The VIA Classification on character strengths and virtues suggests 24 character strengths clustered into six core virtues. Three recent studies employed different methods for testing the assignment of character strengths to virtues, and generally supported the VIA classification. However, the co-occurrence of character strengths and virtues within individuals has not been examined yet. Another untested assumption is that an individual’s composition of character strengths is related to being considered of “good character.” Thus, the present study addresses three research questions: How (...) do character strengths and measured virtues co-occur within individuals? How does the number of character strengths an individual possesses within a virtue cluster relate to their level of the respective virtue? How does the composition of an individual’s character strengths relate to being considered of “good character”? We combined data from different studies to obtain a sample of N = 1,241 participants aged 18 to 92 years. All participants completed assessments of character strengths and virtues. Regarding, we found a high convergence of the correlations between strengths and virtues and the VIA Classification: 22 out of 24 character strengths correlated with the assigned virtue. Also, 15 character strengths showed the numerically highest correlation with their assigned virtue. Regarding, overall, we found a linear trend between the number of strengths within one cluster and the virtue level. Regarding, we found higher levels of reported “good character” in those who possessed either at least one character strength in each virtue cluster or all character strengths in at least one virtue compared to those who did not. The present results contribute to the discussion regarding the structure of character: individuals’ character strengths relate to differences in virtues, across different measures and data sources. Relationships were mostly as expected, and deviations were consistent with results obtained using other approaches. (shrink)

Teamwork has been argued to play an increasingly important role in numerous jobs, and several studies focused on the effects of team composition for work-related outcomes. Recent research has also identified individuals’ character strengths and positive team roles as conducive to work-related outcomes. However, there is a scarcity of research on the role of character strengths or positive team roles on the level of teams. In the present study, we extend theoretical assumptions of team role theories to the study of (...) character strengths and positive team roles: We examined the associations between character strengths and team roles with work-related outcomes on the individual and the team level. Further, we examined how the team composition relates to the outcomes, that is, whether balanced teams go along with desired outcomes and whether an overrepresentation of team roles or character strengths in a team goes along with undesired outcomes. We studied a sample of 42 teams who completed measures of team roles, character strengths, teamwork quality, job satisfaction, and self-rated individual and team performance. Further, supervisor ratings of individual and team performance were collected. Results corroborated the relationships of team roles and character strengths with individual outcomes such as that specific roles and character strengths go along with individual performance and work satisfaction. Further, the results suggested that teams in which more team roles are represented report higher performance and teamwork quality. Also, teams with higher average levels of the character strengths of teamwork and fairness, and teams with more members scoring high in fairness and prudence report higher teamwork quality. Further, there is no evidence that having too many members with a particular character strength has detrimental effects on teamwork quality, work satisfaction, or performance. We conclude that extending the study of character to the level of teams offers an important advancement. (shrink)

The assessment of the fear of being laughed at in Poland: Translation and first evaluation of the Polish GELOPH The main aim of the paper was to translate and, for the first time, evaluate the Polish GELOPH. This is a 15-item questionnaire for the subjective assessment of gelotophobia, the fear of being laughed at. Gelotophobia is seen as an individual differences phenomenon at a sub-clinical level. The psychometric properties of the Polish version were tested in two independently collected samples with (...) a total N of 506 participants. The Polish GELOPH yielded good psychometric properties in terms of high reliability in both samples. The fear of being laughed at existed widely independently from the participants' age, sex, or marital status. The Polish GELOPH can be seen as a reliable instrument for the subjective assessment of gelotophobia for research and practical applications. (shrink)

A growing body of research demonstrates the relevance of character strengths for flourishing in general, but also for important outcomes across different life domains. Studies have also shown that there are differences in the extent to which character strengths are applied, that is, perceived as relevant and shown in behavior in a given context, between work and private life, but they have not considered other life domains. This study aims to close this gap by examining the life domains of work, (...) education, leisure, close personal relationships, and romantic relationships. The present study investigates whether strengths-related behavior across different life domains explains additional variance in flourishing beyond the trait level of each respective character strength and studies differences in the relevance of character strengths and strengths-related behavior across different life domains, and examines their relationships with flourishing. A sample of 203 German-speaking adults completed self-reports assessing flourishing and character strengths. They also indicated which of the five life domains were personally relevant to them and reported the character strengths' perceived relevance and the frequency of displaying strengths-related behavior for each of these life domains separately. The results demonstrate that strengths-related behavior averaged across all relevant life domains explained unique variance in flourishing above the trait-level of character strengths in some cases, different life domains were characterized by specific profiles of character strength—regarding both their relevance and strength-related behavior. Moreover, character strengths and strengths-related behavior in different life domains both showed substantial correlations with flourishing. In some cases, these associations were domain-specific. In conclusion, we suggest that examining strengths-related behavior across different life domains represents a worthwhile addition to research on character strengths. (shrink)