The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five Factors of Personality.

The Mini-IPIP, a 20-item short form of the 50-item International Personality Item Pool-Five-Factor Model measure (Goldberg, 1999), was developed and validated across five studies. The Mini-IPIP scales, with four items per Big Five trait, had consistent and acceptable internal consistencies across five studies (= at or well above .60), similar coverage of facets as other broad Big Five measures (Study 2), and test-retest correlations that were quite similar to the parent measure across intervals of a few weeks (Study 4) and several months (Study 5). Moreover, the Mini-IPIP scales showed a comparable pattern of convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity (Studies 2-5) with other Big Five measures. Collectively, these results indicate that the Mini-IPIP is a psychometrically acceptable and practically useful short measure of the Big Five factors of personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self–other agreement in personality and affectivity: The role of acquaintanceship, trait visibility, and assumed similarity.

Self- and other-ratings on the Big Five and a comprehensive inventory of trait affect were obtained from 74 married couples, 136 dating couples, and 279 friendship dyads. With the exception of Surprise, all scales showed significant self–other agreement in all 3 samples, thereby establishing their convergent validity. Consistent with the trait visibility effect, however, the Big Five consistently yielded higher agreement correlations than did the affectivity scales. Conversely, the affective traits consistently showed stronger evidence of assumed similarity (i.e., the tendency for judges to rate others as similar to themselves) than did the Big Five. Cross-sample comparisons indicated that agreement was significantly higher in the married sample than in the other 2 groups; however, analyses of 3 potential moderators in the dating and friendship samples failed to identify the source of this acquaintanceship effect. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

What is being assessed and why it matters: The impact of transient error on trait research.

Temporal instability can reflect either true psychological change or transient measurement error, and it is important that trait psychologists be able to distinguish one from the other. The authors report results from large retest studies of Big Five, trait affectivity, and personality disorder measures across time frames (2 months and 2 weeks) over which these constructs should show little or no true change. On average, nearly 25% of the variance in the measures was a product of transient error rather than true change; however, the proportion of error varied widely—but consistently—across measures. In addition, a reexamination of long-term longitudinal data demonstrated that ignoring transient error can lead to inaccurate conclusions. Most notably, a substantial portion of the observed instability in the Big Five and trait affectivity is due to transient error; thus, these traits are even more stable than commonly thought. The present data further suggest that previous reports of differential stability between the Big Five and trait affectivity are due, in part, to differential levels of transient error in measures of these constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the temporal stability of personality: Evidence for differential stability and the role of life experiences.

The authors investigated the stability of personality and trait affect in young adults. In Studies 1 and 2, young adults were retested on a Big Five personality measure and a trait affect inventory over a 2.5-year and a 2-month period, respectively. Results from Study 1 point to positive mean-level changes; participants scored higher on Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness at Time 2. Affectively, participants experienced less negative affect and more positive affect at Time 2. Results from both retests provide clear evidence of differential stability. Affective traits were consistently less stable than the Big Five. Other analyses suggest that life events influence the stability of affective traits more than the Big Five. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure.

To integrate the 5-dimensional simple-structure and circumplex models of personality, the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex (AB5C) taxonomy of personality traits was developed, consisting of the 10 circumplexes that can be formed by pitting each of the Big Five factors against one another. The model maps facets of the Big Five dimensions as blends of 2 factors. An application to data consisting of 636 self-ratings and peer ratings on 540 personality trait adjectives yielded 34 well-defined facets out of a possible 45. The AB5C solution is compared with simple-structure and lower dimensional circumplex solutions, and its integrative and corrective potential are discussed, as well as its limitations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A periodic table of personality elements? The "Big Five" and trait "psychology" in critical perspective.

Within contemporary personality psychology there is widespread consensus that, at long last, the basic elements of "the" human personality have been empirically discovered, and that the systematic search for the underlying causes and consequences of personality differences can be pursued on this basis. The putatively basic trait dimensions are neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, and are referred to collectively as "the Big Five." In the present article, this perspective on the psychology of personality is examined critically and found wanting. It is argued that neither the "Big Five" framework in particular nor trait "psychology" more generally is adequate as the basis for a scientific psychology of the human person. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Benchmarks: Integrating affective and interpersonal circles with the Big-Five personality factors.

Previous research on the Big Five personality factors has not accounted for trait variables interstitial to the factor poles. To better integrate interstitial variables with the Big Five and to provide a framework for reconciling variant versions of the 5 factors, 636 self- and peer ratings using a set of 394 trait adjectives were analyzed. Pairings of 3 factors (I, II, and IV) showed a markedly large incidence of interstitial variables. These 3 factors, referencing affective and interpersonal traits, formed a 3-dimensional space. Adjective clusters defining both factor-univocal and interstitial benchmark positions in this space were developed. The 3 circles defined by the clusters showed appropriate circumplex characteristics when examined in an independent sample of 205 peer ratings. Two of these circles corresponded to the affective and interpersonal circles defined by personality research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Filipino personality structure and the big five model: a lexical approach

In lexically based studies, we derived Filipino personality dimensions and related them to the Big Five model. In Study 1, Filipino high-school and college students (N = 629) rated themselves on a near-comprehensive list of 861 Filipino (Tagalog) trait adjectives. In Study 2, Filipino high-school and college students (N = 1,531) rated 280 markers of dimensions identified in Study 1. Some students (n = 473) also completed the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Seven comparable Filipino dimensions were identified in factor analyses in the two studies. We concluded that the dimensions we labeled Concern for Others (vs. Egotism), Conscientiousness, Gregariousness, and Intellect were quite similar to Big Five Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and Intellect, respectively. The Filipino Self-Assurance dimension was most similar to Big Five Neuroticism. The Filipino Temperamentalness dimension was more complex in Big Five terms, overlapping Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism. A final Filipino factor resembled a Negative Valence or Infrequency dimension. More than five factors had to be extracted to obtain Philippine dimensions resembling all of the Big Five.     

Hierarchical organization of personality and prediction of behavior.

Two studies evaluated personality trait measures and Big Five factor measures for their accuracy in predicting important behavior criteria. The results of both studies showed that the narrower traits and the broader factors, thought to define 2 levels of a hierarchy of personality variables, separately predicted most criterion variables. However, the incremental validity of the personality trait measures (the degree to which the traits increased the criterion prediction achieved by the factors) was generally much larger than the incremental validity of the Big Five factor measures. It was concluded that aggregating personality traits into their underlying personality factors could result in decreased predictive accuracy due to the loss of trait-specific but criterion-valid variance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Big Five versus nobody?

Comments on L. R. Goldberg's (see record 1993-17546-001) depiction of the Big Five factor structure as an alternative theoretical perspective on personality. In light of the multiple perspectives that characterize personality psychology, it is asserted that Goldberg's remarks about an emerging consensus on the Big Five as a solution should be read with caution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English.

Spanish-language measures of the Big Five personality dimensions are needed for research on Hispanic minority populations. Three studies were conducted to evaluate a Spanish version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI) (0. R John et al., 1991) and explore the generalizability of the Big Five factor structure in Latin cultural groups. In Study 1, a cross-cultural design was used to compare the Spanish and English BFI in college students from Spain and the United States, to assess factor congruence across languages, and to test convergence with indigenous Spanish Big Five markers. In Study 2, a bilingual design was used to compare the Spanish and English BFI in a college-educated sample of bilingual Hispanics and to test convergent and discriminant validity across the two languages as well as with the NEO Five Factor Inventory in both English and Spanish. Study 3 replicated the BFI findings from Study 2 in a working-class Hispanic bilingual sample. Results show that (a) the Spanish BFI may serve as an efficient, reliable, and factorially valid measure of the Big Five for research on Spanish-speaking individuals and (b) there is little evidence for substantial cultural differences in personality structure at the broad level of abstraction represented by the Big Five dimensions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"The structure of phenoytypic personality traits": Comment.

Comments on L. R. Goldberg's (see record 1993-17546-001) account of the Big Five taxonomy as scientific taxonomy of personality traits. It is argued that the Big Five taxonomy lacks the essential features of scientific theory; there is little concern with personality theory, with making testable deductions, and with demonstrating that the personality factors fit in with the results obtained. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Clarification of the five-factor model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex.

Shows how the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex (AB5C; W. K. Hofstee, et al; see PA, Vol 79:39188 ) clarifies disputes about the Big Five or 5-factor model. Trait ratings from instruments representing 4 versions of the Big Five (L. R. Goldberg, see PA, Vol 79:25730; R. Hogan and J. A. Johnson, 1981; R. R. McCrae and P. T. Costa, see PA, Vols 73:3750 and 74:15614; and W. T. Norman, 1963) were subjected to separate AB5C analyses for 2,148 American and 1,285 German Ss. Replicated results formed standard designation codes representing trait adjectives' primary and secondary factor loadings. These codes unveiled the unique coloring imparted by secondary loadings to different scales proffered by researchers to represent the 5 factors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Higher-order factors of the Big Five

Estimated factor correlations from 14 studies supporting the 5 factor, Big Five model of personality trait organization--5 studies based on children and adolescents, 9 on adults--were factor analyzed. Two higher-order factors were clearly evident in all studies. One was principally related to the Big Five trait dimensions Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability; the other, the dimensions Extraversion and Intellect. Two models, one for children and adolescents, the other for adults, were tested by confirmatory factor analysis with generally excellent results. Many personality theorists appear to have considered one or both of these 2 metatraits, provisionally labeled alpha and beta.     

Big Five factors of personality and replicated predictions of behavior.

Measures of the Big Five factors of personality were used to predict a variety of criterion variables thought to represent behaviors of some social and cultural significance (e.g., alcohol consumption, grade point average). Analyses focused on replicated predictions across 2 independent samples of participants (Ns=276 and 142) with 3 different measures of the Big Five (the NEO Five-Factor Inventory, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, and the Five-Factor Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire, the latter an experimental nonverbal personality inventory). The results indicated substantial consistency in behavior predictions across the different Big Five assessments. The data are interpreted as supporting both the construct validity of the personality measures used and the role of the Big Five factors as determinants of certain complex behaviors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Enhancing target variance in personality impressions: Highlighting the person in person perception.

D. A. Kenny (1994) estimated the components of personality rating variance to be 15, 20, and 20% for target, rater, and relationship, respectively. To enhance trait variance and minimize rater variance, we designed a series of studies of personality perception in discussion groups (N?=?79, 58, and 59). After completing a Big Five questionnaire, participants met 7 times in small groups. After Meetings 1 and 7, group members rated each other. By applying the Social Relations Model (D. A. Kenny and L. La Voie, 1984) to each Big Five dimension at each point in time, we were able to evaluate 6 rating effects as well as rating validity. Among the findings were that (a) target variance was the largest component (almost 30%), whereas rater variance was small (less than 11%); (b) rating validity improved significantly with acquaintance, although target variance did not; and (c) no reciprocity was found, but projection was significant for Agreeableness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)