A Bright Side,Facet Analysis of Histrionic Personality Disorder: The Relationship Between the HDS Colourful Factor and the NEO-PI-R Facets in a Large Adult Sample

This study looks at “bright-side,” Big Five Personality trait correlates of a “dark-side” Personality Disorder, namely Histrionic Personality Disorder (HPD). More than 5000 British adults completed the Neuroticism Extraversion Openness Personality Inventory-Revised (Costa & McCrae, 1985), which measures the Big Five Personality factors at the Domain (Super Factor) and the Facet (Factor) level, as well as the Hogan Development Survey (HDS; Hogan & Hogan, 2009), which has a measure of HPD, exclusively called “Colourful” in the HDS terminology. Correlation and regression results confirmed many of the associations between these “bright” and “dark” side individual difference variables. The Colourful (HPD) score from the HDS was the criterion variable in all analyses. Colourful individuals are high on Extraversion and Openness, but also Stable and Disagreeable. The Facet analysis identified Assertiveness and Immodesty as particularly characteristic of that type. The study confirmed work on HPD using different population groups and different measures, showing that personality traits are predictable and correlated with various personality disorders.     

Psychometric Correlates of FIRO‐B Scores: Locating the FIRO‐B scores in personality factor space

This paper investigated the relationship between the six Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation (FIRO)‐B scales, the Big Five Personality traits assessed by the NEO PI‐R, the Hogan Development Survey (HDS) and two measures of cognitive ability (Watson Glaser; Graduate and Managerial Assessment). It examined the concurrent and construct validity of the measure in various adult groups attending assessment centres in order to locate the FIRO‐B dimensions in established personality factor space. The FIRO‐B was consistently correlated with Extraversion, though analysis at the primary factor (facet) level showed many traits from all five factors were strongly correlated with the six FIRO‐B scores. Regressing the six FIRO‐B facets onto each of the Big Five in turn showed all were significant particularly for Expressed Inclusion and Wanted Control. The second study also showed considerable and logical overlap between the six FIRO‐B scales and the 11 dysfunctional personality strategies as measured by the HDS. There were also strong correlational patterns for the Cautious, Reserved, Colourful and Dutiful type disorders. The third study showed the FIRO‐B was statistically associated with both cognitive ability tests though it only accounted for small percentages of the explained variance. Expressed Control was the most consistently correlated of the intelligence test scores. Despite the fact that many explicable associations were found between the FIRO‐B and other measure the effect sizes were not large. Thus only 4% of the trait facet scores and 4.5% of the HDS showed medium effect sizes. Results are discussed in terms of the usefulness and possible discriminant validity of the instrument for use in selection and assessment.     

Neediness and connectedness and the five‐factor model of personality

This study examined maladaptive and relatively more adaptive forms of dependency, as measured by the neediness and connectedness factors of the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, D'Afflitti, & Quinlan, 1976 ), within a comprehensive scheme of personality provided by the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R; Costa & McCrae, 1992 ). University students (n = 475) completed the DEQ, NEO‐PI‐R, and a measure of depressive symptoms. Results indicated that neediness reflected anxiety, self‐consciousness, vulnerability, unassertiveness, and inactivity, whereas connectedness reflected anxiety, warmth, agreeableness, and valuing of relationships. Neediness demonstrated stronger relations than connectedness with depressive symptoms. These results support the validity of DEQ neediness and connectedness as measures of maladaptive and relatively more adaptive forms of dependency. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Incipient adult personality: The NEO‐PI‐3 in middle‐school‐aged children

This study administered the NEO Personality Inventory‐3 (NEO‐PI‐3), a more readable version of an adult measure of the Five‐Factor Model, to 449 boys and girls aged 12 and 13, who described themselves or a peer. Analyses of readability, reliability, factor structure, and convergent and discriminant validity suggested that the NEO‐PI‐3 can be appropriately used in this age group. Personality traits in children of this age closely resemble in structure and functioning the traits of older adolescents and adults. Most gender differences known from studies of adults are found in this age group, and mean levels show continuity with older groups. The NEO‐PI‐3 appears to be a useful instrument for research, and potentially for clinical applications, in middle‐school‐aged children.     

Domains and facets: hierarchical personality assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory

Personality traits are organized hierarchically, with narrow, specific traits combining to define broad, global factors. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992c) assesses personality at both levels, with six specific facet scales in each of five broad domains. This article describes conceptual issues in specifying facets of a domain and reports evidence on the validity of NEO-PI-R facet scales. Facet analysis-the interpretation of a scale in terms of the specific facets with which it correlates-is illustrated using alternative measures of the five-factor model and occupational scales. Finally, the hierarchical interpretation of personality profiles is discussed. Interpretation on the domain level yields a rapid understanding of the individual interpretation of specific facet scales gives a more detailed assessment.     

Specific Personality Traits and General Personality Dysfunction as Predictors of the Presence and Severity of Personality Disorders in a Clinical Sample

This study examined the associations of specific personality traits and general personality dysfunction in relation to the presence and severity of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM–IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) personality disorders in a Dutch clinical sample. Two widely used measures of specific personality traits were selected, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory as a measure of normal personality traits, and the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire as a measure of pathological traits. In addition, 2 promising measures of personality dysfunction were selected, the General Assessment of Personality Disorder and the Severity Indices of Personality Problems. Theoretically predicted associations were found between the measures, and all measures predicted the presence and severity of DSM–IV personality disorders. The combination of general personality dysfunction models and personality traits models provided incremental information about the presence and severity of personality disorders, suggesting that an integrative approach of multiple perspectives might serve comprehensive assessment of personality disorders.     

Personality for free: Psychometric properties of a public domain Australian measure of the five‐factor model

Fifty items from Goldberg's International Personality Item Pool were compiled to form a public‐domain measure of personality, the Australian Personality Inventory (API). Data from a random community sample (N = 7615) and a university‐based sample (N = 271) were used to explore psychometric properties of this 50‐item measure of the five‐factor model of personality (FFM). In both samples, internal reliabilities were adequate. In the university‐based sample an appropriate pattern of convergent and divergent relationship was found between scale scores and domain scores from the NEO Five‐Factor Inventory. After adjusting for an apparent response set (mean response across items), exploratory factor analyses clearly retrieved the FFM in both samples. It is provisionally concluded that raw scale scores from the API provide reliable estimates of the FFM, but adjustment for mean response across the 50 items might clarify the five‐factor structure, especially in less educated samples.     

A spherical conceptualization of personality traits

This research utilizes the geometric structure of the two‐dimensional Interpersonal Circumplex (IPC), and adds the Five‐Factor Model (FFM) dimension of conscientiousness to create a three‐dimensional spherical model of personality; the interpersonal sphere (IPS). A sample of 250 participants was initially used to select items that conformed to the geometric locations of 26 different characteristics on the IPS. A separate sample of 251 participants confirmed the geometric structure of these characteristic measures using randomization tests. To demonstrate an application of this three‐dimensional model, the IPS was employed as a geometric taxonomy to map various personality constructs. The combined sample of 501 participants was used to cartographically locate 164 scales from the NEO Personality Inventory, (NEO‐PI‐R), the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), the California Psychological Inventory (CPI), the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI), the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ), and the Jackson Personality Inventory (JPI‐R) onto the IPS. The spherical conception of traits provided by the three‐dimensional IPS is discussed as both an extension of the FFM and the two‐dimensional IPC. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Needs and Cognition/Behavior Patterns at Work and the Big Five: An assessment of the Personality and Preference Inventory‐Normative (PAPI‐N) from the perspective of the five‐factor model

This study examined the relationship between psychological needs and cognition/behavior patterns at work as measured by the Personality and Preference Inventory – Normative (PAPI‐N) and the five‐factor model of personality as measured by the NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO‐FFI) in a sample of 91 working adults and 71 psychology undergraduates who worked or had some work experience. Our results showed significant and theoretically congruent correlations between the PAPI‐N scales and the measures of the five‐factor model. These correlations were similar to those found using alternative instruments to measure Murray's needs. Despite the differences in the conceptual origins of the PAPI‐N and the NEO‐FFI and divergences in the aspects of personality measured by the two inventories, joint and interbattery factor analyses showed that most of the needs and cognition/behavior patterns measured by the PAPI‐N can be meaningfully organized within the framework of the five‐factor model. These results provide further empirical evidence for the validity of the five‐factor model and the PAPI‐N, although they also point out personality aspects that are not encompassed by the five‐factor model.     

The relationship between the Five‐Factor Model personality traits and peptic ulcer disease in a large population‐based adult sample

The current study examined the relationship between the Five‐Factor Model personality traits and physician‐confirmed peptic ulcer disease (PUD) diagnosis in a large population‐based adult sample, controlling for the relevant behavioral and sociodemographic factors. Personality traits were assessed by participants themselves and by knowledgeable informants using the NEO Personality Inventory‐3 (NEO PI‐3). When controlling for age, sex, education, and cigarette smoking, only one of the five NEO PI‐3 domain scales – higher Neuroticism – and two facet scales – lower A1: Trust and higher C1: Competence – made a small, yet significant contribution (p < 0.01) to predicting PUD in logistic regression analyses. In the light of these relatively modest associations, our findings imply that it is certain behavior (such as smoking) and sociodemographic variables (such as age, gender, and education) rather than personality traits that are associated with the diagnosis of PUD at a particular point in time. Further prospective studies with a longitudinal design and multiple assessments would be needed to fully understand if the FFM personality traits serve as risk factors for the development of PUD.     

Capturing the DSM‐5 Alternative Personality Disorder Model Traits in the Five‐Factor Model's Nomological Net

Several studies have shown structural and statistical similarities between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM‐5) alternative personality disorder model and the Five‐Factor Model (FFM). However, no study to date has evaluated the nomological network similarities between the two models. The relations of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI‐R) and the Personality Inventory for DSM‐5 (PID‐5) with relevant criterion variables were examined in a sample of 336 undergraduate students (M_age = 19.4; 59.8% female). The resulting profiles for each instrument were statistically compared for similarity. Four of the five domains of the two models have highly similar nomological networks, with the exception being FFM Openness to Experience and PID‐5 Psychoticism. Further probing of that pair suggested that the NEO PI‐R domain scores obscured meaningful similarity between PID‐5 Psychoticism and specific aspects and lower‐order facets of Openness. The results support the notion that the DSM‐5 alternative personality disorder model trait domains represent variants of the FFM domains. Similarities of Openness and Psychoticism domains were supported when the lower‐order aspects and facets of Openness domain were considered. The findings support the view that the DSM‐5 trait model represents an instantiation of the FFM.     

Modeling general and specific variance in multifaceted constructs: a comparison of the bifactor model to other approaches

This article recommends an alternative method for testing multifaceted constructs. Researchers often have to choose between two problematic approaches for analyzing multifaceted constructs: the total score approach and the individual score approach. Both approaches can result in conceptual ambiguity. The proposed bifactor model assesses simultaneously the general construct shared by the facets and the specific facets, over and above the general construct. We illustrate the bifactor model by examining the construct of Extraversion as measured by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R; Costa & McCrae, 1992), with two college samples (N = 383 and 378). The analysis reveals that the facets of the NEO‐PI‐R Extraversion correlate with criteria in opposite directions after partialling out the general construct. The direction of gender differences also varies by facets. Bifactor models combine the advantages but avoid the drawbacks of the 2 existing methods and can lead to greater conceptual clarity.     

Effects of self‐enhancement on agreement on personality profiles

Effects of self‐enhancement and socially desirable responding (SDR) on rater agreement for personality profiles were studied in 304 students. Dyads of participants described themselves and their peer on the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R) that measures 30 facets of personality. In addition, participants filled in six scales measuring self‐enhancement or SDR. Data analyses focussed on moderator and suppressor effects of SDR on the similarity between self‐reported and other reported NEO‐PI‐R profiles. Three kinds of profile agreement were distinguished: (a) normative agreement; (b) distinctive agreement and (c) profile normativeness, that is, how strongly a self‐reported personality profile resembled the average profile of all participants. There were no moderator or suppressor effects on distinctive agreement, but SDR predicted profile normativeness quite strongly. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The five-factor model and its assessment in clinical settings.

Personality researchers have recently converged on the five-factor model as an adequate representation of the structure of personality traits. This article introduces the factors and the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI), a questionnaire designed to measure the factors and some of the traits that define them. Data on the comprehensiveness of the model and on the reliability, validity, and stability of measures of the factors are reviewed, and correlations between scales from the NEO-PI and two instruments widely used in clinical practice (the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory [MMPI] and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory [MCMI]) are used to illustrate similarities and differences between normal and clinical assessment. Some issues regarding the clinical use of the five-factor model are discussed.     

Perfectionism Dimensions and the Five‐factor Model of Personality

This study of university students (n = 357) and community adults (n = 223) examined personal standards (PS) and evaluative concerns (EC) higher‐order dimensions of perfectionism that underlie several measures from three different theoretical frameworks. In both students and community adults, confirmatory factor analyses supported PS perfectionism and EC perfectionism higher‐order latent factors. In relation to the revised NEO Personality Inventory, PS perfectionism was primarily related to conscientiousness and achievement striving. In contrast, EC perfectionism was primarily related to neuroticism, and lower positive emotions, trust and competence. EC perfectionism accounted for unique variance in current depressive and anxious symptoms over and above the five‐factor domain scores. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Predicting observers' ratings of the big five from the CPI,HPI, and NEO–PI–R: a comparative validity study

The present study compares the ability of three widely used personality inventories to predict averaged acquaintance ratings. Scores from 135 individuals on the California Psychological Inventory (CPI; Gough, 1987), Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI; Hogan and Hogan, 1992) and NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R; Costa and McCrae, 1992) were correlated with four sets of acquaintance ratings representing four variants of the Five‐Factor Model. Validity coefficients for the NEO‐PI‐R primary domain scales equalled or surpassed the CPI and HPI validity coefficients. Across all inventory scales and subscales, the magnitude of validity coefficients was moderated by the congruence between a predictor's and criterion's secondary factor loading. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

‘Grandpa,Do You Like Roller Coasters?’: Identifying Age‐Appropriate Personality Indicators

Personality development research heavily relies on the comparison of scale means across age. This approach implicitly assumes that the scales are strictly measurement invariant across age. We questioned this assumption by examining whether appropriate personality indicators change over the lifespan. Moreover, we identified which types of items (e.g. dispositions, behaviours, and interests) are particularly prone to age effects. We reanalyzed the German Revised NEO Personality Inventory normative sample (N = 11,724) and applied a genetic algorithm to select short scales that yield acceptable model fit and reliability across locally weighted samples ranging from 16 to 66 years of age. We then examined how the item selection changes across age points and item types. Emotion‐type items seemed to be interchangeable and generally applicable to people of all ages. Specific interests, attitudes, and social effect items—most prevalent within the domains of Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Openness—seemed to be more prone to measurement variations over age. A large proportion of items were systematically discarded by the item‐selection procedure, indicating that, independent of age, many items are problematic measures of the underlying traits. The implications for personality assessment and personality development research are discussed. © 2019 European Association of Personality Psychology