Construction and Validation of a Short Adjectives Checklist to Measure Big Five (SACBIF)

1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Perugini ◽  
Luigi Leone
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Selection Procedure ◽  
Factorial Structure ◽  
Personality Dimensions

The aim of this contribution is to present a new short adjective-based measure of the Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality, the Short Adjectives Checklist of BIg Five (SACBIF). We present the various steps of the construction and the validation of this instrument. First, 50 adjectives were selected with a selection procedure, the “Lining Up Technique” (LUT), specifically used to identify the best factorial markers of the FFM. Then, the factorial structure and the psychometric properties of the SACBIF were investigated. Finally, the SACBIF factorial structure was correlated with some main measures of the FFM to establish its construct validity and with some other personality dimensions to investigate how well these dimensions could be represented in the SACBIF factorial space.

Thinking styles and the five‐factor model of personality

2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 465-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li‐fang Zhang ◽  
Jiafen Huang
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Specific Pattern ◽  
Thinking Styles ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Personality Dimensions ◽  
Complex Thinking ◽  
Neo Five Factor Inventory

The primary aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between thinking styles and the big five personality dimensions. Four hundred and eight (149 males, 259 females) university students from Shanghai, mainland China, responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory and the NEO Five‐Factor Inventory. It was found that thinking styles and personality dimensions overlap to a degree. As predicted, the more creativity‐generating and more complex thinking styles were related to the extraversion and openness personality dimensions, and the more norm‐favouring and simplistic thinking styles were related to neuroticism. No specific pattern was identified in the relationships of thinking styles to the agreeableness and conscientiousness dimensions. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

scholarly journals LIETUVIŠKOSIOS NEO PI-R VERSIJOS PSICHOMETRINIAI RODIKLIAI

Psichologija ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 7-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rita Žukauskienė ◽  
Rasa Barkauskienė
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Practical Applications ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
The Usa

Pastaruosius du dešimtmečius asmenybės psichologiniuose tyrimuose Penkių faktorių modelis (PFM), kitaip žinomas kaip „Penketas svarbiausiųjų“, tampa dominuojančia paradigma. NEO PI-R klausimynas (Costa and McCrae, 1992) yra skirtas būtent PFM empiriškai tyrinėti. Naudojant savistaba paremtus klausimynus būtina, kad tie patys teiginių rinkiniai būtų lygiaverčiai, t. y. skirtingose kultūrose turėtų tą pačią reikšmę. NEO PI-R, kaip ir bet kurio kito klausimyno, vertimas ir naudojimas kitose kultūrose priklauso nuo tos kalbos ir kultūros ypatumų, todėl toje šalyje, kur metodikos bus taikomos, būtina psichometrinių rodiklių analizė ir standartizacija. Šiame straipsnyje pateikiami kai kurie lietuviškosios NEO PI-R versijos psichometriniai rodikliai. Tyrime dalyvavo 317 vyrų ir moterų, kurių amžius nuo 19 iki 64 metų, savanoriškai sutikę užpildyti NEO PI-R klausimyną. Tyrimo rezultatai rodo, kad vidinis didžiųjų dimensijų (neurotizmo, ekstraversijos, atvirumo patyrimui, sutariamumo bei sąmoningumo) suderinamumas pakankamai geras. Kai kurių asmenybės dimensijų žemesnio lygmens bruožus įvertinančių subskalių vidinis suderinamumas gana prastas, bet panašūs rezultatai gauti JAV, analizuojant amerikiečių normatyvinės imties tyrimų rezultatus. Be to, tikrinant PFM struktūros generalizacijos galimybes dar vienoje kultūroje, hipotetinė penkių faktorių struktūra gauta ir analizuojant lietuvių tiriamųjų rezultatus. Duomenų analizė rodo, kad 28 iš 30 subskalių turi didžiausią svorį iš anksto numatytame faktoriuje, o tai rodo gerą NEO PI-R lietuviškosios versijos struktūrinį validumą, taip pat pakankamą atitikimą teoriniam Penkių faktorių modeliui.Pagrindiniai žodžiai: asmenybės bruožai, Penkių faktorių modelis, NEO PI-R . PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF THE LITHUANIAN VERSION OF THE NEO PI-RRita Žukauskienė, Rasa Barkauskienė SummaryPersonologists from many countries have consulted the natural language when developing personality taxonomies. Presently, the Big Five factor structure represents the most popular lexically derived personality taxonomy. The Five-Factor model consists of hierarchical trait organization and comprises five basic personality dimensions or factors. These factors are often termed the “Big Five” and represent the general consensus in differential psychology. The five factors are named Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Openness (O), Agreeableness (A), and Conscientiousness (C). The five-factor model developed by Costa and McCrae (1985) is operationalized in the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI R) (Costa, McCrae, 1992).The replicability and ubiquity of the Big Five have led many personality psychologists to advocate this structure as a basic framework for personality description and assessment. The generalizability across different cultures and languages is crucial for the evaluation of a personality taxonomy or structure. When using selfreports, it is critical for trait psychologists to ascertain whether the same sets of assertions are equivalent, i. e. whether they convey the same meanings across languages and cultures that are different from the one in which they were originally generated. Like any kind of assessment based on informants, NEO PI-R is susceptible to the influence of culture and language. This makes analysis of psychometric properties and standardization necessary for the culture in which they are going to be used.This study examined the psychometric properties of the Lithuanian version of the NEO PI-R in a sample of 317 adults (104 men and 213 women, age 19–64). With respect to reliability, although internal consistency and homogeneity estimates of five dimensions were all acceptable the results suggested rather high levels of internal consistency and homogeneity for most of the facet scales with few exceptions. The similarity of reliability with English studies gives to these dimensions and facets scales, the needed stability for future practical applications, as well as for research.Next, in this study we deal with the examination of construct or structural equivalence. To determine the structure of its underlying factor, the Lithuanian NEO PI-R scores of item-level (240 items) were subjected to the principal components analysis with varimax rotation. Factorial analysis identified the same five factors as in other countries. 28 from 30 facet scales (all, except Impulsivity (N5) and Activity (E4)) had chief loadings in the predicted factor. This confirms the generalizability and sufficient fit to the theoretical model.Third, our results with respect to mean scores revealed significant differences between the Lithuanian sample and the USA normative sample for Neuroticism, Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness domains. Overall, this study has provided evidence to support the conjecture that personality structure transcends cultural differences. The conclusions of this study are in line with these recent findings, and they support McCrae and Costa’s (1997) hypothesis that the FFM represents a universal personality structure.Key words: personality traits, Five Factor Model, NEO PI-R

scholarly journals Trait Aggression is Primarily a Facet of Antagonism: Evidence from Dominance, Latent Correlational, and Item-Level Analyses

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Chester ◽  
Samuel James West
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Personality Dimensions ◽  
Big Five Inventory ◽  
Trait Aggression ◽  
Item Level

Trait aggression has been studied for decades and yet remains adrift from broader frameworks of personality such as the Five Factor Model. Across two datasets from undergraduate participants (Study 1: N = 359; Study 2; N = 620), we observed strong manifest and latent correlations between trait aggression and lower agreeableness (i.e., greater antagonism). Trait aggression was also linked to greater neuroticism and lower conscientiousness, but their effect sizes fell beneath our preregistered threshold. Subsequent item-level analyses were unable to articulate trait aggression and agreeableness items into separate factors using the IPIP-NEO, but not the Big Five Inventory. Our findings suggest that trait aggression is accurately characterized as primarily a facet of antagonism, while also reflecting other personality dimensions.

Validity of the Five Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI): An Investigation in Italy

1998 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Perugini ◽  
Anna Paola Ercolani
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Current Literature ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Openness To Experience ◽  
Personality Dimensions ◽  
High Level

The Big Five are nowadays the standard factors of personality dimensions. Several instruments have been proposed in the last few years for their measurement, either with adjectives or with items. A new state-of-the-art questionnaire to measure the Big Five is the Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI), composed of 100 items. For this article, the questionnaire was validated in Italy with a sample of 249 subjects. Generalizibility, reliability, construct validity (convergent and discriminant), and predictive validity were investigated. Particular attention was devoted to the fifth factor, the most debated in current literature. Results fully supported the validity of FFPI and testify to its high-level psychometric properties. The fifth factor of the FFPI proved to be different from the standard definitions (Intellect or Openness to Experience), being better characterized as Autonomy.

Evidence of cross‐cultural invariance of the big five personality dimensions in work settings

2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. S67-S76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús F. Salgado ◽  
Silvia Moscoso ◽  
Mario Lado
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Personnel Selection ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Personality Dimensions ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Work Related

This article explores the cross‐cultural invariance (construct validity) of two work‐related personality inventories based upon the Five Factor Model (the HPI and the IP/5F). The results show a good convergent and discriminant validity between scales that measure the Big Five personality dimensions. A factor analysis indicates that all personality scales load on the hypothesized Big Five dimensions. Some implications of these findings for the research and practice of personality measurement in personnel selection are discussed. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

scholarly journals Measuring Resilience Across Participating Regions in the UPRIGHT EU Horizon 2020 Project: Factor Structure and Psychometric Properties of the Resilience Scale for Adolescents

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Anyan ◽  
Roxanna Morote ◽  
Carlota Las Hayas ◽  
Silvia Gabrielli ◽  
Iwona Mazur ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Resilience Scale ◽  
The Social ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Resilience Intervention

Resilience is the process and outcome of healthy adaptation despite significant adversity. Proliferation of research on the resilience construct has led to scientific concerns about the operationalization and measurement of resilience for assessment science and practice. Various studies that have investigated the psychometric properties and construct validity of the Resilience Scale for Adolescents (READ) have yielded inconsistent findings, which could partly be due to variations in the methodological approaches. This study investigated the factor structure and construct validity of the READ in four European regions participating in the Universal Preventive Resilience Intervention Globally Implemented in Schools to Improve and Promote Mental Health for Teenagers (UPRIGHT) project. Participants included adolescents aged 10–15 years from Spain (n = 391, females = 51%), Iceland (n = 379, females = 55%), Italy (n = 460, females = 55%), and Poland (n = 316, females = 51%). The five-factor model of the READ was similar across gender and participating regions. Construct validity of the READ was supported. After establishing construct separability, incremental validity was supported (except for the social competence subscale). The READ is a valid and reliable measure of protective factors involved in resilience and demonstrates promise for cross-cultural applicability. Recommendations for measuring resilience and validating the READ in future investigations are provided.

scholarly journals LIETUVIŠKOSIOS HIERARCHINIO VAIKO ASMENYBĖS APRAŠO (HiPIC) VERSIJOS PSICHOMETRINĖS CHARAKTERISTIKOS

Psichologija ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 24-43
Author(s):  
I. Grauslienė ◽  
R. Barkauskienė
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Personality Inventory For Children

Penkių faktorių modelis yra plačiai taikomas tiriant vaikų ir paauglių asmenybės bruožus skirtingais amžiaus tarpsniais: nuo ankstyvosios vaikystės iki vėlyvosios paauglystės. Įvairiais tyrimais įrodyta, kad Penkių faktorių modelis yra tinkamas aprašyti vaiko asmenybę. Šiuo tyrimu buvo siekiama įvertinti kai kuriuos lietuviškosios Hierarchinio vaiko asmenybės aprašo versijos (HiPIC, Mervielde and De Fruyt, 1999) psichometrinius rodiklius. HiPIC yra skirtas įvertinti 6–12 metų vaikų asmenybės dimensijoms remiantis Penkių faktorių modeliu. Tyrimą sudarė trys etapai, kuriuose dalyvavo 1 081 tėvai, auginantys 7–11 metų vaikus. Visų etapų metu buvo gauti duomenys apie 739 vaikų asmenybės bruožus, kuriuos apibūdino abu arba vienas tėvų. HiPIC aukštesniojo lygmens bruožų skalių vidinis teiginių suderintumas svyravo nuo 0,806 iki 0,909, o žemesniojo lygmens bruožų subskalių vidinis teiginių suderintumas buvo nuo 0,574 iki 0,873. Faktorinė subskalių analizė atskleidė, kad aiškesnė yra keturių, o ne penkių faktorių struktūra, kurioje išryškėjo sąmoningumo ir vaizduotės dimensijų subskalių junginys, sudarantis vieną, o ne du atskirus faktorius. Rezultatų analizė atskleidė, kad lietuviškoji HiPIC versija yra patikima, konstrukto validumas keturių faktorių modeliui yra pakankamai geras, taigi šis aprašas gali būti naudojamas atliekant mokslinius tyrimus.Pagrindiniai žodžiai: vaikų asmenybės bruožai, Penkių faktorių modelis, HiPIC, psichometrinės charakteristikos.PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF THE LITHUANIAN VERSION OF THE HIERARCHICAL PERSONALITY INVENTORY FOR CHILDREN (HiPIC)Izabelė Grauslienė, Rasa Barkauskienė SummaryThe Five-factor Model (FFM) is currently the most common dimensional approach to personality traits. Research of children’s personality traits is a new challenge for scientists, which motivates to step into an almost unknown area. These investigations were encouraged by the success of the Five-factor Model research on adults: scientists quite intensively started going deeper into the research of children’s personality traits starting from early childhood till late adolescence. The present study was designed to investigate the psychometric properties of the Lithuanian version of the Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (HiPIC, Mervielde and De Fruyt, 1999). The HiPIC is an instrument to assess the five dimensions of the five-factor model for children between 6 and 12 years. The HiPIC measures 18 facets grouped into five dimensions: Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Benevolence, Emotional Stability, and Imagination (Mervielde and De Fruyt, 1999). This inventory, contrary to the NEO PI-R, was developed using a bottom-up strategy (Mervielde and De Fruyt, 2002).The present research included three phases. A parent rating was obtained for 739 children all aged between 7 and 11. Some children were rated by their both parents, some by mother or farther; 1081 parents filled the questionnaires. The HiPIC was distributed in the classroom by the researchers to the children who had to bring the questionnaire to their parents. All 144 HiPIC items were translated and retranslated into Lithuanian by professional translators with the author of the inventory supervision during all three phases of the research.The facets’ internal consistency was estimated by the Cronbach alpha coefficient. At the domain level, the internal consistency ranged from 0.808 to 0.909, and at the facet level the internal consistency ranged within 0.574–0.873. In order to assess the construct validity, we conducted a principal componentexploratory factor analysis with the varimax rotation of the 18 facet scales. In order to compare the factorial structure with the theoretical structure of the inventory, first we chose to extract five factors, but the further factor analysis showed that the Lithuanian HiPIC version had more arguments for a four-factor structure with a blend of the Conscientiousness and Imagination domains and explaining 71.93% of variance.The Lithuanian version of the HiPIC is reliable, although construct validity indicators had some weakness. The internal consistencies are satisfactory and similar to those found with the original Flemish version and the French version. As a conclusion, the Lithuanian HiPIC version can be used in scientific research in assessing children’s personality traits.This research was funded by a grant (No. MIP-016/2012) from the Research Council of Lithuania.Key words: children’s personality traits, the Five Factor Model, HiPIC, psychometric properties.

A Comparison of the Validity of Very Brief Measures of the Big Five/Five-Factor Model of Personality

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112093916
Author(s):  
Chelsea E. Sleep ◽  
Donald R. Lynam ◽  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Past ◽  
Functional Implications ◽  
Varying Length

Personality is of great lay, clinical, and research interest with important functional implications. The field has largely settled on five- or six-factor models as being largely sufficient for descriptive purposes, at least in W.E.I.R.D settings and, as such, numerous measures have been created of varying length and breadth. For a number of reasons, however, super-short forms have come to be quite popular in research endeavors with a number created in the past 20 years. The goal of the present study was to compare the time with completion and general psychometric properties of these measures, as well as examine their convergence with one another and with longer measures in an online community sample ( N = 494). Generally, the psychometric properties of the measures varied considerably in terms of internal consistency and convergence with one another. The brief measures demonstrated mostly adequately convergence with longer measures. Despite this convergence, longer measures were found to contain considerably more variance that was not accounted for by brief measures. We consider the advantages and disadvantages of these measures and suggest that longer measures be prioritized whenever possible.

Social Desirability in Personality Inventories

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 144-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Bäckström ◽  
Fredrik Björklund
Keyword(s):  
Social Desirability ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Work Performance ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Peer Ratings ◽  
Personality Inventories ◽  
Model Study ◽  
The Difference ◽  
New Variables

The difference between evaluatively loaded and evaluatively neutralized five-factor inventory items was used to create new variables, one for each factor in the five-factor model. Study 1 showed that these variables can be represented in terms of a general evaluative factor which is related to social desirability measures and indicated that the factor may equally well be represented as separate from the Big Five as superordinate to them. Study 2 revealed an evaluative factor in self-ratings and peer ratings of the Big Five, but the evaluative factor in self-reports did not correlate with such a factor in ratings by peers. In Study 3 the evaluative factor contributed above the Big Five in predicting work performance, indicating a substance component. The results are discussed in relation to measurement issues and self-serving biases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document