scholarly journals Alexithymia Assessment and Relations with Dimensions of Personality

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grégoire Zimmermann ◽  
Jérôme Rossier ◽  
Franz Meyer de Stadelhofen ◽  
François Gaillard
Keyword(s):  
Locus Of Control ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Irrational Beliefs ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Cognitive State ◽  
Emotional Instability ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Tas 20

Abstract. This study examines the relationship between alexithymia, impulsiveness, locus of control, irrational beliefs, and both the domain and the facet levels of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality in a sample of 136 undergraduate students by using the 26-Item and the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scales (TAS-26; TAS-20), the Impulsiveness Questionnaire (I7), the Internal, Powerful others, and Chance Scales (IPC), the Malouff and Schutte Belief Scale and the NEO Personality Inventory Revised. The aim of this study is to compare the TAS-26 and the TAS-20, and to explore relations between alexithymia and personality especially regarding aspects that have not been taken into account so far, like impulsiveness and irrational beliefs. As expected, alexithymia overlaps with various dimensions of the FFM, as well as other dimensions like external locus of control and irrational beliefs. Surprisingly, there is no association between alexithymia and impulsiveness. Our results suggest that alexithymia is a cognitive state of externally oriented thinking with an emotional instability associated to the inability to cope with stressful situations.

Examination of Relations between the Neo Personality Inventory-Revised and the Temperament and Character Inventory

2002 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 921-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. MacDonald ◽  
Daniel Holland
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Regression Equations ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Temperament And Character Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Character Inventory

The present investigation examined the relation of the Five Factor Model of personality as measured by the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised to the seven-factor model of temperament and character as tapped by the Temperament and Character Inventory by testing a sample of 344 undergraduate students. Correlations and regression analyses suggest there is substantial overlap between the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised domains and Temperament and Character Inventory dimensions as reflected in multiple correlations ranging from .54 to .80 for the latter when used as predictors of NEO Personality Inventory-Revised domains and .46 to .78 for the former domains when used as predictors of Temperament and Character Inventory dimension scores. Information for constructing the regression equations to allow for the prediction of personality constructs for one model from scores obtained on the other are provided.

A Comparison of Two Five-Factor Model Operationalizations of the Triarchic Model of Psychopathy in a Clinical Sample

Assessment ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107319112110061
Author(s):  
Jared R. Ruchensky ◽  
M. Brent Donnellan ◽  
Christopher J. Hopwood ◽  
John F. Edens ◽  
Andrew E. Skodol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Triarchic Model

Structural models of personality traits, particularly the five-factor model (FFM), continue to inform ongoing debates regarding what personality attributes and trait domains are central to psychopathy. A growing body of literature has linked the constructs of the triarchic model of psychopathy (boldness, meanness, disinhibition) to the FFM. Recently, researchers developed both item and regression-based measures of the triarchic model of psychopathy using the NEO Personality Inventory–Revised—a popular measure of the FFM. The current study examines the correlates of these two FFM-derived operationalizations of the triarchic model using data from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study. The two approaches had strong convergent validity coefficients and similar patterns of criterion-related validity coefficients. Meanness related to greater personality pathology characterized by exploitation of others and poor attachment, whereas disinhibition related to indicators of greater negative affect and poor behavioral constraint. Boldness related to reduced negative affect and greater narcissistic personality traits. Although the item and regression-based approaches showed similar patterns of associations with criterion-variables, the item-based approach has some practical and psychometric advantages over the regression-based approach given strong correlations between the meanness and disinhibition scores from the regression approach.

Possible Barnum Effect in the Five Factor Model: Do Respondents Accept Random Neo Personality Inventory–Revised Scores as Their Actual Trait Profile?

2002 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 539-545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pauline Andersen ◽  
Hilmar Nordvik
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Correct Identification ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Military Aviation ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Positive Correlations ◽  
Barnum Effect

This study investigated a possible Barnum effect in personality traits, i.e., that persons accept a false trait profile as correct. Having answered the Norwegian translation of the NEO Personality Inventory–Revised, a group of 75 students, 56 (five women) military aviation cadets and 19 (10 women) graduate students, received a random T-score profile and were asked to rate their agreement on a 7-point scale. For all personality traits, i.e., facets and domains measured by the NEO Personality Inventory–Revised, positive correlations ranging from .08 to .64 were found between the agreement ratings and the similarity between the random false scores and the actual scores. The respondents identified and rejected random T scores that deviated far from their actual scores, which works against the Barnum effect. Correct identification correlated negatively with Neuroticism ( r = −.41) and positively ( r = .53) with Conscientiousness.

The Hierarchical Structures of the NEO PI-R and the 16 PF 51

2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérôme Rossier ◽  
Franz Meyer de Stadelhofen ◽  
Samuel Berthoud
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Hierarchical Structures ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Factor Solution ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Five Dimension

Summary: The present study compares the higher-level dimensions and the hierarchical structures of the fifth edition of the 16 Personality Factors (16 PF 5) with those of the NEO Personality Inventory Revised (NEO PI-R). Both inventories measure personality according to five higher-level dimensions. These inventories were, however, constructed according to different methods (bottom-up vs. top-down). Both questionnaires were filled out by 386 participants. Correlations, regressions, and canonical correlations made it possible to compare the inventories. As expected, they roughly measure the same aspects of personality. There is a coherent association among four of the five dimensions measured in the tests. However, Agreeableness, the remaining dimension in the NEO PI-R, is not represented in the 16 PF 5. Our analyses confirmed the hierarchical structures of both instruments, but this confirmation was more complete in the case of the NEO PI-R. Indeed, a parallel analysis indicated that a four-factor solution should be considered in the case of the 16 PF 5. On the other hand, the five-factor solution of the NEO PI-R was confirmed. The top-down construction of this instrument seems to make for a more legible structure. Of the two five-dimension constructs, the NEO PI-R, thus, seems the more reliable. This confirms the relevance of the Five-Factor Model of personality.

Exploring five factor model personality traits as predictors of burnout dimensions among college students in the Philippines

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Eric S. Reyes ◽  
Roger D. Davis ◽  
Cherline A. San Diego ◽  
Mara Carmina A. Tamayo ◽  
Nolein Verniz V. Dela Cruz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Maslach Burnout Inventory ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Student Survey ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised

Burnout occurs among students when they suddenly lose interest in their studies due to feeling physically and emotionally drained. They experience further emotional depletion due to study demands, distrustfulness and detachment about their work. This study investigated the relationship between the Five-Factor Model (FFM) personality traits and burnout, as operationalised by Maslach's three dimensions of burnout, namely exhaustion, cynicism and reduced personal efficacy. Previous Western research was replicated in order to contribute to the cross-cultural literature on burnout. The Maslach Burnout Inventory – Student Survey University Form and the NEO – Personality Inventory Revised Form S were subjected to stepwise forward regression using FFM factors and facets to predict the scores on each burnout dimension. Five hundred and seventy-seven Filipino college students (age 17 to 24) from private universities and colleges within Metro Manila participated. Results revealed that neuroticism and conscientiousness predict all three burnout constructs. However, certain facets of neuroticism and conscientiousness are more important than others. At the facet level, facets of agreeableness and openness contributed to prediction of burnout as well.

scholarly journals Two of a kind or distant relatives? A multimethod investigation of the overlap between personality traits and character strengths

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willibald Ruch ◽  
Valentina Vylobkova ◽  
Sonja Heintz
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Character Strengths ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Levels Of Abstraction ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Personality Facets

Allport’s (1927) distinction of personality devaluated (personality) and personality evaluated (character) can still be found in today’s psychological landscape. The present study compares the Five-Factor Model of personality and the VIA-classification of character strengths across two methods (self- and peer-reports) and across two levels of abstraction (domains/factors and scales/facets). A sample of 152 participants and 152 peer-raters completed the NEO-Personality Inventory Revised and the VIA Inventory of Strength. Personality and character were found to strongly overlap, yet the different operationalizations were rarely redundant (except for 3 personality facets). Multitrait-multimethod analyses mostly supported the convergent and discriminant validity of personality and character. Interpersonal strengths (e.g., teamwork) and abstract character factors lacked discriminant validity to personality facets. The present investigation contributes to a better understanding of the interplay between personality and character and provides an impetus for future research on the “virtue gap” between devaluated and evaluated personality traits.

Maladaptive Personality Trait Models: Validating the Five-Factor Model Maladaptive Trait Measures With the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and NEO Personality Inventory

Assessment ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley C. Helle ◽  
Stephanie N. Mullins-Sweatt
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Affective Dysregulation ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

Eight measures have been developed to assess maladaptive variants of the five-factor model (FFM) facets specific to personality disorders (e.g., Five-Factor Borderline Inventory [FFBI]). These measures can be used in their entirety or as facet-based scales (e.g., FFBI Affective Dysregulation) to improve the comprehensiveness of assessment of pathological personality. There are a limited number of studies examining these scales with other measures of similar traits (e.g., DSM-5 alternative model). The current study examined the FFM maladaptive scales in relation to the respective general personality traits of the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised and the pathological personality traits of the DSM-5 alternative model using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. The results indicated the FFM maladaptive trait scales predominantly converged with corresponding NEO Personality Inventory-Revised, and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 traits, providing further validity for these measures as extensions of general personality traits and evidence for their relation to the pathological trait model. Benefits and applications of the FFM maladaptive scales in clinical and research settings are discussed.

scholarly journals Associations Between the Five Factor Model of Personality and Dementia-Related Anxiety

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 385-386
Author(s):  
Stacy Yun ◽  
Lisa Stone ◽  
Evan Furr ◽  
Molly Maxfield
Keyword(s):  
Locus Of Control ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cognitive Status ◽  
Personality Change ◽  
Emotional Instability ◽  
External Locus ◽  
Modifiable Factors ◽  
External Locus Of Control

Abstract The Five Factor Model (FFM) of normative personality is predictive of long-term outcomes, including well-being and anxiety. For example, people with anxiety disorders often report high Neuroticism and low Conscientiousness (Kotov et al., 2010). Dementia-related anxiety (DRA) is concern about developing dementia that can occur in individuals of any age and cognitive status (Kessler et al., 2012). This study assessed associations between the FFM and DRA and the extent to which other factors, such as demographics and variables related to DRA (i.e., external locus of control and lacking knowledge of dementia), contributed to relationships. Participants (N = 664; aged 18 to 81; M = 30.24) completed measures of the FFM, DRA, locus of control, and dementia knowledge. Hierarchical regression (block 1: basic demographics, block 2: DRA-related variables, and block 3: FFM) was computed. The set of predictors explained 17.9% of the variance in DRA, F(14, 623) = 9.69, p < 001. Being older, partnered, low on Conscientiousness and Openness, and having greater external locus of control and less dementia knowledge predicted higher DRA (p-values < .05). Surprisingly, Neuroticism was not predictive of DRA after controlling for demographic and DRA-related factors, indicating that the trait-like tendency towards emotional instability does not explain DRA. Longitudinal research can explore the course of relationships among Conscientiousness, Openness, and DRA over time to further examine significant effects of age, as expressions of personality change across the lifespan. Research targeting potentially modifiable factors (i.e., dementia knowledge) could help identify methods of reducing DRA.

Development and Validation of the Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM)

Assessment ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Watson ◽  
Ericka Nus ◽  
Kevin D. Wu
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Validity Data ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Five Phases

The Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM) is a comprehensive hierarchical measure of personality. The FI-FFM was created across five phases of scale development. It includes five facets apiece for neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness; four facets within agreeableness; and three facets for openness. We present reliability and validity data obtained from three samples. The FI-FFM scales are internally consistent and highly stable over 2 weeks (retest rs ranged from .64 to .82, median r = .77). They show strong convergent and discriminant validity vis-à-vis the NEO, the Big Five Inventory, and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Moreover, self-ratings on the scales show moderate to strong agreement with corresponding ratings made by informants ( rs ranged from .26 to .66, median r = .42). Finally, in joint analyses with the NEO Personality Inventory–3, the FI-FFM neuroticism facet scales display significant incremental validity in predicting indicators of internalizing psychopathology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document