-101).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.450
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Perugini, M. (1993). The “big five questionnaire”: A new questionnaire to assess the five factor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(3), 281– 288. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90218-R
Caspi, A. (1998). Personality development across the life course. In W. Damon (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, 5th ed. N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Social, emotional, and personality development (Vol. 3, pp. 311–388). New York: Wiley.
Caspi, A., Harrington, H., Milne, B., Amell, J. W., Theodore, R. F., & Moffitt, T. E. (2003). Children’s behavioral styles at age 3 are linked to their adult personality traits at age 26. Journal of Personality, 71, 495–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7104001
Chang, L., Connelly, B.S., & Geeza, A. A. (2012). Separating method factors and higher order traits of the Big Five: A meta-analytic multitrait–multimethod approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(2), 408–426. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025559
Cieciuch, J., & Strus, W. (2017). Two-Factor Model of Personality. In: V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_2129-1
Costa, P. T., Herbst, J. H., McCrae, R. R., Samuels, J., & Ozer, D. J. (2002). The replicability and utility of three personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16(S1), S73–S87. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.448
Costa, P. T. J., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Re-sources.
De Fruyt, F., Mervielde, I., & Van Leeuven, K. (2002). The consistency of personality type classification across samples and five-factor measures. European Journal of Personality, 16, S57–S72. https://doi. org/10.1002/per.444
De Raad, B., & Perugini, M. (2002). Big Five factor assessment: Introduction. In B. De Raad & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five assessment (pp. 1-26). Seattle – Toronto – Bern – Gottingen: Hogrefe and Huber Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017184
DeYoung, C. G. (2005). Cognitive ability and externalizing behavior in a psychobiological personality framework (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto. DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi- informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1138
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00171-4
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., Seguin, J. R., & Tremblay, R. E. (2008). Externalizing behavior and the higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 947–953. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013742.
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246-1256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246
Donnellan, M.B. & Robins, R.W. (2010). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types: Issues and controversies. Person-ality and Social Psychology Compass, 3, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00313.x
Donnellan, M. B., Frederick, L., Oswald, B. M. B., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.18.2.192
Ekehammar, B., & Akrami, N. (2003). The relation between personality and prejudice: a variable- and a person-centered approach. European Journal of Personality, 17(6), 449–464. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.494
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences. A natural science approach. New York: Plenum Press. Freudenstein, J.-P., Strauch, C., Mussel, P. & Ziegler, M. (2019). Four personality types may be neither robust nor exhaustive. Nature Human Behaviour, 3, 1045–1046. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0721-4
Gerlach, M., Farb, B., Revelle, W., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2018). A robust data-driven approach identifies four personality types across four large data sets. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 735–742. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0419-z
Gerlitz J. Y., & Schupp, J. (2005). Zur Erhebung der Big-Five-basierten Persönlichkeitsmerkmale im SOEP. Dokumentation der Instrumen-tenentwicklung BFI-S auf Basis des SOEP-Pretests 2005. DIW Research, Notes 4.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In: I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
Gramzow, R. H., Sedikides, C., Panter, A. T., Sathy, V., Harris, J., & Insko, C. A. (2004). Patterns of self-regulation and the Big Five. European Journal of Personality, 18(5), 367–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.513
Grumm, M., von Collani. G. (2009). Personality types and self-reported aggressiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 845–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.001
Herzberg, P. Y., & Roth, M. (2006). Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? an extension of personality prototype research. European Journal of Personality, 20(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.557
Hofstee, W. K. B. (2002). Types and variables: Towards a congenial procedure for handling personality data. European Journal of Personality, 16, S89–S96. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.447
Hofstee, W. K. B., De Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. (1992). Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(1), 146–163 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.1.146.
Isler, L., Liu, J. H., Sibley, C. G. & Fletcher, G. J. O. (2016). Self- Regulation and personality profiles: Empirical development, long-itudinal stability and predictive ability. European Journal of Personality, 30(3), 274–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2054
Isler, L., Garth, J. O., Fletcher, G. J. O. Liu, J. H., & Sibley, C. G. (2017). Validation of the four-profile configuration of personality types within the Five-Factor Model. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.058
John, O., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 102– 138).
Guilford Press. Johnson, J. A. (2014). Measuring thirty facets of the Five Factor model with a 120-item public domain inventory: development of the IPIP- NEO-120. Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.05.003
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00969.x
Leikas, S., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2014). Personality types during transition to young adulthood: How are they related to life situation and well- being? Journal of Adolescence, 37(5), 753–762. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.01.003
McAdams, D. P. (1992). The Five-Factor Model in personality: A critical appraisal. Journal of Personality, 60, 329-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00976.x
McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61(3), 204–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.3.204
McCrae, R. R. (2009). The physics and chemistry of personality. Theory & Psychology, 19, 670 – 687. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309341928
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
McCrae, R. R., Jang, K. L., Ando, J., Ono, Y., Yamagata, S., Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Spinath, F. M. (2008). Substance and artifact in the higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 442–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.2.442
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., Costa, P. T., Jr., & Ozer, D. J. (2006). Person-factors in the California Adult Q-Set: Closing the door on personality trait types? European Journal of Personality, 20, 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.553
Meeus, W., Van de Schoot, R., Klimstra, T., & Branje, S. (2011). Personality types in adolescence: Change and stability and links with adjustment and relationships: A five-wave longitudinal study.Developmental Psychology, 47(4), 1181–1195 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023816.
Mervielde, I., & Asendorpf, J. (2000). Variable-centered and person- centered approaches to childhood personality. In S. Hampson (Ed.), Advances in personality psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 37–76). London: Routledge.
Merz, E. L., & Roesch, S. C. (2011). A latent profile analysis of the Five Factor Model of personality: Modeling trait interactions. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(8), 915–919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.07.022
Musek, J. (2007). A General Factor of Personality: Evidence of the Big One in the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1213-1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.02.003
Rammstedt, B., Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Borkenau, P. (2004). Resilients, Overcontrollers, and Undercontrollers: The replicability of the three personality prototypes across informants. European Journal of Personality, 18(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.495
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(1), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.157
Rushton, J. P., & Irving, P. (2011). The General Factor of Personality: normal and abnormal. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 134-163). London: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1996). The language of personality: Lexical perspectives on the five factor model. In J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 21–50). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Sava, F. A., & Popa, R. I. (2011). Personality types based on the big five model. A cluster analysis over the Romanian population. Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15(3), 359–384.
Schnabel, K., Asendorpf, J. B., & Ostendorf, F. (2002). Replicable types and subtypes of personality: German NEO-PI-R versus NEO-FFI. European Journal of Personality, 16, S7–S24. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.445
Simsek, Ö. F., Koydemir, S., & Schütz, A. (2012). A multigroup multitrait- multimethod study in two countries supports the validity of a two- factor higher order model of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 442–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.04.005
Solís-Cámara R., P., Meda Lara, R.M., Moreno Jiménez, B., Palomera Chávez, A. & Juárez Rodríguez, P. (2017). Comparación de la salud subjetiva entre prototipos de personalidad recuperados en población general de México [Comparison of subjective health between personality prototypes extracted from general population of Mexico]. Acta colombiana de Psicología, 20(2), 214-226. https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2017.20.2.10
Specht, J., Luhmann, M., & Geiser, C. (2014). On the consistency of personality types across adulthood: Latent profile analyses in two large-scale panel studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(3), 540–556. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036863
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(4), 442–446. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.016
Strelau, J. (2002). Psychologia różnic indywidualnych [The psychology of individual differences]. Warsaw, Poland: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J. (2017). Towards a synthesis of person-ality, temperament, motivation, emotion and mental health mod-els within the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Journal of Research in Personality, 66, 70-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.12.002.
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J. (2019). Are the questionnaire and the psycho- lexical Big Twos the same? Towards an integration of personality structure within the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Interna-tional Journal of Personality Psychology, 5, 18-35. https://doi.org/10.21827/ijpp.5.35594
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000017
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.002
Zawadzki, B. (2016). Gamma i Delta w ujęciu Kołowego Modelu Metacech a przekonania w zaburzeniach osobowości [Gamma and Delta in the perspective of the Circumplex of Personality Metratraits and beliefs in personality disorders]. In A. Rynkiewicz, K. Jan-kowski, & W. Oniszczenko (Eds.), Wybrane metody i paradygmaty badawcze w psychologii [Selected research methods and paradigms in psychology] (pp. 203–220). Warsaw, PL: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Zawadzki, B. (2017). The location of personality disorders in the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Annals of Psychology, 20(2), 493–512. https://doi.org/10.18290/rpsych.2017.20.2-7en
Zawadzki, B., & Strelau, J. (2003a). Identyfikacja trzech podstawo-wych prototypów osobowości w grupach polskich: Próba reorien-tacji badań nad osobowością z koncepcji cech w koncepcję typów? [The identification of three basic personality prototypes: The attempt to reorientation of personality research from concept of traits to concept of types?]. Studia Psychologiczne, 41(4), 217– 242.
Zawadzki, B., & Strelau, J. (2003b). Trzy podstawowe typy czy cztery struktury temperamentu? [Three basic types or four struc-tures of temperament?]. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 6, 271 –285.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Włodzimierz Strus
1
Natalia Cybis
1
Jan Cieciuch
1
Tomasz Rowiński
1

  1. Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw
Pobierz PDF Pobierz RIS Pobierz Bibtex

Abstrakt

Personality types are currently understood as basic configurations of personality traits from the Big Five model. However, to date, research has provided inconsistent results as to the number and content of personality types. The broadest support was found for the three-type RUO (Resilient-Undercontrolled-Overcontrolled) typology, but many studies indicate the existence of four or five basic personality types. The prevalence of an exploratory orientation in research on personality types was identified as the main cause of these inconsistencies, and the need for a well-justified theoretical basis for the personality typology was observed. The current study examines the predictions resulting from the four-type RUNO (Resilient-Undercontrolled-Nonresilient-Overcontrolled) typology – a proposal built on the Two Factor Model of personality and its extension: the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. We used various measurement instruments (11 questionnaires to measure Big Five traits), samples (five samples with a total of 4430 respondents) and statistical procedures (cluster analyses on row and standardized data) testing the three-type, four-type and five-type solutions. We expected that although the robustness of the empirically derived type-solutions across different research conditions will be limited (in accordance with the previous studies), the configurations of each type found in the Big Five data will be in a concordance with the RUNO typology. Obtained results roughly confirmed our expectations. We conclude that a renewed focus on the theoretical basis of personality typology seems to be necessary to further advance this field of research and the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits enables the essential turn from an exploratory approach (usually used in the previous studies) to a theoretically driven approach (proposed by us in the current study) to personality typology.
Przejdź do artykułu

Bibliografia


Alessandri, G., & Vecchione, M. (2017). Resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled personality types across cultures. In A. T. Church (Ed.), The Praeger handbook of personality across cultures: Culture and characteristic adaptations (pp. 211-246). Santa Barbara, CA, US: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.
Asendorpf, J. B., Borkenau, P., Ostendorf, F., & Van Aken, M. A. G. (2001). Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15(3), 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.408
Barbaranelli, C. (2002). Evaluating cluster analysis solutions: an application to the Italian NEO personality inventory. European Journal of Personality, 16, S43–S55. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.449
Block, J. (1971). Lives through time. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft Book.
Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 177, 187–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117
Block, J. (2010). The five-factor framing of personality and beyond: Some ruminations. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478401003596626
Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1980). The role of ego-control and ego- resiliency in the organization of behavior. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Development of cognition, affect and social relations: The Minnesota symposia on child psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39-101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Perugini, M. (1993). The “big five questionnaire”: A new questionnaire to assess the five factor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(3), 281– 288. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90218-R
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Vecchione, M. (2007). BFQ-2 Big Five Questionnaire –2. Manuale. Firenze: Giunti O.S. Organizzazioni Speciali.
Cieciuch, J., & Strus, W. (2017). Two-Factor Model of Personality. In: V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_2129-1
Cieciuch, J., Strus, W., Rowiński, T., & Vecchione, M. (2012). Polish version of the Big Five Questionnaire-2. 16th European Conference on Personality, Trieste, Italy, 10-14.07.2012
Costa, P. T., Herbst, J. H., McCrae, R. R., Samuels, J., & Ozer, D. J. (2002). The replicability and utility of three personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16(S1), S73–S87. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.448
Costa, P. T. J., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Re-sources.
De Raad, B., & Perugini, M. (2002). Big Five factor assessment: Introduction. In B. De Raad & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five assessment (pp. 1-26). Seattle – Toronto – Bern – Gottingen: Hogrefe and Huber Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017184
DeYoung, C. G. (2005). Cognitive ability and externalizing behavior in a psychobiological personality framework (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto.
DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi- informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1138
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00171-4
DeYoung, C., Quilty, L., & Peterson, J. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880–896. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.880
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246-1256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246
Donnellan, M.B. & Robins, R.W. (2010). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types: Issues and controversies. Person-ality and Social Psychology Compass, 3, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17519004.2010.00313.x
Gerlach, M., Farb, B., Revelle, W., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2018). A robust data-driven approach identifies four personality types across four large data sets. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 735–742. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0419-z
Gerlitz J. Y., & Schupp, J. (2005). Zur Erhebung der Big-Five-basierten Persönlichkeitsmerkmale im SOEP. Dokumentation der Instrumen-tenentwicklung BFI-S auf Basis des SOEP-Pretests 2005. DIW Research, Notes 4.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In: I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
Gramzow, R. H., Sedikides, C., Panter, A. T., Sathy, V., Harris, J., & Insko, C. A. (2004). Patterns of self-regulation and the Big Five. European Journal of Personality, 18(5), 367–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.513
Grumm, M., von Collani. G. (2009). Personality types and self-reported aggressiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 845–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.001
Hendriks, A. A. J., Hofstee, W. K. B., & De Raad, B. (1999). The Five- Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI). Personality and Individual Differences, 27(2), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00245-1
Herzberg, P. Y., & Roth, M. (2006). Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? an extension of personality prototype research. European Journal of Personality, 20(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.557
Hofstee, W. K. B., De Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. (1992). Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(1), 146–163 https://doi.org/10.1037/002-3514.63.1.146.
Isler, L., Liu, J. H., Sibley, C. G. & Fletcher, G. J. O. (2016). Self- Regulation and personality profiles: Empirical development, long-itudinal stability and predictive ability. European Journal of Personality, 30(3), 274–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2054
John, O., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 102– 138). Guilford Press.
Leikas, S., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2014). Personality types during transition to young adulthood: How are they related to life situation and well- being? Journal of Adolescence, 37(5), 753–762. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.01.003
McAdams, D. P. (1992). The Five-Factor Model in personality: A critical appraisal. Journal of Personality, 60, 329-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00976.x
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., Costa, P. T., Jr., & Ozer, D. J. (2006). Person-factors in the California Adult Q-Set: Closing the door on personality trait types? European Journal of Personality, 20, 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.553
Merz, E. L., & Roesch, S. C. (2011). A latent profile analysis of the Five Factor Model of personality: Modeling trait interactions. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(8), 915–919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.07.022
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(1), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.157
Rowiński, T., Cieloch, M., Cybis, N., Strus, W., Cieciuch, J. (2014). Polska adaptacja i wersja skrócona kwestionariusza IPIP-NEO-PI-R. Referat na XXXV Zjeździe Naukowym Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychologicznego „Psychologia w zmieniającym się świecie”, Bydgoszcz, 18-21.09.2014.
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1996). The language of personality: Lexical perspectives on the five factor model. In J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 21–50). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Sava, F. A., & Popa, R. I. (2011). Personality types based on the big five model. A cluster analysis over the Romanian population. Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15(3), 359–384.
Siuta, J. (2006). Inwentarz Osobowości NEO-PI-R Paula T. Costy Jr i Roberta R. McCrae. Adaptacja polska. Podręcznik. [The NEO-PI-R Personality Inventory by Paul T. Costa Jr. and Robert McCrae: Polish adaptation. Manual]. Warsaw: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychologicznego.
Specht, J., Luhmann, M., & Geiser, C. (2014). On the consistency of personality types across adulthood: Latent profile analyses in two large-scale panel studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(3), 540–556. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036863
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(4), 442–446. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.016
Strelau, J. (2002). Psychologia różnic indywidualnych [The psychology of individual differences]. Warsaw, Poland: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Strus, W., & Cieciuch, J. (2017). Towards a synthesis of persona-lity, temperament, motivation, emotion and mental health models within the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Journal of Research in Personality, 66, 70-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.12.002.
Strus, W., & Cieciuch, J. (2019). Are the questionnaire and the psycho- lexical Big Twos the same? Towards an integration of personality structure within the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Interna-tional Journal of Personality Psychology, 5, 18-35. https://doi.org/10.21827/ijpp.5.35594
Strus, W., & Cieciuch, J. (2021). Higher-order factors of the Big Six – Similarities between Big Twos identified above the Big Five and the Big Six. Personality and Individual Differences, 171, 110544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110544
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, T. (2012). Polish version of Big five Aspects Scales from International Personality Item Pool. 16th European Conference on Personality, Trieste, Italy, 10-14.07.2012.
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, T. (2014a). The Circumplex of Personality Metatraits: A synthesizing model of personality based on the Big Five. Review of General Psychology, 18(4), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000017
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, T. (2014b). Circumplex structure of personality traits measured with the IPIP-45AB5C questionnaire in Poland. Personality and Individual Differences, 71, 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.07.018
Strus, W., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, T. (2014c). The Polish adaptation of the IPIP-BFM-50 questionnaire for measuring five personality traits in the lexical approach. Annals of Psychology, 2(17), 347–366.
Strus, W., Cybis, N., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, T. (2021). Theoretical framework for a RUNO personality typology based on the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 52(3), 197–210. https://doi.org/10.24425/ppb.2021.137885.
Trapnell, P. D., & Wiggins, J. S. (1990). Extension of the Interpersonal Adjective Scales to include the Big Five dimensions of personality (IASR-B5). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 781– 790. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.4.781
Zawadzki, B. (2016). Gamma i Delta w ujęciu Kołowego Modelu Metacech a przekonania w zaburzeniach osobowości [Gamma and Delta in the perspective of the Circumplex of Personality Metratraits and beliefs in personality disorders]. In A. Rynkiewicz, K. Jankowski, & W. Oniszczenko (Eds.), Wybrane metody i para-dygmaty badawcze w psychologii [Selected research methods and paradigms in psychology] (pp. 203–220). Warsaw, PL: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Zawadzki, B. (2017). The location of personality disorders in the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. Annals of Psychology, 20(2), 493–512. https://doi.org/10.18290/rpsych.2017.20.2-7en
Zawadzki, B., Strelau, J., Szczepaniak, P., & Śliwińska, M., (1998). Inwentarz Osobowości NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae: adaptacja polska. Podręcznik. [Personality Inventory NEO-FFI by Costa and McCrae: Polish adaptation. Manual]. Warsaw: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychologicznego.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Włodzimierz Strus
1
Natalia Cybis
1
Jan Cieciuch
1
Tomasz Rowiński
1

  1. Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw

Abstrakt

Aiming at the problems of low accuracy, low efficiency and low stability of traditional methods and recent developments in advanced technology incite the industries to be in sync with modern technology. With respect to various available techniques, this paper designs a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model of the manufacturing industry for transferring risk based on economic big-data analytics. The big-data analysis method is utilized to obtain the data source of fuzzy evaluation of the manufacturing industry to transfer risk using data as the basis of risk evaluation. Based on the risk factors, the proposed model establishes the risk index system of the manufacturing industry and uses the expert evaluation method to design the scoring method of the evaluation index system. To ensure the accuracy of the evaluation results, the manufacturing industry's fuzzy comprehensive model is established using the entropy weight method, and the expert evaluation results are modified accordingly. The experimental results show that the highest efficiency of the proposed method is 96%, the highest accuracy of the evaluation result is 75%. The evaluation result's stability is higher than the other existing methods, which fully verifies the effectiveness and can provide a reliable theoretical basis for enterprise risk evaluation research.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Tong Sun
1
Chunzhi Liu
2

  1. Department of Economics, Shenyang Institute of Science and Technology, Shenyang, 110167, China
  2. College of International Business, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang, 110034, China

Abstrakt

The road network development programme, as well as planning and design of transport systems of cities and agglomerations require complex analyses and traffic forecasts. It particularly applies to higher-class roads (motorways and expressways), which in urban areas, support different types of traffic. Usually there is a conflict between the needs of long-distance traffic, in the interest of which higher-class roads run through undeveloped areas, and the needs of bringing such road closer to potential destinations, cities [1]. By recognising the importance of this problem it is necessary to develop the research and methodology of traffic analysis, especially trip models. The current experience shows that agglomeration models are usually simplified in comparison to large city models, what results from misunderstanding of the significance of these movements for the entire model functioning, or the lack of input data. The article presents the INMOP 3 research project results, within the framework of which it was attempted to increase the accuracy of traffic generation in agglomeration model owing to the use of BigData – the mobile operator’s data on SIM card movements in the Warsaw agglomeration.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

A. Brzeziński
T. Dybicz
Ł. Szymański

Abstrakt

Modern IT and telecommunications technologies create new possibilities of data acquisition for the needs of traffic analyses and transport planning. At the same time, the current experience suggests that it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain data on interurban travels of people in a traditional way (among others, in Poland there has been no comprehensive survey of drivers on the sections of non-urban roads since 2006). Within the framework of the INMOP 3 research project, an attempt was made to analyse the use of the Big Data application possibilities including data from SIM cards of the mobile telephony operator [1] and data from probe vehicle data (also known as “floating car data”), as data sources for carrying out the traffic analyses and modelling of travels by all means of transport in Poland. The article presents the manner, in which the data were used, as well as methodological recommendations for creating transport models at the national, regional and local levels. Especially the results of work can be applied for systematic passenger cars trip matrix update
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Andrzej Brzeziński
1
Tomasz Dybicz
1

  1. Warsaw University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Al. Armii Ludowej 16, 00-637 Warsaw, Poland

Abstrakt

Lean thinking and Industry 4.0 have been broadly investigated in recent years in intelligent manufacturing. Lean Production is still one of the most efficient industrial solutions in business and research, despite being implemented for a long time. On the other hand, Industry 4.0 has been introduced referring to the fourth industrial revolution. This study aims to analyze the combination of both Industry 4.0 and Lean production practices through a systematic literature review from a Lean Automation perspective. In this field, 189 articles are examined using VOSviewer for cluster analysis. Then, a more detailed analysis is provided to explore how Industry 4.0 and Lean techniques are integrated from a practical perspective. Results highlighted Big Data Analysis and Value Stream Mapping as the most common techniques, also emphasizing a growing trend toward new publications. Nevertheless, few practical applications are identified in the literature highlighting six gaps in the correlation of LA practices.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Laura Lucantoni
1
Sara Antomarioni
1
Filippo Emanuele Ciarapica
1
Maurizio Bevilacqua
1

  1. Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale e Scienze Matematiche, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Italy

Abstrakt

W pracy poddano analizie trwałość przynależności do klas produktywności badawczej na poziomie indywidualnym. Do analiz wykorzystano dane pochodzące z prowadzonego przez nas Obserwatorium Polskiej Nauki (100 000 naukowców, 380 000 publikacji z ostatniej dekady) oraz metadane z bazy Scopus dotyczące niemal miliona (N = 935 167) polskich artykułów z ostatnich 50 lat. Przeanalizowano przebieg kariery naukowej 2326 polskich profesorów tytularnych. Zbadano daty kolejnych awansów naukowych i liczbę publikacji ( N = 79 027 artykułów) między awansami w ciągu 20–40 lat pracy naukowej w 14 dyscyplinach (nauki ścisłe, techniczne, inżynieryjne, matematyczne i medyczne, czyli w obszarze STEMM). Interesowało nas przemieszczanie się między trzema klasami produktywności – najwyższą (górnych 20%), przeciętną (60%) i najniższą (dolnych 20%). Połowa najbardziej produktywnych doktorów okazała się najbardziej produktywnymi doktorami habilitowanymi, a połowa najbardziej produktywnych doktorów habilitowanych –najbardziej produktywnymi profesorami tytularnymi (52,6% i 50,8%). Przechodzenie od najwyższej do najniższej i od najniższej do najwyższej klasy produktywności dotyczyło tylko 100 (4,3%) naukowców. W modelach regresji logistycznej dwoma silnymi predyktorami przynależności do najwyższej klasy produktywności wśród profesorów tytularnych okazały się wysoka produktywność w okresie bycia doktorem i w okresie bycia doktorem habilitowanym (zwiększając szanse średnio niemal dwukrotnie i czterokrotnie, o 179% i 361%). Podsumowanie obejmuje wykorzystanie Big Data do badania karier akademickich.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Marek Kwiek
1
ORCID: ORCID
Wojciech Roszka
2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Institute for Advanced Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities (IAS) UAM w Poznaniu
  2. Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu, Centrum Studiów nad Polityką Publiczną UAM

Abstrakt

W pracy analizujemy zjawisko rezygnacji z nauki akademickiej i pokazujemy, jak odchodzenie z nauki różni się między kobietami i mężczyznami, dyscyplinami akademickimi i na przestrzeni czasu. Prezentowane podejście jest kompleksowe: globalne, oparte na kohortach naukowców, i podłużne – obserwujemy działalność publikacyjną indywidualnych naukowców w czasie. Korzystając z metadanych pochodzących z bazy Scopus – globalnej bibliometrycznej bazy danych publikacji i cytowań – analizujemy kariery publikacyjne naukowców z 38 krajów OECD, którzy rozpoczęli publikowanie w 2000 r. ( N = 142 776) i w 2010 r. ( N = 232 843). W pracy przetestowano przydatność dużych zbiorów danych bibliometrycznych do globalnych analiz karier naukowych.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Marek Kwiek
1
ORCID: ORCID
Łukasz Szymula
2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Institute for Advanced Studies in SocialSciences and Humanities (IAS), Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
  2. Wydział Matematyki i Informatyki, Uniwersytetim. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu

Abstrakt

Celem niniejszego opracowania jest omówienie książki Andrzeja Targowskiego zatytułowanej Informatyka Strategiczna, która powinna stać się Biblią Informatyki w XXI w. Strategiczna informatyka jest monografią dziedziny informatyki w zakresie jej strategicznych fal rozwojowych i wyzwań postępu technologicznego oraz głównych, strategią-zorientowanych zastosowań w biznesie, służbie zdrowia, rolnictwie, edukacji i prywatnym domu. Przedstawia zestaw wyzwań strategicznych informatyki w zakresie humanistyki, cyfrowego państwa i miasta, zrównoważonego rozwoju oraz informatycznej etyki, moralności i praw.
Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Kazimierz Kowalski
1

  1. Professor Emeritus, California State University, Dominguez Hills

Ta strona wykorzystuje pliki 'cookies'. Więcej informacji