Lexical studies of Filipino person descriptors: adding personality‐relevant social and physical attributes

Lexical studies have focused on traits. In the Filipino language, we investigated whether additional dimensions can be identified when personality‐relevant terms for social roles, statuses and effects, plus physical attributes, are included. Filipino students (N = 496) rated themselves on 268 such terms, plus 253 markers of trait and evaluative dimensions. We identified 10 dimensions of social and physical attributes—Prominence, Uselessness, Attractiveness, Respectability, Uniqueness, Destructiveness, Presentableness, Strength, Dangerousness and Charisma. Most of these dimensions did not correspond in a one‐to‐one manner to Filipino or alternative trait models (Big Five, HEXACO, ML7). However, considerable redundancy was observed between the social and physical attribute dimensions and trait and evaluative dimensions. Thus, social and physical attributes communicate information about personality traits, and vice versa. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A multigroup multitrait-multimethod study in two countries supports the validity of a two-factor higher order model of personality

This study examined the factor structure of the Big Five Inventory and tested the hypothesis that the five personality dimensions could be summarized by two higher order factors, namely, plasticity and stability, using multigroup multitrait-multimethod confirmatory factor analyses. We tested the higher order model in two young adult samples drawn from Germany and Turkey. Adequate inter-rater agreement between self- and informant reports was obtained. Among the models tested, a two-factor model was the most parsimonious model in which the first factor included Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and low Neuroticism; and the second factor included Extraversion and Openness to Experience. Invariance of this model was supported by multiple-group analyses, suggesting a lack of variability across samples.     

The Questionnaire Big Six in 26 Nations: Developing Cross‐Culturally Applicable Big Six,Big Five and Big Two Inventories

The Big Five is a useful model of attributes now commonly used in cross‐cultural research, but without the support of strong measurement invariance (MI) evidence. The Big Six has been proposed as a cross‐culturally informed update, and the broader Big Two (Social Self‐Regulation and Dynamism) draws on even more cross‐cultural evidence. However, neither has been rigorously tested for cross‐cultural MI. Here a Big Six inventory (36QB6) and measures of the Big Five and Big Two derived from it were tested and refined for cross‐cultural usability in samples from 26 nations, divided into three subsets. Confirmatory factor analysis of the models in the first subset of nations demonstrated fit as strong in translation as typical personality measures achieve in their nation of origin (although poor per standard benchmarks). Items that performed inconsistently across cultures were removed, and alternates considered in a second subset of nations. Fit and invariance were improved for refined 30‐item QB6, 25‐item Big Five and 14‐item Big Two measures in the third subset of nations. For all models, decrease in comparative fit index between MI levels was larger than .01, indicating lack of support for higher levels. Configural and factorial invariance were relatively stronger, compared to scalar and full. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Heritabilities of Common and Measure-Specific Components of the Big Five Personality Factors

Three different measures of the Big Five personality dimensions were developed from the battery of questionnaires used in the National Merit Twin Study: one from trait self-rating scales, one from personality inventory items, and one from an adjective check list. Behavior-genetic models were fit to what the three measures had in common, and to the variance distinctive to each. The results of the model fitting agreed with other recent studies in showing the Big Five dimensions to be substantially and about equally heritable, with little or no contribution of shared family environment. Heritabilities for males and females did not differ significantly. For Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, some effect of shared environment was found for measure-specific variance on the personality inventory, and for Extraversion and Neuroticism, models involving nonadditive genetic variance or twin contrast effects provided slightly better fits.     

Personality and gender differences in global perspective

Men's and women's personalities appear to differ in several respects. Social role theories of development assume gender differences result primarily from perceived gender roles, gender socialization and sociostructural power differentials. As a consequence, social role theorists expect gender differences in personality to be smaller in cultures with more gender egalitarianism. Several large cross‐cultural studies have generated sufficient data for evaluating these global personality predictions. Empirically, evidence suggests gender differences in most aspects of personality—Big Five traits, Dark Triad traits, self‐esteem, subjective well‐being, depression and values—are conspicuously larger in cultures with more egalitarian gender roles, gender socialization and sociopolitical gender equity. Similar patterns are evident when examining objectively measured attributes such as tested cognitive abilities and physical traits such as height and blood pressure. Social role theory appears inadequate for explaining some of the observed cultural variations in men's and women's personalities. Evolutionary theories regarding ecologically‐evoked gender differences are described that may prove more useful in explaining global variation in human personality.     

An alternative multi‐language structure for personality attributes

A scientific taxonomy of human personality attributes should optimally be based on studies from multiple languages and cultures. Study 1 demonstrates convergence between seven‐factor structures found in previous studies of Filipino and Hebrew languages. Study 2 shows that this ‘Multi‐Language Seven’ (ML7) factor model overlaps partially with the Big Five model, but includes four rather than three affective–interpersonal factors, replicates in American English lexical data nearly as well as the Big Five, and has close correspondences to the structure upon which two Italian lexical studies have converged. Correlates were used to clarify interpretation of ML7 factors labelled Gregariousness, Self‐Assurance, Even Temper ‘versus Temperamentalness’, Concern for Others, Conscientiousness, Originality/Virtuosity, and Negative Valence ‘or Social Unacceptability’. These studies indicate the viability of a lexically derived ‘etic’ alternative to the Big Five. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

From adorable to worthless: implicit and self‐report structure of highly evaluative personality descriptors

So‐called highly ‘evaluative’ personality judgments (e.g. describing someone as exceptional, odd, or vile,) are an integral component of people's daily judgments of themselves and others. However, little is known about the conceptual structure, psychological function, and personality‐relevance of these kinds of attribution. Two studies were conducted to explore the internal (i.e. implicit) and external (i.e. self‐report) structure of highly evaluative terms. Factor analyses of semantic‐similarity sortings and self‐reports on several representative samples of highly evaluative personality adjectives yielded internal and external structures that were very similar. Both types of structure included five dimensions representing distinction, worthlessness, depravity, unconventionality, and stupidity. The robustness of the uncovered dimensions across the two studies suggests that typically excluded highly evaluative personality terms, far from being behaviorally ambiguous and psychologically uninformative, allude to meaningful dispositions that people both implicitly understand and possess to different degrees. These findings also suggest that highly evaluative personality judgments are organized around the basic domains of morality (i.e. depravity), power (distinction and worthlessness), peculiarity (unconventionality), and intelligence (stupidity). We discuss the implications of our findings for the study of self‐ and other‐esteem processes, personality perception, and the Big Seven factor model of personality. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Personality and prejudice: Extension to the HEXACO personality model

We modelled the associations between the HEXACO dimensions of personality, Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and prejudice towards dangerous, derogated and dissident groups (N = 454 undergraduates). Consistent with a Big‐Five model, low Openness to Experience predicted RWA and therefore dangerous and dissident group prejudice. As predicted, low Emotionality (and Openness) rather than Agreeableness predicted SDO and therefore derogated and dissident group prejudice. Comparison with meta‐analytic averages of Big‐Five data supported expected similarities and differences in the association of Big‐Five and HEXACO models of personality with ideology. Finally, Honesty‐Humility simultaneously predicted increases in RWA but decreases in SDO, and thus opposing effects on prejudice. These opposing effects have gone unidentified in research employing Big‐Five models of personality structure. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Personality described by adjectives: The generalizability of the Big Five to the Italian lexical context

Two studies have been performed in the frame of the Big Five model to describe personality. In the first study, the most useful adjectives for describing personality have been selected, trying to adopt a procedure as objective and empirically driven as possible. The resulting pool of adjectives (n = 492) has been administered to a sample of 274 subjects to verify the emergence of the Big Five in the Italian context. In the second study the pool of original adjectives has been reduced to 260 adjectives selecting the most representative terms (with regard to the factorial structure that has emerged). This pool of 260 adjectives has been administered to a sample of 862 subjects, together with the NEO-PI and the BFQ to facilitate the interpretation of the resulting factorial structure. Results showed the emergence of an Italian Big Five factorial structure that resembles the ‘canonical’ Big Five, although some of the factors, viz. Agreeableness and Emotional Stability, emerged as ‘blended’ dimensions.     

Gone too far—or not far enough? Comments on the article by Ashton and Lee (2001)

Ashton and Lee argue that Honesty should be added to the Big Five model of personality as a sixth factor, and present a theoretical framework for interpreting Big Five factors and Honesty that helps make sense of the proposed six‐factor structure. The attempt by Ashton and Lee to go beyond the Big Five is applauded, but numerous problems are evident. Adding Honesty to the Big Five is plausible only if one ignores key assumptions that the Big Five model consists of independent factors that are candidates for pervasive lexical universals. The proposal does not take into account significant deviations from the Anglo‐Germanic Big Five that have occurred in emic studies of languages having their origin outside of northern Europe, nor potential substantive interpretations of the widely replicated Negative Valence factor. Future studies should seek improvements or alternatives to the Big Five in a way that keeps constituent factors well discriminated from one another and enhances the likelihood of ubiquity across diverse languages and cultures. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Using bifactor models to identify faking on Big Five questionnaires

To identify faking, bifactor models were applied to Big Five personality data in three studies of laboratory and applicant samples using within‐subjects designs. The models were applied to homogenous data sets from separate honest, instructed faking, applicant conditions, and to simulated applicant data sets containing random individual responses from honest and faking conditions. Factor scores from the general factor in a bifactor model were found to be most highly related to response condition in both types of data sets. Domain factor scores from the faking conditions were found less affected by faking in measurement of Big Five domains than summated scale scores across studies. We conclude that bifactor models are efficacious in assessing the Big Five domains while controlling for faking.     

Recurrent Personality Dimensions in Inclusive Lexical Studies: Indications for a Big Six Structure

ABSTRACT Previous evidence for both the Big Five and the alternative six-factor model has been drawn from lexical studies with relatively narrow selections of attributes. This study examined factors from previous lexical studies using a wider selection of attributes in 7 languages (Chinese, English, Filipino, Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, and Turkish) and found 6 recurrent factors, each with common conceptual content across most of the studies. The previous narrow-selection-based six-factor model outperformed the Big Five in capturing the content of the 6 recurrent wideband factors. Adjective markers of the 6 recurrent wideband factors showed substantial incremental prediction of important criterion variables over and above the Big Five. Correspondence between wideband 6 and narrowband 6 factors indicate they are variants of a "Big Six" model that is more general across variable-selection procedures and may be more general across languages and populations.     

Consumption symbols as carriers of culture: a study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs

This research argues that the meaning embedded in consumption symbols, such as commercial brands, can serve to represent and institutionalize the values and beliefs of a culture. Relying on a combined emic-etic approach, the authors conducted 4 studies to examine how symbolic and expressive attributes associated with commercial brands are structured and how this structure varies across 3 cultures. Studies 1 and 2 revealed a set of "brand personality" dimensions common to both Japan and the United States (Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, and Sophistication), as well as culture-specific Japanese (Peacefulness) and American (Ruggedness) dimensions. Studied 3 and 4, which extended this set of findings to Spain, yielded brand personality dimensions common to both Spain and the United States (Sincerity, Excitement, and Sophistication), plus nonshared Spanish (Passion) and American (Competence and Ruggedness) dimensions. The meaning of these brand personality dimensions is discussed in the context of cross-cultural research on values and affect, globalization issues, and cultural frame shifting.     

Motivational Basis of Personality Traits: A Meta‐Analysis of Value‐Personality Correlations

We investigated the relationships between personality traits and basic value dimensions. Furthermore, we developed novel country‐level hypotheses predicting that contextual threat moderates value‐personality trait relationships. We conducted a three‐level v‐known meta‐analysis of correlations between Big Five traits and Schwartz's (1992) 10 values involving 9,935 participants from 14 countries. Variations in contextual threat (measured as resource threat, ecological threat, and restrictive social institutions) were used as country‐level moderator variables. We found systematic relationships between Big Five traits and human values that varied across contexts. Overall, correlations between Openness traits and the Conservation value dimension and Agreeableness traits and the Transcendence value dimension were strongest across all samples. Correlations between values and all personality traits (except Extraversion) were weaker in contexts with greater financial, ecological, and social threats. In contrast, stronger personality‐value links are typically found in contexts with low financial and ecological threats and more democratic institutions and permissive social context. These effects explained on average more than 10% of the variability in value‐personality correlations. Our results provide strong support for systematic linkages between personality and broad value dimensions, but they also point out that these relations are shaped by contextual factors.     

Predicting domain‐specific risk taking with the HEXACO personality structure

Although risk taking traditionally has been viewed as a unitary, stable individual difference variable, emerging evidence in behavioral decision‐making research suggests that risk taking is a domain‐specific construct. Utilizing a psychological risk‐return framework that regresses risk taking on the perceived benefits and perceived riskiness of an activity (Weber & Milliman, 1997 ), this study examined the relations between risk attitude and broad personality dimensions using the new HEXACO personality framework (Lee & Ashton, 2004 ) across four risk domains. This personality framework, which has been replicated in lexical studies in over 12 natural languages, assess personality over six broad personality dimensions, as opposed to the traditional Five‐Factor Model, or “Big Five.” Through path analysis, we regressed risk taking in four separate domains on risk perceptions, perceived benefits, and the six HEXACO dimensions. Across all risk domains, we found that the emotionality dimension was associated with heightened risk perceptions and high conscientiousness was associated with less perceived benefits. We also report several unique patterns of domain‐specific relations between the HEXACO dimensions and risk attitude. Specifically, openness was associated with risk taking and perceived benefits for social and recreational risks, whereas lower honesty/humility was associated with greater health/safety and ethical risk taking. These findings extend our understanding of how individuals approach risk across a variety of contexts, and further highlight the utility of honesty/humility, a dimension not recovered in Big Five models, in individual differences research. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.