The correlation of personality factors with spiritual gifts clusters

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of the study, the review of related literature and research, the methodology, and the findings are briefly summarized below.
The Purpose
Research had been undertaken to investigate the possible correlation between temperaments and spiritual gifts (Joachim, 1984) and psychological types and spiritual gifts (Phoon, 1986). These studies found that there are significant correlations between temperaments and spiritual gifts and between psychological types and spiritual gifts. However, far fewer correlations than anticipated were identified, and it was hypothesized that the instruments utilized in these studies may not have been adequate for the research questions.
A preliminary study (Naden et al., 1992) examined the possible correlation between the personality factors of the 16 PF and spiritual gifts clusters of the NSGI and hypothesized five predictive models. The strength of the correlations suggested that a full-scale study was warranted. The purpose of this present study was to explore hypothetical predictive models regarding the correlation that exists between the personality factors and five spiritual gifts clusters on the basis of two empirically developed instruments, the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire and the New Spiritual Gifts Inventory, in two contrasting cultures.
Review of Related Literature and Research The review of literature was divided into two sections. The first dealt with spiritual gifts; and the second, with personality factors.
Among the several Greek words that are translated "gift" in the New Testament, charisma and pneumatikos are prominent. Charisma, which means "gift of grace," uniquely expresses Paul's theology of spiritual gifts, and pneumatikos, which means "gift," and often translated as "spiritual" gift, connotes the idea of sovereign distribution. Other words such as diakonia, enerqema, phanerosis, and domata, along with charisma and pneumatikos, reflect the experience Paul had with spiritual gifts in his own life.
Among them, the three words that are used in 1 Cor 12:4-6 (charisma, diakoniai, and enerctemata) express the nature and purpose of spiritual gifts--the term charismata denotes the source of the gifts as divine charis; the term diakoniai means "eager readiness to serve," which implies a purpose to serve others, not the recipient; and the term enercremata means functional "outworkings," to produce results. In his use of these three terms, Paul implies the origin of the gifts, the way in which they are experienced in the church, and the results of ministry using spiritual gifts.
Two positions regarding the difference between spiritual gifts and natural talents are noteworthy: one is that spiritual gifts are not related with talents, and the other is that they are virtually the same. Those who distinguish the two believe that spiritual gifts are supernatural, whereas talents are innate in every human at birth. Those who view the conversion experience as the act of giving one's natural talents to God and receiving them back as spiritual gifts are comfortable with the idea of spiritual gifts and personality being intimately correlated.
No consensus has been reached concerning a classification of spiritual gifts, but an attempt has been made to establish the main areas of giftedness with the goal of enabling individuals to identify and experiment with a wide range of ministries in the contemporary setting. Several researchers have developed gift inventories to help Christians identify individual giftedness, but only one researcher has published validity and reliability data.
It was Cattell who viewed personality as the predictor of behavior and developed questionnaires to study individual personalities by factor analysis. To reveal the underlying structure of personality, Cattell identified source traits and labeled them as factors A=Q_(4). These 16 basic traits are explored in the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire.
The 16 PF has been used widely in research regarding the correlation between personality patterns and different vocations, with the result that different occupational groups are now characterized by specific personality profiles. Religious professions (e.g., priests) have been included in the identification of personality profiles. Some studies with the 16 PF have revealed that personalities are significantly correlated with different approaches to ministry by clergy.
Methodology
A correlational research design was used to determine the relationship between 16 personality factors and five spiritual gifts clusters. The instruments used were:
1. The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 PF) by Cattell, Saunders, and Stice, which has 187 questions --each offers a trinomial choice
2. The New Spiritual Gifts Inventory (NSGI) by Naden, which has 20 questions--each offers a choice on a Likert-style 5-point continuum between false and true.
These two instruments were used because validity and reliability data have been published that indicate their appropriateness for empirical research.
Eight hundred and forty subjects were included in this study which was comprised of students and their spouses of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Berrien Springs, Michigan, and undergraduate students of Philippine Union College, Silang, Philippines. Four hundred and thirty-seven sets of instruments were collected over 4 years for the seminarian sample, and 410 sets were administered to students of Philippine Union College. Four hundred and three sets were returned, and of these, 399 (97%) were usable.
Two null hypotheses were formulated to be tested statistically. The two hypotheses were tested with six statistical procedures of multiple regression analyses. For each of the hypotheses, only those with a significance level of p<.05 and multiple R-squared of >.1000 were considered.
Findings of the Study
For Hypotheses 1 and 2, Table 22 (p. 108) presents an overview of the results.
Hypothesis 1
Among the seminarian respondents, there is no significant multiple correlation between each of the spiritual gifts clusters and personality factors indicated by the 16 PF.
For the seminarian sample, someone high in factors H (friendly, responsive), M (imaginative), and N (shrewd, efficient) was found to have the teacher cluster. Someone high in factors H (bold, venturesome, uninhibited), Q_(3) (self-control), and G (conscientious), and low in factors B (concrete-thinking) and Q_(1) (conservative) was found to have the shepherd/evangelist cluster. Someone high in factors G (persistent, disciplined, ordered), H (active, carefree), O (apprehensive), and Q_(3) (self-control), and low in factors B (concrete-thinking) and Q_(4) (relaxed, composed, unfrustrated) was found to have the supporter cluster. Someone high in factors H (can take stress) and E (ascendance), and low in factor Q_(4) (relaxed, composed, unfrustrated) was found to have the counselor cluster. Someone high in factors H (toughness, sociability), G (conscientious), E (dominant), and Q_(3) (socially precise), and low in factor O (inner peace) was found to have the leader cluster.
Table 15 (p. 97) summarizes the results for this hypothesis.
Hypothesis 2
Among the Filipino respondents, there is no significant multiple correlation between each of the spiritual gifts clusters and personality factors indicated by the 16 PF.
Someone 'high in factors H (bold, venturesome, active), Q_(3) (exacting will power), and A (warm), and low in factor F (sober, serious) was found to have the teacher cluster. Someone high in factors H (bold, venturesome, active), Q_(3) (exacting will power), G (conforming, staid), and A (warm), and low in factor F (sober) was found to have the shepherd/evangelist cluster. Someone high in factors Q_(3) (controlled) and H (active, carefree) was found to have the supporter cluster. Someone high in factors H (bold, sociability) and Q_(3) (socially precise)., and low in factor O (inner peace) was found to have the leader cluster.
The regression model for the counselor cluster was not practical, because the proportion of variance explained was too small.
Table 21 (p. 107) summarizes the results for this hypothesis.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• TABLE OF CONTENTS = ⅲ
• LIST OF TABLES = vi
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS = viii
• CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION = 1
• Statement of the Problem = 8
• Purpose of the Study = 9
• Hypotheses = 10
• Hypothesis 1 = 10
• Hypothesis 2 = 10
• Theoretical Framework = 10
• 16 Personality Factors = 12
• Spiritual Gifts and Personality Factors = 13
• Teacher Cluster = 14
• Shepherd/Evangelist Cluster = 15
• Supporter Cluster = 16
• Counselor Cluster = 18
• Leader Cluster = 19
• Significance of the Study = 21
• Delimitation of the Study = 21
• Definition of Terms = 22
• Outline of the Study = 27
• CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE = 28
• Spiritual Gifts = 28
• The Term "Spiritual Gifts" = 29
• The Nature and Purpose of Spiritual Gifts = 34
• Definition of "Spiritual Gifts" = 35
• Natural Talents and Spiritual Gifts = 37
• Classifying Spiritual Gifts = 38
• Discovering Spiritual Gifts = 41
• Personality Factors = 44
• Factor Analysis = 46
• The Trait Approach to Personality = 48
• Major Source Traits = 50
• The Specification Equation = 51
• Personality of Religious Individuals = 53
• Summary = 57
• CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY = 59
• Type of Study = 59
• Population and Sample = 59
• Instrumentation = 60
• Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire = 61
• Formation = 61
• Reliability = 62
• Validity = 63
• The New Spiritual Gifts Inventory = 68
• Format ion = 68
• Reliability = 69
• Validity = 70
• Procedure for Collecting Data = 72
• Hypotheses and Statistical Analysis = 73
• Hypothesis 1 = 73
• Hypothesis 2 = 74
• Summary = 75
• CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA = 76
• Description of Sample = 76
• Testing of Hypotheses and Discussion of the Findings = 78
• Hypothesis 1 = 85
• Teacher Cluster = 85
• Shepherd/Evangelist Cluster = 87
• Supporter Cluster = 89
• Counselor Cluster = 92
• Leader Cluster = 93
• Summary of Testing Hypothesis 1 = 96
• Hypothesis 2 = 98
• Teacher Cluster = 98
• Shepherd/Evangelist Cluster = 99
• Supporter Cluster = 101
• Counselor Cluster = 103
• Leader Cluster = 104
• Summary of Testing Hypothesis 2 = 106
• Summary of Testing Hypotheses = 108
• Chapter Summary = 111
• CHAPTER V SUMMARIES, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS = 113
• Summaries = 113
• The Purpose = 113
• Review of Related Literature and Research = 114
• Methodology = 116
• Findings of the Study = 117
• Hypothesis 1 = 117
• Hypothesis 2 = 118
• Conclusions = 119
• Implications = 122
• Recommendations = 124
• For Further Study = 124
• APPENDICES = 126
• APPENDIX A. CORRESPONDENCE= 127
• APPENDIX C. CORRELATION MATRICES= 130
• APPENDIX D. THE 20 STATEMENTS OF THE NSGI = 151
• BIBLIOGRAPHY = 153
• VITA = 175