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.     

A Preliminary Validation of Preadolescents' Self-Reports Using the Five-Factor Model of Personality

Although self-reports using the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality have been used in both adult and adolescent populations, few studies have investigated preadolescents' ability to rate themselves using measures of the FFM. A total of 130 preadolescents (mean age = 10.79 years) rated their personalities using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). When standardized verbal prompts were used to clarify the vocabulary in the NEO-FFI, preadolescents were able to reliably rate themselves across all traits of the FFM. Preadolescents' self-ratings were found to moderately agree with mothers' ratings of their children's personalities, suggesting not only the potential utility of using other-reports of preadolescent personality but also the appropriateness of using self-reports.     

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.     

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 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.     

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.     

国外人格障碍五因素模型研究述评

近些年来,国外许多心理学家致力于将基础的人格理论和人格障碍研究相结合的工作,其中将五因素模型引入人格障碍的研究已经取得了很大进展。文章主要总结了这方面的研究成果,探讨了将五因素模型应用于临床诊断和干预的可能性,最后讨论了未来人格障碍的研究方向     

Evolution, the Five-Factor Model, and Levels of Personality

ABSTRACT This article interprets the five-factor model as subsuming variation in normative, species-typical systems with adaptive functions in the human environment of evolutionary adaptedness. It is argued that the evolutionary logic of personality systems is apparent in the patterning of mean sex differences in personality. Personality systems are conceptualized as evolved motivational systems with an affective core. The evolved motive dispositions at the core of personality anchor a hierarchy of levels of cognitive and behavioral functioning aimed at attaining or avoiding the affective states central to these personality systems. Personality systems are seen as often in dynamic conflict within individuals and as highly compartmentalized in their functioning between settings. While variation in personality consists of a range of viable strategies for humans, extremes on these systems tend to be maladaptive, although in at least some cases individuals who approach the maladaptive extremes of individual variation may be viewed as engaging in high-risk evolutionary strategies. Within this wide range of viable strategies, personality variation functions as a resource environment for individuals in the sense that personality variation is evaluated according to the interests of the evaluator.     

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.     

Unsubstantiated beliefs and values flaw the Five-Factor Model of Personality

The Five-Factor Model of Personality was empirically derived and is now ubiquitous in research and applied personality psychology. However it is presented in current textbooks as including an un-evidenced component: the judgement that, while the five traits are socially desirable qualities (except socially undesirable Neuroticism), low scorers are characterised by their deficiency in essential social skills, displaying unattractive undesirable personalities. This judgement is verbally reinforced by the value-laden designations of the five traits (excepting Extraversion). Thus the model ignores evidence for cognate but contrasting personality factors that are also desirable in individuals and for society. It is proposed that traits are better understood as coming in pairs, thus resembling allelic variant expressions of genes. Extraversion and Introversion would then each reference a quality with both positive and negative potential. The traits Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness could become respectively Imaginative/Practical, Empathic/Rational and Purposeful/Relaxed. It is argued that the proposed revision would yield a model more consistent with experienced, and hopefully ontological, reality than the current formulation.     

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.     

Patterns of Expectations About Counseling: Relations to the Five-Factor Model of Personality

The authors sought to identify groups of students who differed in their patterns of expectations about counseling, and then to relate those groups to personality, as organized in the 5-factor model (FFM). Results of cluster analysis of 150 female and 96 male students' responses to the Expectations About Counseling-Brief form (EAC-B; H. E. A. Tinsley, 1982) questionnaire revealed 5 distinct clusters. Results of discriminant analysis identified 2 FFM personality functions (A Neuroticism and Closedness and Optimism) that meaningfully discriminated among the 5 clusters. A brief interpretation is offered of each cluster that integrates information based on EAC-B factor scores and the significant personality functions.     

The Psychotherapeutic Utility of the Five-Factor Model of Personality: A Clinician's Experience

This article summarizes experience using the five-factor model of personality, operationalized by the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI), to facilitate psychotherapy treatment with 119 private-practice, outpatient, psychotherapy patients and their family members over a period of 2 years. Trait theories such as the five-factor model implicitly challenge the premises of much clinical theory, yet they can be useful to clinicians, as they provide a detailed, accurate portrait of the client's needs, feelings, proximate motives, and interpersonal style. I suggest that: Neuroticism (N) influences the intensity and duration of the patient's distress, Extraversion (E) influences the patient's enthusiasm for treatment, Openness (O) influences the patient's reactions to the therapist's interventions, Agreeableness (A) influences the patient's reaction to the person of the therapist, and Conscientiousness (C) influences the patient's willingness to do the work of psychotherapy. Fundamental questions raised by the five-factor model about the nature of psychopathology and psychotherapy are discussed.     

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.