Strangers' ratings of the five robust personality factors: Evidence of a surprising convergence with self-report.

Attempted to replicate and extend the results of Passini and Norman (1966), who found surprising evidence of convergent validity (i.e., significant correlations with the targets' self-ratings) in strangers' judgments of 5 broad personality factors. In the current study, 250 previously unacquainted Ss were run in small, same-sex groups of various sizes. Ss rated both themselves and their fellow group members on the same set of 20 bipolar trait scales used by Passini and Norman. Consistent with previous research, significant self–peer agreement correlations were obtained for Extraversion and Conscientiousness. Ratings of Agreeableness also showed significant convergent validity when a sufficient number of peers rated the target. More generally, self–peer agreement correlations tended to rise as the number of peer raters increased. Possible explanations for the validity of strangers' trait ratings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cattell, Comrey, and Eysenck personality factors compared: More evidence for the five robust factors?

We administered the Cattell 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 PF), the Comrey Personality Scales (CPS), and the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) to a sample of 669 Australians that was controlled in composition for age, sex, and social class. Factor analyses derived from analyzing scales of the three inventories in the same matrix produced a group of factors that were similar to the five robust factors of personality found in studies that used ratings by others. Two of the factors were similar to the two EPI scales and five were similar to five of the eight CPS scales. One of these five factors was similar to a single 16PF scale. The 16PF scales were highly overlapping and factorially complex, an indication that fewer than 16 separate constructs are measured at the primary level. There were, however, clear relations between the five factors and the second-order factor structure of the 16PF, as Karson and O'Dell (1976) described. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Validity of observer ratings of the big five personality factors.

Examined the validity of observer (supervisor, coworker, and customer) ratings and self-ratings of personality measures. Results based on a sample of 105 sales representatives supported the 2 hypotheses tested. First, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings of the 2 job-relevant personality dimensions—conscientiousness and extraversion—were valid predictors of performance ratings, and the magnitude of the validities was at least as large as for self-ratings. Second, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings accounted for significant variance in the criterion measure beyond self-ratings alone for the relevant dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that validities of personality measures based on self-assessments alone may underestimate the true validity of personality constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Further validation of antisocial personality types.

Describes more fully the 7 delinquent personality types previously derived by J. Kulik, K. Stein, and T. Sarbin (see record 1968-17429-001). Personality types were based on the scores of 346 institutionalized delinquent boys on 4 dimensions: delinquent role, drug usage, parental defiance, and assaultiveness. Validation was tested in relation to 5 classes of psychological and social variables: family relations, verbal and intellectual achievement, self-acceptance, delinquency, and miscellaneous. A 3-yr follow-up of police records as a measure of recidivism was included. Significant findings were utilized as definitional characteristics in describing each of the 7 types. Several general findings emerged: (a) a combination of typological pattern and magnitude of dimensional scores rather than either factor alone was a better predictor of future recidivism; and (b) among milder delinquent types, race may be operating as a bias in determining incarceration. Future research on the problem of discovering differential methods of intervention and behavior change in relation to the 7 types is discussed. (17 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Personality and vocational interests: The relation of Holland's six interest dimensions to five robust dimensions of personality.

Relations between interest-based personality dimensions from J. L. Holland's (1985) theory of vocational personalities and 5 robust factors of personality (R. R. McCrae and O. P. John; see record 1993-01496-001) were examined. Results for 479 male and 246 female US Navy trainees imply that the 6 theoretical scales of the Vocational Preference Inventory and 20 scales of the NEO Personality Inventory share 2–4 significant factors. Social and Enterprising vocational preferences were positively correlated with Extraversion; Investigative and Artistic preferences were positively correlated with Openness; and Conventional preferences were correlated with Conscientiousness. Examinations of correlations for instruments with scales that are assumed to represent facets of 5 general personality factors usually supported these interpretations. Despite their regularity, the vocational–personality correlations were too low to suggest that either form of assessment is a dependable substitute for the other. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Factors and factors of personality.

Attempted to account for the diverse sets of factors of personality found by the analysis of questionnaire items as reported by different investigators and to see what common ground there might be. Divergencies were attributed to certain insufficiencies in factor analysis and to the fundamental views of analysts with regard to emphasis upon data or upon personality theory. Some reconciliations were found by recognizing that factors of different levels of psychological generality can come out in a 1-level analysis. A 3-level model of factor traits, based upon 13 Guilford factors, was proposed as a frame of reference. Construct validities of factor traits from different sources are examined. Suggestions are made concerning how to deal with factors of different levels. (2 p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Age differences in five personality domains across the life span.

The present study addresses the issue of age differences in 5 personality domains across the life span in a cross-sectional study. In contrast to most previous studies, the present study follows a methodologically more rigorous approach to warrant that age-related differences in personality structure and mean level can be meaningfully compared. It uses data on 50 items of the Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI) available from a study in a large and representative Dutch sample (N = 2,494; age range: 16 to 91 years) conducted in 1996 for the purpose of establishing norms for the FFPI. After having established strict measurement invariance, tests were made for factor covariances to be equal across age groups, revealing structural continuity of personality. Additionally, factor variances were shown to be equal across age groups. A number of age differences in the mean level of the five personality domains emerged. Specifically, older adults were, on average, more agreeable and, especially, more conscientious than middle-aged and younger adults. Findings from our study suggest that both continuity and change may mark personality over the course of life. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Further comments toward a dimensional classification of personality disorder.

Responds to the comments by H. N. Garb (see record 2007-19520-012) and A. M. Ruscio (see record 2007-19520-013) on the current authors' original article "Plate tectonics in the classification of personality disorder: Shifting to a dimensional model" (see record 2007-01685-001). Unable to respond to all of Garb's and Ruscio's concerns given space limitations, the current authors attempt to respond to key points regarding their article on integrating the classification of personality disorder with a dimensional model of general personality structure. These points include: clinical judgments; feasibility; communication; thresholds; and validity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Investigation of personality factors in a Canadian context. II. Standards of decision regarding personality factors in questionnaires.

Responds to commentary by DeYoung, writing from R. B. Cattell's laboratory, which criticized certain aspects of the methodology on which the current authors' substantive discoveries are based (see record 1971-29076-001). In this reply the authors not only have to defend their work on methodological grounds but must also indicate dissatisfaction with the methodology adopted by Cattell (1966). DeYoung points out, very properly, that factor analysts must give greater attention to precision of procedure and presentation. The current authors point out that they used widely accepted procedures, principal components followed by Varimax rotation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Parental personality factors in child abuse.

Studied whether abusing parents differ from nonabusing parents in personality variables by administering the Michigan Screening Profile of Parenting to 6 groups of mothers: (a) adjudicated abusers, (b) spouses of adjudicated abusers, (c) mothers convicted of child neglect, (d) nonabusing mothers from a college student population, (e) nonabusing mothers from a middle socioeconomic level, and (f) nonabusing mothers from a lower socioeconomic level. 107 Ss were studied, all of whom had at least one child under 5 yrs of age. Major differences occurred when comparison was made of 1 or more of the 1st 3 groups with 1 of the latter 3 groups. The groups differed significantly on 6 factor-analyzed cluster categories: (a) relationship to one's own parents, (b) tendency to becoming upset and angry, (c) tendency toward isolation and loneliness, (d) expectations of one's own children, (e) inability to separate parental and child feelings, and (f) fear of external threat and control. In all of the cases, the 1st 3 groups scored at levels of higher risk than did the latter 3 groups, whereas the abusers scored at the highest risk levels throughout. It is suggested that a therapist who helps a parent develop the ability to maintain equanimity under stress, by helping reduce deviations from the norm in characteristics related to abuse potential, is ultimately helping to reduce actual abusive behavior. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Delinquency and objective personality test factors.

The Objective-Analytic Personality Test Battery was administered to an offender and a nonoffender Navy enlisted sample to determine the validity of these objective test dimensions in differing delinquent from nondelinquent groups. 8 of the 18 objective test factors differentiated the samples at the .05 confidence level or higher. However, when correlations were computed against number of offenses within the offender sample none of the factors was significantly related to the criterion. (15 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The five factor model of personality and job performance in the European Community.

In 3 prior meta-analyses, the relationship between the Big Five factors of personality and job criteria was investigated. However, these meta-analyses showed different findings. Furthermore, these reviews included studies carried out only in the United States and Canada. This study reports meta-analytic research on the same topic but with studies conducted in the European Community, which were not included in the prior reviews. The results indicate that Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability are valid predictors across job criteria and occupational groups. The remaining factors are valid only for some criteria and for some occupational groups. Extraversion was a predictor for 2 occupations, and Openness and Agreeableness were valid predictors of training proficiency. These findings are consistent with M. R. Barrick and M. K. Mount (see record 1991-22928-001) and L. M. Hough et al (see record 1991-06268-001). Implications of the results for future research and the practice of personnel selection are suggested. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cognitive and personality factors in suicidal behavior.

Studied the role of aggression in suicidal behavior. The personality functioning of 20 suicide attempters, 20 nonsuicidal psychiatric controls, and 20 suicide completers was assessed using the Rorschach. There were 11 female and 9 male 21–63 yr old Ss in each group. M. Feffer's role-taking task (see record 1960-04380-001) provided a test of the cognitive functioning of the 1st 2 groups. All 3 groups experienced the breakthrough of more aggressive than libidinal drive derivatives, but no significant differences between the groups were found. Only the suicide attempters' aggressive responses were more primitive than their libidinal responses. On the role-taking task, the suicidal group's cognitive functioning in the neutral situation was superior to their functioning in the aggressive one. The control group yielded no such difference. The suicidal group's performance in the aggressive situation was also significantly inferior to the control group. Results are interpreted as underscoring the role of cognition in symptom choice. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Standards of decision regarding personality factors in questionnaires.

In a previous study, E. Howarth and J. Browne (see record 1971-29076-001) factor analyzed personality questionnaire items and concluded that the primary personality structure found by J. Guilford and R. Cattell should be reevaluated according to independent item-factoring. DeYoung criticizes this study for not meeting adequate standards regarding (a) decision as to the number of factors, (b) choice of communalities, and (c) rotation. DeYoung supports the marker structure found by Cattell. In a separate article, Howarth and Browne justify their methodology and refute DeYoung's position. (16 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Age differences in personality across the adult life span: Parallels in five cultures.

Both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies in the United States have shown consistent changes between college age and middle adulthood. There appear to be declines in 3 of the 5 major factors of personality-Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness-and increases in Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. To examine cross-cultural generalizability of these findings, translations of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory were administered to samples in Germany, Italy, Portugal, Croatia, and South Korea (N?=?7,363). Similar patterns of age differences were seen in each country, for both men and women. Common trends were also seen for the more specific traits that define the major factors. Because these nations differ substantially in culture and recent history, results suggest the hypothesis that these are universal maturational changes in adult personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Investigation of personality factors in a Canadian context: I. Marker structure in personality questionnaire items.

Constructed a 100-item personality questionnaire by adapting 67 marker items from S. B. Sells, R. G. Demaree, and D. P. Will and 10 from Eysenck in order to see whether restructured items would reappear as factors in item factor analysis. The questionnaire was administered to 329 undergraduates and the data factor analyzed by principal axis and rotated by varimax. The following factors were identified: emotional stability, sociability, conscience, shyness, relaxed composure, impulsiveness, individual tolerance, considerateness, group tolerance, physical prowess, energy, trust vs. suspicion, group affiliation, rhathymia, and paranoid sensitivity. The attempted replication was reasonably clear-cut, showing 44 out of 77 markers in an appropriate position and suitably marked by salients greater than .30. The implication is that certain widely used personality questionnaires, not based on item analysis of the most stringent kind but on prior item groupings, should be carefully reevaluated. Comparisons are drawn between the factors obtained in independent item-factoring and it is concluded that the method holds considerable promise for the replicable measurement of personality structure. (French summary) (15 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Are personality factors raters' conceptual factors?

3 separate factor-analytic studies were conducted to compare personality factors with semantic factors using 76 trait-rating scales. In 1 study raters rated real persons using the scales, in another stereotype persons. In the third study raters rated the "meaning" of select trait words on the trait-rating scales. A comparison of factors found in the 3 studies using an index of factor similarity showed that 5 of 11 factors found for ratings of real persons were congruent with 5 of 10 factors found for the ratings of stereotype persons, while the same 5 in these 2 studies were congruent with 4 of 9 factors found for ratings of the meaning of select trait words. These results suggested that "personality factors" based upon trait ratings of persons can be interpreted as distinct concepts implied by trait words rather than internal structural features of persons. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in response to automation: The five factor model of personality.

This study examined the relationship of operator personality (Five Factor Model) and characteristics of the task and of adaptive automation (reliability and adaptiveness—whether the automation was well-matched to changes in task demand) to operator performance, workload, stress, and coping. This represents the first investigation of how the Five Factors relate to human response to automation. One-hundred-sixty-one college students experienced either 75% or 95% reliable automation provided with task loads of either two or four displays to be monitored. The task required threat detection in a simulated uninhabited ground vehicle (UGV) task. Task demand exerted the strongest influence on outcome variables. Automation characteristics did not directly impact workload or stress, but effects did emerge in the context of trait-task interactions that varied as a function of the dimension of workload and stress. The pattern of relationships of traits to dependent variables was generally moderated by at least one task factor. Neuroticism was related to poorer performance in some conditions, and all five traits were associated with at least one measure of workload and stress. Neuroticism generally predicted increased workload and stress and the other traits predicted decreased levels of these states. However, in the case of the relation of Extraversion and Agreeableness to Worry, Frustration, and avoidant coping, the direction of effects varied across task conditions. The results support incorporation of individual differences into automation design by identifying the relevant person characteristics and using the information to determine what functions to automate and the form and level of automation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

The matching of behavior rating and questionnaire personality factors.

A review of evidence leads the author to chalenge the assertion that a one-to-one matching of behavior rating and questionnaire factors has been proved. Many of the technical, statistical, and psychological issues involved are discussed. The author recommends the development of a single questionnaire which can be scored in terms of either a self-perception-factor or in terms of a behavior factor criterion. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)