scholarly journals Comparing Job Applicants to Non–Applicants Using An Item–Level Bifactor Model on the Hexaco Personality Inventory

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 669-684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeromy Anglim ◽  
Gavin Morse ◽  
Reinout E. De Vries ◽  
Carolyn MacCann ◽  
Andrew Marty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Desirability ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Job Applicant ◽  
Item Level ◽  
Improved Model

The present study evaluated the ability of item–level bifactor models (a) to provide an alternative explanation to current theories of higher order factors of personality and (b) to explain socially desirable responding in both job applicant and non–applicant contexts. Participants (46% male; mean age = 42 years, SD = 11) completed the 200–item HEXACO Personality Inventory–Revised either as part of a job application ( n = 1613) or as part of low–stakes research ( n = 1613). A comprehensive set of invariance tests were performed. Applicants scored higher than non–applicants on honesty–humility ( d = 0.86), extraversion ( d = 0.73), agreeableness ( d = 1.06), and conscientiousness ( d = 0.77). The bifactor model provided improved model fit relative to a standard correlated factor model, and loadings on the evaluative factor of the bifactor model were highly correlated with other indicators of item social desirability. The bifactor model explained approximately two–thirds of the differences between applicants and non–applicants. Results suggest that rather than being a higher order construct, the general factor of personality may be caused by an item–level evaluative process. Results highlight the importance of modelling data at the item–level. Implications for conceptualizing social desirability, higher order structures in personality, test development, and job applicant faking are discussed. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology

scholarly journals Comparing Job Applicants to Non-Applicants Using an Item-Level Bifactor Model on the HEXACO Personality Inventory

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeromy Anglim ◽  
Gavin Morse ◽  
Reinout E. de Vries ◽  
Carolyn MacCann ◽  
Andrew Marty
Keyword(s):  
Social Desirability ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Order Structure ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Job Applicant ◽  
Item Level ◽  
Improved Model

The present study evaluated the ability of item-level bifactor models (a) to provide an alternative explanation to current theories of higher-order factors of personality, and (b) to explain socially desirable responding in both job applicant and non-applicant contexts. Participants (46% male; mean age=42 years, SD=11) completed the 200- item HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised (HEXACO PI-R) either as part of a job application (n = 1613) or as part of low-stakes research (n = 1613). A comprehensive set of invariance test were performed. Applicants scored higher than non-applicants on honesty- humility (d = 0.86), extraversion (d = 0.73), agreeableness (d = 1.06), and conscientiousness (d = 0.77). The bifactor model provided improved model fit relative to a standard correlated factor model, and loadings on the evaluative factor of the bifactor model were highly correlated with other indicators of item social desirability. The bifactor model explained approximately two-thirds of the differences between applicants and non- applicants. Results suggest that rather than being a higher-order construct, the general factor of personality may be caused by an item- level evaluative process. Results highlight the importance of modelling data at the item-level. Implications for conceptualizing social desirability, higher-order structure in personality, test development, and job applicant faking are discussed.

Higher-Order and Bifactor Models of the Drinking Motives Questionnaire

Assessment ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Lac ◽  
Candice D. Donaldson
Keyword(s):  
Structural Equation ◽  
Negative Reinforcement ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Equation Model ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Drinking Motives ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses

The Drinking Motives Questionnaire, previously postulated and documented to exhibit a measurement structure of four correlated factors (social, enhancement, conformity, and coping), is a widely administered assessment of reasons for consuming alcohol. In the current study ( N = 552), confirmatory factor analyses tested the plausibility of several theoretically relevant factor structures. Fit indices corroborated the original four-factor model, and also supported a higher-order factor model involving a superordinate motives factor that explicated four subordinate factors. A bifactor model that permitted items to double load on valence type (positive or negative reinforcement) and source type (external or internal) generated mixed results, suggesting that this 2 × 2 motivation paradigm was not entirely tenable. Optimal fit was obtained for a bifactor model depicting a general factor and four specific factors of motives. Latent factors derived from this structure exhibited criterion validity in predicting frequency and quantity of alcohol usage in a structural equation model. Findings are interpreted in the context of theoretical implications of the instrument, alternative factor structures of drinking motives, and assessment applications.

Higher-Order Factors in a Five-Factor Personality Inventory and its Relation to Social Desirability

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Bäckström
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Social Desirability ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Factor Models ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Order Factor

Abstract. This paper compared two higher-order factor models using a 100-item, five-factor personality inventory originating from the IPIP database. The sample consisted of 2,019 subjects tested on the Internet. The two models were compared using confirmatory factor analysis. The two-factor model showed a similar fit to the data. The criteria for parsimony favored a hierarchical model with one higher-order factor at the top and five personality factors beneath. The single higher-order factor was found to be related to social desirability in a subsample of 196 subjects.

scholarly journals Three recommendations based on a comparison of the reliability and validity of the predominant models used in research on the empirical structure of psychopathology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam K. Forbes ◽  
Ashley Lauren Greene ◽  
Holly Levin-Aspenson ◽  
Ashley L. Watts ◽  
Michael Hallquist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Single Factor ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Single Factor Model

The present study compared the primary models used in research on the structure of psychopathology (i.e., correlated factor, higher-order, and bifactor models) in terms of structural validity (model fit and factor reliability), longitudinal measurement invariance, concurrent and prospective predictive validity in relation to important outcomes, and longitudinal consistency in individuals’ factor score profiles. Two simpler operationalizations of a general factor of psychopathology were also examined—a single-factor model and a count of diagnoses. Models were estimated based on structured clinical interview diagnoses in two longitudinal waves of nationally representative data from the United States (n = 43,093 and n = 34,653). Models that included narrower factors (fear, distress, and externalizing) were needed to capture the observed multidimensionality of the data. In the correlated factor and higher-order models these narrower factors were reliable, largely invariant over time, had consistent associations with indicators of adaptive functioning, and had moderate stability within individuals over time. By contrast, the fear and distress specific factors in the bifactor model did not show good reliability or validity throughout the analyses. Notably, the general factor of psychopathology (p-factor) performed similarly well across tests of reliability and validity regardless of whether the higher-order or bifactor model was used; the simplest (single-factor) model was also comparable across most tests, with the exception of model fit. Given the limitations of categorical diagnoses, it will be important to repeat these analyses using dimensional measures. We conclude that when aiming to understand the structure and correlates of psychopathology it is important to: 1) look beyond model fit indices to choose between different models; 2) examine the reliability of latent variables directly; and 3) be cautious when isolating and interpreting the unique effects of specific psychopathology factors, regardless of which model is used.

The Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition: A Bifactor Model, Dimensionality, and Measurement Invariance

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Sedigheh Salami ◽  
Paulo Felipe Ribeiro Bandeira ◽  
Cristiano Mauro Assis Gomes ◽  
Parvaneh Shamsipour Dehkordi
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Motor Development ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Gross Motor ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
Gross Motor Development

Aim: To examine the latent structure of the Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition (TGMD-3) with a bifactor modeling approach. In addition, the study examines the dimensionality and model-based reliability of general and specific contributions of the test’s subscales and measurement invariance of the TGMD-3. Methods: A convenience sample of (N = 496; Mage = 7.23 ± 2.03 years; 53.8% female) typically developed children participated in this study. Three alternative measurement models were tested: (a) a unidimensional model, (b) a correlated two-factor model, and (c) a bifactor model. Results: The totality of results, including item loadings, goodness-of-fit indexes, and reliability estimates, all supported the bifactor model and strong evidence of a general factor, namely gross motor competence. Additionally, the reliability of subscale scores was poor, and it is thus contended that scoring, reporting, and interpreting of the subscales scores are probably not justifiable. Conclusions: This study shows the advantages of using bifactor approach to examine the TGMD-3 factor structure and suggests that the two traditionally hypothesized factors are better understood as “grouping” factors rather than as representative of latent constructs. In addition, our findings demonstrate that the bifactor model appears invariant for sex.

scholarly journals Does Cooperation in the Laboratory Reflect the Operation of A Broad Trait?

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
William H.B. McAuliffe ◽  
Daniel E. Forster ◽  
Eric J. Pedersen ◽  
Michael E. McCullough
Keyword(s):  
European Association ◽  
Dictator Game ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Trust Game ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Valid Measure ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Economic Games ◽  
Social Settings ◽  
Self Assessments

The Dictator Game, a face valid measure of altruism, and the Trust Game, a face valid measure of trust and trustworthiness, are among the most widely used behavioural measures in human cooperation research. Researchers have observed considerable covariation among these and other economic games, leading them to assert that there exists a general human propensity to cooperate that varies in strength across individuals and manifests itself across a variety of social settings. To formalize this hypothesis, we created an S–1 bifactor model using 276 participants’ Dictator Game and Trust Game decisions. The general factor had significant, moderate associations with self–reported and peer–reported altruism, trust, and trustworthiness. Thus, the positive covariation among economic games is not reducible to the games’ shared situational features. Two hundred participants returned for a second session. The general factor based on Dictator Game and Trust Game decisions from this session did not significantly predict self–reported and peer–reported cooperation, suggesting that experience with economic games causes them to measure different traits from those that are reflected in self–assessments and peer–assessments of cooperativeness. © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Psychometric properties of a new scale for measuring academic positive psychological capital

2021 ◽  
pp. 25-30
Author(s):  
Pasquale Anselmi ◽  
Daiana Colledani ◽  
Luigi Fabbris ◽  
Egidio Robusto ◽  
Manuela Scioni
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Capital ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Positive Psychological Capital ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Explained Common Variance ◽  
University Of Padua ◽  
Academic Results

Positive psychological capital (PsyCap) is the name given to a set of psychological dimensions (hope, resilience, self-efficacy, and optimism) that may support students in their effort to achieve better academic results and even improve the employability of graduates. These dimensions could help students to achieve better academic results and impact fresh graduates’ ability to stand the labour market in times of crisis. A scale, called Academic PsyCap, was specifically developed to evaluate the four PsyCap dimensions among students and fresh graduates. To deeply investigate the structural validity of the scale, three alternative models (one-factor model, correlated four-factor model, bifactor model) were run on the responses provided by about 1,600 fresh graduates at the University of Padua. The results indicated that the bifactor model fit the data better than the other two models. In this model, all items significantly loaded on both their own domain specific factor and on the general factor. The values of Percentage of Uncontaminated Correlations (PUC), Explained Common Variance (ECV), and Hierarchical Omega suggested that multidimensionality in the scale was not severe enough to disqualify the use of a total PsyCap score. The scale was found to be invariant across gender and academic degree (bachelor’s and master’s degree). Internal consistency indices were satisfactory for the four dimensions and the total scale.

scholarly journals A bioenergetic model that links psychopathology and intelligence: Implications for research and clinical practice

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Fissler ◽  
R. Nehir Mavioglu ◽  
Maya Wenzel ◽  
Steffen Stoewer ◽  
Wanja Wolff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Affect Regulation ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Cerebral Function ◽  
Bioenergetic Model ◽  
Treatment Research ◽  
P Factor

Decomposing the structure of human cerebral function in its domains, such as affect regulation or cognition, forms the backbone of psychiatric diagnosis and treatment. Research continues to decipher the domains and hierarchical structure of cerebral function. So far, the findings strongly suggest two higher-order latent factors of general psychopathology (p factor) and general intelligence (g factor). Both general factors are functions of the same organ, covary, share risk factors as well as biomarkers, and benefit from the same treatments. However, to our knowledge, a model that connects both components of cerebral function within a higher-order latent factor and describes its potential biological underpinning is lacking. First, we suggest the general factor of cerebral function (c factor) as the shared variance of the measures of g and p in a bi-factor model. Second, we propose and provide evidence that mitochondrial bioenergetics (MB) is one core biological underpinning of c. Third, we describe how this c factor mito-bioenergetics (CMB) model may transform research and clinical practice by advancing knowledge of treatment effects, risk factors, biomarkers and clinical outcomes. Finally, we present a CMB model-based hypothesis stating that fatigue—as a phenotypical correlate of MB—directly loads on c.

Measuring Positive Mental Health in the Postpartum Period: The Bifactor Structure of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form in Portuguese Women

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112091024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabiana Monteiro ◽  
Ana Fonseca ◽  
Marco Pereira ◽  
Maria Cristina Canavarro
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Short Form ◽  
High Reliability ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Positive Mental Health ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Explained Common Variance

This study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF) in the postpartum context using a single-factor model, a correlated three-factor model, and a bifactor model. The reliability and validity of the MHC-SF were also examined. The total sample consisted of 882 postpartum Portuguese women. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the bifactor model yielded a significantly better fit to the data than the other models. The unidimensionality strength indices (explained common variance = .76, percentage of uncontaminated correlations = .69) and the ω H values supported the general factor of positive mental health, which accounted for 91.5% of the reliable variance in the total score. Additionally, the MHC-SF showed high reliability (ω = .96), and its total and subscale scores were significantly correlated with other measures related to mental health. The results of this study suggest a strong general factor of positive mental health and support the use of its total score in this context.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document