Factor Analysis of the NEO-PI and the Comrey Personality Scales

The 1985 version of the NEO-PI of Costa and McCrae and the Comrey Personality Scales were administered to a sample of 227 volunteers. The former was designed to measure the “Big Five” factors of personality, using single scales for the factors of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, and six “facet scales” each to measure the factors of Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness. The Comrey Personality Scales consist of 40 personality subscales (FHIDs) that have been shown repeatedly to define eight major factors of personality. In this study, these 40 subscales, the CPS Response Bias Scale, the two NEO-PI single factor scales, the 18 NEO-PI facet scales, and sex were factor analyzed. All eight Comrey factors were clearly identified. NEO-PI scales Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness matched well with Comrey factors Emotional Stability, Extraversion, and Orderliness, respectively. NEO-PI Agreeableness was substantially related to two other Comrey factors, Trust and Empathy. NEO-PI Openness was identified as a separate ninth factor.

Download Full-text

Cross‐culturally recurrent personality factors: analyses of three factors

European Journal of Personality ◽

10.1002/per.550 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 19 (6) ◽

pp. 451-474 ◽

Cited By ~ 38

Author(s):

Boele De Raad ◽

Dean Peabody

Keyword(s):

Big Five ◽

Emotional Stability ◽

Personality Factors ◽

Five Factors ◽

Two Factors ◽

Big Five Factors

This study proceeds from an earlier one that examined the ‘Big Five’ factors (Peabody & De Raad, 2002). That study considered the substantive nature of five factors from six European psycholexical studies. The results supported Big Five Factor III (Conscientiousness), but Factors I (Extraversion) and II (Agreeableness) often split into two factors. Big Five Factors IV (Emotional Stability) and V (Intellect) often failed to appear in coherent form. The failures might cause the splits, with five factors required. For three factors, the splits might not occur, and the three large (‘Big Three’) factors could appear. The present study pursues this implication, using three factors from the same six studies. The factors that split are now generally unified. This supports the Big Three and not the Big Five. This result is generally confirmed for several additional studies. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Full-text

Which of the Big Five factors are in need of situational specification?

European Journal of Personality ◽

10.1002/per.668 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 22 (4) ◽

pp. 269-289 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Boele De Raad ◽

Esther Sullot ◽

Dick P. H. Barelds

Keyword(s):

Big Five ◽

Emotional Stability ◽

Intellectual Autonomy ◽

Five Factors ◽

Relevant Situation ◽

Personality Questionnaires ◽

Big Five Factors ◽

Situational Information

With the availability of a personality relevant situation taxonomy (Ten Berge & De Raad, 2002), a burning question ahead is whether systematic inclusion of situation references in personality questionnaires does improve their descriptive and predictive capacities. In this paper, the reliability question was addressed, and we investigated for which factors of the Big Five the interjudge‐agreement would increase upon adding situational information. In this study we excluded the fifth factor, Intellectual Autonomy. Two studies were performed, involving a first test in Study 1, and a replication with three tests through varying sets of items in Study 2. In Study 1, trait descriptive adjectives representing four factors were administered twice (N = 182), one time without and one time with situational information. In Study 2 (N = 152), we varied both the trait‐adjectives and the situational trait‐sentences from set to set. All four tests indicated that the interjudge‐agreement for Extraversion generally decreased upon adding situation information, for Agreeableness and Conscientiousness it did not essentially change, and the interjudge‐agreement for Emotional Stability substantially increased. Some explanations and implications are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Full-text

Taxonomy and structure of Croatian personality‐descriptive adjectives

European Journal of Personality ◽

10.1002/per.539 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 19 (2) ◽

pp. 117-152 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

Boris Mlačić ◽

Fritz Ostendorf

Keyword(s):

Big Five ◽

Emotional Stability ◽

Data Sets ◽

Peer Ratings ◽

Factor Content ◽

The Third ◽

Five Factors ◽

Big Five Factors ◽

Lexical Factors

This paper describes the development of a comprehensive taxonomy of Croatian personality‐descriptive terms, organized in three studies. In the first study three judges searched through a standard dictionary of the Croatian language for person‐descriptive terms. In the second study, personality‐descriptive adjectives were classified by seven judges into 13 different categories of descriptors. In the third study, the 483 adjectives that the majority of judges in the second study classified as dispositions were rated for self‐descriptions by 515 University of Zagreb students and for peer‐descriptions by 513 students' best acquaintances. Self‐ and peer ratings were factor analysed separately and the Croatian emic lexical factors from both data sets were interpreted to be similar to the Big‐Five factors: Agreeableness, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Intellect, and Emotional Stability. The inspection of factor content of the Croatian emic factors and their relation to imported Big‐Five measures revealed high correspondences for all five Croatian factors although the relation between the Croatian and the imported factors of Emotional Stability and Agreeableness was somewhat more complex. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download Full-text

Some Comments on a Factor Analysis of the 16PF and the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised

Psychological Reports ◽

10.2466/pr0.1995.77.3f.1307 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 77 (3_suppl) ◽

pp. 1307-1311 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Heather E. P. Cattell

Keyword(s):

Factor Analysis ◽

Big Five ◽

Personality Inventory ◽

Factor Analyses ◽

Neo Personality Inventory ◽

Five Factors ◽

Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽

Big Five Factors ◽

Strong Relationships

This paper comments on unusual results recently published by Byravan and Ramanaiah. Their factor analysis of the 16PF and the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised showed the scales of the two tests to be largely unrelated. However, two recent factor analyses of these tests show strong relationships between the two sets of global factors—as strong as between the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised five factors and Goldberg's big-five factors. Possible reasons for the discrepancy are discussed.

Download Full-text

Using Principal Component Scores to Enhance the Validity and Reliability of Big Five Personality Measures

Journal of Individual Differences ◽

10.1027/1614-0001/a000225 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 38 (2) ◽

pp. 83-93

Author(s):

Jeffrey M. Cucina ◽

Nicholas L. Vasilopoulos ◽

Arwen H. DeCostanza

Keyword(s):

Big Five ◽

Discriminant Validity ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Principal Component ◽

Big Five Personality ◽

Validity And Reliability ◽

Scoring Method ◽

Five Factors ◽

Big Five Factors ◽

Component Scores

Abstract. Varimax rotated principal component scores (VRPCS) have previously been offered as a possible solution to the non-orthogonality of scores for the Big Five factors. However, few researchers have examined the reliability and validity of VRPCS. To address this gap, we use a lab study and a field study to investigate whether using VRPCS increase orthogonality, reliability, and criterion-related validity. Compared to the traditional unit-weighting scoring method, the use of VRPCS enhanced the reliability and discriminant validity of the Big Five factors, although there was little improvement in criterion-related validity. Results are discussed in terms of the benefit of using VRPCS instead of traditional unit-weighted sum scores.

Download Full-text