We investigated the distinction between traits (also labelled basic tendencies or dispositions) and (characteristic) adaptations, two related features of the personality system postulated to influence how personality manifests throughout the lifespan. Traits are alleged to be universal, causal, and enduring entities that exist across cultures and through evolutionary time, whereas learned adaptations are acquired through sustained interaction with cultural, physical, and social environments. Although this distinction is central to several personality theories, they provide few measurable criteria to distinguish between traits and adaptations. Moreover, little research has endeavoured to operationalize it, let alone test it empirically. Drawing on insights from four frameworks—the Five‐Factor Theory, Cybernetic Big Five Theory, Disposition–Adaptation–Environment Model, and New Big Five—we attempted to investigate the distinction both theoretically and empirically. Using various experimental rating conditions, we first scored 240 questionnaire items in their degrees of definitionally reflecting traits and/or adaptations. Next, we correlated these definitional ratings with the items' estimates of rank‐order stability, consensual validity, and heritability—criteria often associated with personality traits. We found some evidence that items rated as more trait‐like and less adaptation‐like correspond to higher cross‐rater agreement and stability but not heritability. These associations survived controlling for items' retest reliability, social desirability, and variance. The theoretical and empirical implications of these findings are discussed. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

中文翻译：

---

特质与适应：理论检验与新的经验证据

我们研究了特质（也称为基本倾向或性格）和（特征）适应之间的区别，特质是人格系统的两个相关特征，假定会影响人格在整个寿命中的表现方式。特质被认为是普遍存在的，因果关系的和持久的实体，存在于不同文化之间以及通过进化的时间而存在，而习得的适应则是通过与文化，自然和社会环境的持续互动而获得的。尽管这种区别对几种人格理论至关重要，但它们几乎没有提供可测量的标准来区分特征和适应。此外，很少有研究致力于将其投入运营，更不用说对其进行经验检验了。借鉴四个框架的洞察力-五因素理论，控制论的大五理论，性格-适应-环境模型，以及新五巨头-我们试图从理论和经验上研究这种区别。使用各种实验评分条件，我们首先对240个问卷调查项目进行了评分，这些项目在定义上反映了特征和/或适应性的程度。接下来，我们将这些定义性等级与项目对等级稳定性，共识有效性和遗传性（通常与人格特征相关的标准）的估计值相关联。我们发现一些证据表明，被评定为具有更多特质和较少适应性的项目对应于较高的交叉评估者一致性和稳定性，但与遗传性无关。这些协会幸免于难，无法控制商品的重新测试可靠性，社会可取性和差异。讨论了这些发现的理论和经验意义。