A Sequential System for Personality Scale Development

Author(s):  
Douglas N. Jackson
2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 (1) ◽  
pp. 15557
Author(s):  
Xiaoyuan Zhu ◽  
Dev K Dalal ◽  
Janet L Barnes-Farrell ◽  
Kevin P. Nolan

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angeline Mercado

Despite various advances on methods, personality scale development still tends to focus on traits, leaving social context out of the equation. To address this, Cross-Dimensional Framework (Cross D) was devised to systematically integrate social context on every item of a personality scale. The framework was used to develop Cross-Dimensional Conscientiousness Scale (XC). After standardization, XC was administered to 304 Filipino college students along with the Conscientiousness scale items from International Personality Item Pool Representation of the NEO PI-R (IPIP NEO), and Big Five Inventory (BFI). Statistical analyses were performed to see whether (1) the theoretical assumptions of Cross D are true, and if the framework does not compromise the (2) reliability and (3) validity of the test created. Majority of the results support all the assumptions of Cross D without compromising the reliability and validity of the test based on it, thereby proving the utility of the framework for personality scale development. Besides the novelty of integrating social context on personality scale development, the framework also paves way for the possible quantification of trait’s consistent expression across social context.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Willems ◽  
Gilbert Swinnen ◽  
Wim Janssens ◽  
Malaika Brengman

1987 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 591-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nerella V. Ramanaiah ◽  
Steven R. Conn ◽  
Thomas Schill

Since the scales in the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory do not have good factorial validity and good discriminant validity, Jackson's (1970) theory of personality scale development would predict that most of the items in each of these scales would have low content saturation. The present study empirically tested this prediction and found strong support for it. Implications of the results were discussed.


Methodology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith A. Markus

Abstract. Bollen and colleagues have advocated the use of formative scales despite the fact that formative scales lack an adequate underlying theory to guide development or validation such as that which underlies reflective scales. Three conceptual impediments impede the development of such theory: the redefinition of measurement restricted to the context of model fitting, the inscrutable notion of conceptual unity, and a systematic conflation of item scores with attributes. Setting aside these impediments opens the door to progress in developing the needed theory to support formative scale use. A broader perspective facilitates consideration of standard scale development concerns as applied to formative scales including scale development, item analysis, reliability, and item bias. While formative scales require a different pattern of emphasis, all five of the traditional sources of validity evidence apply to formative scales. Responsible use of formative scales requires greater attention to developing the requisite underlying theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document