Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Five Factor Form and the Sliderbar Inventory

Assessment ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie L. Rojas ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health Treatment ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Treatment ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
History Of ◽  
Factor Form

Existing measures of the five factor model (FFM) of personality are generally, if not exclusively, unipolar in their assessment of maladaptive variants of the FFM domains. However, two recently developed measures, the Five Factor Form (FFF) and the Sliderbar Inventory (SI), include items that assess for maladaptive variants at both poles of each item. This structure is unique among existing measures of personality and personality disorder, although there is a historical, infrequently used Stone Personality Trait Schema (SPTS) that had also included this item structure. To facilitate an exploration of their convergent and discriminant validity, the SI and SPTS items were reorganized into FFM scales. The convergent and discriminant validity of the FFF, SI-FFM, and SPTS-FFM scales was considered in a sample of 450 adults with current or a history of mental health treatment. The FFF, SI-FFM, and SPTS-FFM were also compared with respect to their relationship with FFM domains. Finally, the FFF items and SI-FFM scales were tested with respect to their relationship with measures of maladaptive variants of both high and low agreeableness and conscientiousness. The implications of the results are discussed with respect to the assessment of maladaptive personality functioning, and suggestions for future research are provided.

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.

scholarly journals Assessment of Fluctuation Between Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissism: Development and Initial Validation of the FLUX Scales

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua R. Oltmanns ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Pathological Narcissism ◽  
Vulnerable Narcissism ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Affective Lability ◽  
Pathological Narcissism Inventory ◽  
Item Scale

There is a growing interest in the distinction between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, along with a hypothesis of a fluctuation between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism within individuals. There are several well-validated measures of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, but research has generally found that they are relatively distinct in their relations with their nomological networks. Further, the existing measures of narcissism do not actually assess for a possible fluctuation. The present study developed three scales of narcissistic fluctuation: Fluctuation between Indifference and Anger, Grandiosity and Shame, and Assertiveness and Insecurity. Consistent with expectations, the FLUX scales correlated with both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, displayed convergent and discriminant validity with factor derived-narcissism scales and the five-factor model, and correlated at moderate-to-large effect sizes with measures of affective lability. The three FLUX scales were also reduced to one unidimensional nine-item scale of narcissistic fluctuation (the g-FLUX) that retained the correlational properties for the more specific scales and had incremental validity over the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory and Pathological Narcissism Inventory grandiose and vulnerable scales in accounting for affective lability. Results from the present study suggest that the FLUX scales may provide an informative assessment of a fluctuation between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism.

The Lexical Foundation of the Big Five Factor Model

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boele de Raad ◽  
Boris Mlačić
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Common Stock ◽  
Ancient History ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Personality Description

A dictionary is the tangible repository of the common stock of words, although dictionaries comprise at best 10% of the full lexicon. Part of the lexicon is made up of the words used to describe what people do and what people are like. The psycholexical approach to personality focuses on this subset of words and on its exploitation, or what can be said to be the glossary of personality. This chapter is concerned with the history of the psycholexical approach to personality description, from ancient history to the more recent efforts, albeit focusing in particular on its modern history. Psycholexical taxonomies from around the world will be considered, as well as taxonomies based on nouns, verbs, adverbs, and their combinations. Ongoing controversies, difficulties, and disputes regarding alternative psycholexical personality structures will be considered, as well as recommendations for future research.

scholarly journals Cognitive Avoidance Questionnaire: Factor structure and psychometric properties.

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-467
Author(s):  
José Miguel Latorre Postigo ◽  
Marta Nieto López ◽  
María Antonia Font Payeras ◽  
Laura Ros Segura ◽  
Jesús Heras ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Coping Styles ◽  
Cognitive Avoidance ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Excellent Internal Consistency

La evitación cognitiva se refiere a las estrategias y esfuerzos dirigidos a prevenir experiencias negativas y eventos aversivos que provocan ansiedad. El presente estudio analizó la estructura factorial y las propiedades psicométricas de la versión española del Cuestionario de evitación cognitiva (CAQ; Sexton & Dugas, 2008), un instrumento que evalúa cinco estrategias de evitación cognitiva relacionadas con la preocupación. La traducción al español se administró a una muestra no clínica de 614 participantes (18-82 años). La escala total y las subescalas mostraron una consistencia interna de buena a excelente. Utilizando el análisis factorial confirmatorio, un modelo de cinco factores mostró un buen ajuste entre la estructura teórica y los datos empíricos. Se obtuvo evidencia de validez convergente y discriminante a través del análisis de las correlaciones del cuestionario con medidas de preocupación, supresión del pensamiento, rumiación y estilos de afrontamiento. Los resultados arrojaron datos preliminares satisfactorios sobre la adaptación española del CAQ, que podría proporcionar mayores avances en la práctica clínica y la investigación sobre procesos cognitivos y trastornos de ansiedad. Cognitive avoidance refers to strategies and efforts toward prevention of aversive experiences and events that provoke anxiety. The present study analyzed the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Cognitive Avoidance Questionnaire (CAQ; Sexton & Dugas, 2008), an instrument that assesses five worry-related cognitive avoidance strategies. The Spanish translation was administered to a non-clinical sample of 614 participants (18-82 years). The total scale and subscales showed good to excellent internal consistency. Using confirmatory factor analysis, a five-factor model showed a good fit between the theoretical structure and the empirical data. Evidence of convergent and discriminant validity was obtained through analysis of the correlations of the questionnaire with measures of worry, thought suppression, rumination and coping styles. The results yielded satisfactory preliminary data on the Spanish adaptation of the CAQ, which could provide for further advances in clinical practice and research on cognitive processes and anxiety disorders. 

Validation of the Swedish Version of the NEO-PI–R: Correlations between Self-Reports and College Peer Ratings

2009 ◽  
Vol 105 (3) ◽  
pp. 815-824 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joakim Westerlund ◽  
Niklas Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Short Version ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Swedish Version ◽  
Peer Ratings ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Validity Tests

The NEO-PI–R has been one of the standard tools for measuring the Five Factor Model. Validity tests of the Swedish version of the NEO-PI-R have previously been limited to factor analyses and to testing the inventory's congruent validity using Hogan's Personality Inventory and the Karolinska Scales of Personality. The aim of the present study was to further investigate the validity of the NEO-PI–R. 53 pairs of volunteer college students who were peers (77 women, 29 men; M age = 27.3 yr., SD = 7) from the Department of Psychology at Stockholm University rated themselves both on the NEO-PI–R and on single statements taken from the NEO-PI–R Summary feedback sheet as well as rating their respective peers on a short version of the NEO-PI–R and on single statements taken from the NEO-PI–R Summary feedback sheet. The pattern of correlations indicated some support for the convergent and discriminant validity of the Swedish version of the NEO-PI–R.

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.

Assessing Aberrant Personality in Managerial Coaching: Measurement Issues and Prevalence Rates across Employment Sectors

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 555-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filip De Fruyt ◽  
Bart Wille ◽  
Adrian Furnham
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Retail Sector ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Employment Sectors

The convergent and discriminant validity of two methods to assess a broad spectrum of aberrant personality tendencies was examined in a large sample of managers who were administered the NEO–PI–R (N = 11 862) and the Hogan Development Survey (N = 6774) in the context of a professional development assessment. Five–Factor Model (FFM) aberrant compounds, defined as linear combinations of NEO–PI–R facets, converged for the antisocial, borderline, histrionic, avoidant and obsessive–compulsive tendencies with their respective Hogan Development Survey counterparts. Alternative linear FFM combinations did improve convergent results for the schizoid and obsessive–compulsive pattern. Risk for various aberrant tendencies was roughly equal across different employment sectors, with a higher prevalence of borderline, avoidant and dependent tendencies in the legal and more histrionic tendencies in the retail sector. Adopting FFM aberrant compound cut–offs developed for coaching purposes to flag at risk individuals showed that 20% to 25% of all managers qualified for at least one and 10% to 15% were flagged as at risk for two or more aberrant tendencies. The theoretical implications and the repercussions of this research for the design of professional development and coaching trajectories are discussed. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Personality Psychology

Validation of Work Need Satisfaction Scales Among Chinese Working Adults: A Psychology of Working Theory Perspective

2021 ◽  
pp. 106907272110323
Author(s):  
Yan Xu ◽  
Chaoping Li ◽  
Jiayan Wang ◽  
Yuanmei Lan
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Need Satisfaction ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Working Adults ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Psychology Of Working

This study translated the Work Need Satisfaction Scales (WNSS), which was conceptualized in the Psychology of Working Theory (PWT), and tested the reliability and validity of the Chinese version (WNSS-C). In Study 1 ( N = 423), the WNSS was translated into Chinese, and an exploratory factor analysis yielded a five-factor solution representing needs related to survival, social contribution, competence, relatedness, and autonomy. In Study 2 ( N = 425), confirmatory factor analyses found no significant differences between the correlated five-factor, higher-order, and higher-order self-determination needs models. The results suggest the effectiveness of using a flexible five-factor model. Then, configural, metric, and scalar invariance models were tested, demonstrating that the WNSS-C is equivalent across gender, age, education level, and job position. Finally, we tested the concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of the WNSS-C and demonstrated that WNSS-C is a useful tool in the Chinese context.

The Development of the Informant Five-Factor Borderline Inventory

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112095976
Author(s):  
Jiwon Min ◽  
Stephanie N. Mullins-Sweatt ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Categorical Diagnosis

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is one of the most studied personality disorders and is associated with significant outcomes such as suicide. Although BPD is represented in DSM-5 as a categorical diagnosis, it may be better characterized dimensionally, such as from the perspective of the five-factor model of general personality (FFM). The Five-Factor Borderline Inventory (FFBI) assesses BPD from the perspective of maladaptive variants of FFM traits. Previous research suggests that informant-reports may increase the validity of personality disorder assessment, providing additional information that may supplement self-report. Therefore, the current study developed an informant measure of the FFBI, Informant Five-Factor Borderline Inventory (IFFBI) and examined its convergent and discriminant validity compared with the self-report FFBI, FFM, and traditional measure of BPD. Overall, the IFFBI demonstrated good convergent validity and moderate discriminant validity with the FFBI, FFM, and other traditional measures of BPD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document