The Cross-Cultural Generalizability of Zuckerman's Alternative Five-Factor Model of Personality

Although theories of stress have emphasized the critical role of the appraisal process, the use of dispositional measures of appraisal have not been readily investigated. Using a large multiethnic sample, we examined the factorial validity and dimensionality of a dispositional version of the Stress Appraisal Measure (SAM; Peacock &; Wong, 1990). Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses resulted in a 4-factor representation of dispositional appraisal fitting better than its originally proposed 6-factor representation. This 4-factor model was invariant across gender groups. Although the 6-factor model purported to measure 3 dimensions of primary appraisal and 3 dimensions of secondary appraisal, these factors were found to be highly unstable and had questionable internal consistency. In contrast, the more parsimonious 4-factor solution identified 4 relative distinct and reliable scales of appraisal: 3 primary (Challenge, Threat, and Centrality) and 1 secondary (Resources). These findings suggest that meaningful dispositional dimensions of appraisal can be derived and incorporated into trait–state models of the stress process.     

Zuckerman's revised alternative five-factor model: validation of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire in four French-speaking countries

The aim of this study was to analyze the replicability of Zuckerman's revised Alternative Five-factor model in a French-speaking context by validating the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) simultaneously in 4 French-speaking countries. The total sample was made up of 1,497 subjects from Belgium, Canada, France, and Switzerland. The internal consistencies for all countries were generally similar to those found for the normative U.S. and Spanish samples. A factor analysis confirmed that the normative structure replicated well and was stable within this French-speaking context. Moreover, multigroup confirmatory factor analyses have shown that the ZKA-PQ reaches scalar invariance across these 4 countries. Mean scores were slightly different for women and men, with women scoring higher on Neuroticism but lower on Sensation Seeking. Globally, mean score differences across countries were small. Overall, the ZKA-PQ seems an interesting alternative to assess both lower and higher order personality traits for applied or research purposes.     

Validation of the Five-Factor Model Personality Disorder Prototype Counts with the Personality Assessment Inventory

Five-factor model (FFM) personality disorder (PD) prototype scores drawn from the revised NEO-Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) have demonstrated strong convergent validity with clinical measures of PD (Miller in Journal of Personality, 80, 1565–1591, 2012). However, an examination of the relations between the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey 1991), which is widely used in personality assessment research, and the FFM PD prototype “count” method, has not been conducted. The present study examines the convergent validity of the FFM borderline, antisocial, and psychopathy prototype counts with the Borderline Features (BOR) and Antisocial Features (ANT) full scales and subscales from the PAI. Furthermore, the BOR and ANT scales are correlated with all 30 NEO-PI-3 facets to empirically evaluate the rationally-selected facet scales used in the borderline, antisocial, and psychopathy PD counts. Five hundred thirty-five undergraduate students completed both the NEO-PI-3 and the PAI. The PD counts demonstrated strong convergent and discriminant validity with the PAI clinical scales. Facet-level analyses generally supported the structure of the PD count formulas, and the exceptions align with previous evidence that the Competence, Dutifulness, and Self-Discipline facets (from the Conscientiousness domain of the FFM) associate strongly with the BOR scale.     

Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) and Cloninger's Temperament and Character Inventory Revised (TCI-R): a comparative study

The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric properties (normal distribution values, reliabilities and factor structure) of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) and the Temperament and Character Inventory revised (TCI-R). The total sample consisted of 482 subjects (53.1% men and 46.9% women) from diverse age. Results showed somewhat better psychometric properties, like reliability and facet-factor structure, for the ZKA-PQ than the TCI-R. The expected five-factor facet structure of the ZKA-PQ was clear found. However, the seven-factor structure of TCI-R was not clear and it did not show a clear distinction between Temperament and Character factors. When ZKA-PQ and TCI-R variables are analyzed together, the ZKA-PQ factors are related to the Character as well as the Temperament factors. In some cases they represent the opposite poles of ZKA-PQ factors; for example, Neuroticism versus Self-Directiveness and Aggression versus Cooperativeness. Some are directly and highly related to ZKA-PQ factors; for example, Sensation Seeking and Novelty Seeking, Extraversion and Reward Dependence, Neuroticism and Harm Avoidance, and Activity and Persistence.     

Assessing the Five-Factor Model of Personality Description

Several approaches to assessing the dimensions of the five-factor model are reviewed and evaluated. The items in the assessment instrument may be adjectives or phrases, and the instrument itself may have been developed specifically to measure the five factors or may have been reinterpreted in terms of the five-factor model. Data are presented comparing an adjective-based measure of the model (Goldberg, 1990) with two phrase-based measures (Costa & McCrae, 1985; Hogan, 1986), and recommendations are made for the choice of an instrument in different research contexts. Allport's (1937) distinctions between the structure of the trait lexicon and the structure of personality in individuals are reiterated.     

Implicit Personality Theory and the Five-Factor Model

The Big Five have not only been identified in ratings of knowledgeable informants, but also in ratings of strangers, in co-occurrence likelihood ratings of traits, in semantic similarity ratings of trait pairs, and in prototypicality ratings of acts for traits. This article describes the shared and distinctive characteristics of correlations among trait ratings and implicit personality theory and reviews studies that compare the structure of memory-based ratings and of on-line behavior counts. Three hypotheses suggested in the literature to account for these correlations are delineated and discussed: an accurate reflection hypothesis, a distortion hypothesis, and an overlap hypothesis. It is concluded that the distortion hypothesis, has been discredited and that an overlap model best accounts for the available evidence. This implies that traits are real and accurately perceived, provided that the judges have the necessary information.     

Personality and Psychopathology: An Application of the Five-Factor Model

Our review is concerned with the relationship of the five-factor model of personality to psychopathology, focusing in particular on Axis II personality disorders and depression. The five factors provide a particularly compelling model for interpreting the Axis II personality disorders as maladaptive variants of normal personality traits. However, we also discuss methodological and conceptual limitations of this application. There has been little research on the relationship of Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness to Axis I mental disorders, but considerable attention has been given to Neuroticism and Extraversion. We focus in particular on the difficulty in distinguishing between the various ways in which personality can relate to depression, either as a predisposition to, a complication of, a pathoplastic effect upon, or a spectrum variant of the mental disorder. We conclude with recommendations for future research.     

Type D Personality: A Five-Factor Model Perspective

This study investigated the position of Type D (high Negative Affectivity and high Social Inhibition) within the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality. A sample of 155 healthy subjects were administered the Type D Scale and the NEO-FFI, assessing the FFM traits. Subjects also filled out the General Health Questionnaire and the Job Stress Survey. Negative Affectivity was positively correlated with Neuroticism (0.74) and negatively with Conscientiousness ( m 0.38), Agreeableness ( m 0.37), and Extraversion ( m 0.35). Social Inhibition was negatively correlated with Extraversion ( m 0.61) and Conscientiousness ( m 0.40) and positively with Neuroticism (0.50). Type D subjects reported more somatic distress ( p <0.0001), anxiety ( p <0.0001) and depression ( p <0.01) than non-Type D subjects. An alternative one-dimensional representation of the D-traits was suggested, conceptualized as a dimension ranging from neurotic introversion with relatively low conscientiousness to stable extraversion with relatively high conscientiousness. These findings are discussed in the light of the renewed interest in psychology for type versus dimensional representations of individual differences.     

Personality and Health: Advantages and Limitations of the Five-Factor Model

Interest in the association between personality characteristics and physical health has been renewed in recent years. Theory and research in this area has also been complicated by conceptual and methodological limitations. The present article briefly reviews this literature and discusses the advantages and limitations of the five-factor model of personality as an integrating framework for studies of personality and health. The model has already been fruitfully applied in several contexts, and more possibilities exist. Although it has some potential limitations, the application of the five-factor model--as well as other aspects of current personality theory and research--is likely to facilitate progress in the study of how personality influences health.     

Cross-Validation of the Five-Factor Interpretive Model of the Suicide Opinion Questionnaire

This study is a cross-validation analysis of the five-factor interpretative model of the Suicide Opinion Questionnaire ( Domino, Moore, Westlake, & Gibson, 1982 ) reported by Rogers and DeShon (1992) . Results indicated moderate support for the five-factor model. That is, although the factor analysis results generally supported the 5-factor model, a number of items loaded equally well across 2 or more factors. Additionally, internal consistency and test–retest reliabilities ranged from .48 to .85 and from .34 to .92, respectively, indicating weaknesses in some of the subscales. Strategies are suggested for the future psychometric development and refinement of the instrument.     

Child Maltreatment and Emergent Personality Organization: Perspectives from the Five-Factor Model

The Five-Factor Model was used to examine personality organization in 211 six-year-old children (135 maltreated and 76 nonmaltreated). Longitudinal assessments were conducted at ages 7, 8, and 9. Six-year-old maltreated children exhibited lower agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience and higher neuroticism than did nonmaltreated children. Maltreated children also were more frequently represented in less adaptive personality clusters than were their nonmaltreated counterparts. A particularly vulnerable profile occurred predominantly among maltreated children and was related to experiencing both abuse and neglect. Child maltreatment and personality clusters were related to individual differences perceived by peers. Longitudinal stability of the personality dimensions also was assessed. At age nine, evidence was found for maintenance of the organization of the personality clusters obtained at age six and for continuity of maltreated children's personality liabilities.     

Relationship between Psychological Needs and the Five-Factor Model of Personality Classification

The relationship between psychological needs, operationalized by the Adjective Check List (ACL), and the Five-Factor model of personality classification, operationalized by the NEO-PI-R, was evaluated in 147 (101 women and 46 men) psychology graduate students. We found presence of the Five Factors in the ACL in that 30 of 37 ACL scales correlated greater than 40 with at least one of the NEO-PI-R factors. This replicates and extends previous findings and is further evidence of construct validity of the five-factor model, as it pertains to personality classification.     

Structural analysis of the facets and domains of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) and the NEO PI-R

Aluja, Kuhlman, and Zuckerman (2010) developed an instrument for American and Spanish populations (Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire [ZKA-PQ]) that includes 4 facets for each 5 basic traits of Zuckerman's psychobiological personality model. This new instrument is intended to improve the previous measure based on the same personality model, the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ), by including the narrower traits (facets) defining the factors. This article explores the convergent and discriminant validity of the new instrument relative to the NEO PI-R in a sample from the Spanish general population. A series of exploratory factor analyses comparing both instruments was conducted. Results showed good convergent and discriminant validity between both instruments, although the ZKA-PQ had a slightly better structure than the NEO PI-R. The results support the validity of the ZKA-PQ factor domains and the facets composing them. The new instrument might be useful in both applied and research settings.     

Personality and Depression: A Validation Study of the Depressive Experience Questionnaire

This study investigated the validity of Blatt's model of depression as indicated by his operational measure of its constructs via the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, D'Afflitti, & Quinlan, 1976). Hypothesized relations between the two relevant scales of the DEQ and Tellegen's (1982) Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire, (MPQ) were examined, Participants consisted of 195 women, including 67 hospitalized unipolar depressives, 77 never-hospitalized unipolar depressives, and 51 nonpsychiatric controls. Overall, the results partially supported the validity of the DEQ even though all participants were women and prior studies have indicated the DEQ's greater discriminative validity for men than for women. However, several of the most strongly predicted relations, such as between DEQ Self-Criticism and MPQ Achievement were not confirmed. Coherent, significant relations between scales of the two measures remained after partialling out the effects of severity of depression.     

Shame, Guilt, Ego Development and the Five-Factor Model of Personality

Shame, guilt, and ego development are conceptually interrelated constructs, yet their empirical relations have not yet been examined. Further, these constructs have not yet been mapped onto the widely used Five-Factor Model. In Study 1, relations were examined between these three domains within a sample of Australian university students. Two types of guilt were distinguished, Empathic Guilt (associated with Agreeableness) and Anxious Guilt (associated with Neuroticism). The relationship between Shame and Ego Level was found to be curvilinear, with Shame greatest for persons at intermediate stages of ego development. In Study 2, relations between ego development and the Five-Factor Model were further examined. Across both studies, Ego Level was best predicted from Conscientiousness among men and from Openness among women. Relations between Ego Level, proneness to shame and guilt, and the five factors were typically modest, suggesting that these represent complementary approaches to the study of personality.     

“大五”与五因素模型：两种不同的人格结构

随着词汇学取向的“大五”结构和理论取向的五因素模型的出现,人格研究者就人格分类系统的问题达成了初步的共识。“大五”结构和五因素模型在形式和内容上有很多相似之处,但二者在历史渊源、内容形式、基本性质、研究走向等方面都存在一定的差异。文章试图从以上方面明确二者的差异,以澄清相关的混淆和误解,并在文章结语部分对两种取向研究对中国人人格结构研究的启示进行了详细的分析     

Relations of Masculinity and Femininity with Personality Dimensions of the Five-Factor Model

The aim of this study was to examine therelations of masculinity and femininity with five-factorpersonality dimensions in Croatian adolescents. Sampleconsisted of 464 high school graduates, all of them Caucasian, and approximately 90% Croatian.Results were analyzed by multiple regression procedureusing masculinity, femininity, gender, and theirinteractions as independent variables. All three maineffects were found to be statistically significant,with no significant interactions. Masculinitycontributes positively to extraversion andconscientiousness, and negatively to neuroticism andagreeableness, while femininity shows strong positive relationshipwith agreeableness, and weak positive relationships withthe other four dimensions. Results are discussed interms of four proposed models of the relation between gender role orientation and psychologicalhealth.