A five-factor measure of obsessive-compulsive personality traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for the Five-Factor Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory (FFOCI), a newly developed measure of traits relevant to obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) from the perspective of the Five-factor model (FFM). Twelve scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of specific FFM facets (e.g., Perfectionism as a maladaptive variant of FFM competence). On the basis of data from 407 undergraduates (oversampled for OCPD symptoms) these 12 scales demonstrated convergent correlations with established measures of OCPD and the FFM. Further, they obtained strong discriminant validity with respect to facets from other FFM domains. Most important, the individual scales and total score of the FFOCI obtained incremental validity beyond existing measures of the FFM and OCPD for predicting a composite measure of obsessive-compulsive symptomatology. The findings support the validity of the FFOCI as a measure of obsessive-compulsive personality traits, as well as of maladaptive variants of the FFM.     

A Five-Factor Measure of Dependent Personality Traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of dependent personality traits from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM). Dependent personality trait scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of FFM facets (e.g., Gullibility as a maladaptive variant of FFM trust). Based on responses from 383 undergraduates, the convergent validity of the Five-Factor Dependency Inventory (FFDI) scales was tested with respect to 2 measures of the FFM, 6 dependency trait scales, and 4 measures of dependent personality disorder. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to FFM facets from alternative domains. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM dependent personality trait scales to account for variance in 2 established measures of dependency, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facet scales and other measures of DPD was first removed. The results of this study provided support for the validity of the FFDI assessment of dependency from the perspective of the FFM.     

A five-factor measure of dependent personality traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of dependent personality traits from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM). Dependent personality trait scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of FFM facets (e.g., Gullibility as a maladaptive variant of FFM trust). Based on responses from 383 undergraduates, the convergent validity of the Five-Factor Dependency Inventory (FFDI) scales was tested with respect to 2 measures of the FFM, 6 dependency trait scales, and 4 measures of dependent personality disorder. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to FFM facets from alternative domains. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM dependent personality trait scales to account for variance in 2 established measures of dependency, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facet scales and other measures of DPD was first removed. The results of this study provided support for the validity of the FFDI assessment of dependency from the perspective of the FFM.     

A five-factor measure of schizotypal personality traits

The current study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of schizotypy from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM) of general personality structure. Nine schizotypy scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of respective facets of the FFM (e.g., Aberrant Ideas as a maladaptive variant of FFM Openness to Ideas). On the basis of data from 143 undergraduates, the convergent validity of these nine scales was tested with respect to seven established measures of schizotypy and the respective facets of the FFM. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to facets from other FFM domains and components of schizotypy. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM schizotypy scales to account for variance in two established measures of schizotypy, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facets and other established measures of schizotypy were first removed. The findings support the validity of these new scales as measures of schizotypal traits and as maladaptive variants of the FFM.     

The five-factor narcissism inventory: a five-factor measure of narcissistic personality traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of narcissistic personality traits created from the perspective of the Five-factor model (FFM) of general personality structure. Fifteen scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of respective facets of the FFM (e.g., Reactive Anger as a narcissistic variant of angry hostility), with item selection made on the basis of a criterion-keying approach using results from 167 undergraduates. On the basis of data from 166 additional undergraduates, the convergent validity of these 15 scales was tested with respect to 8 established measures of narcissism (including measures of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism) and the respective facets of the FFM. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to facets from other FFM domains. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM narcissism trait scales to account for variance in 2 alternative measures of narcissism, after variance accounted for by respective NEO PI-R facet scales and other established measures of narcissism were first removed. The findings support the validity of these new scales as measures of narcissistic personality traits and as maladaptive variants of the FFM.     

Five-factor measure of borderline personality traits

This study provides psychometric data for a new self-report measure of borderline personality traits from the perspective of the Five-factor model (FFM) of general personality. Subscales were constructed in an undergraduate sample (n = 109) to assess maladaptive variants of 12 FFM traits (e.g., Affective Dysregulation as a maladaptive variant of FFM Vulnerability). On the basis of data from a second undergraduate sample (n = 111), the Five Factor Borderline Inventory (FFBI) subscales were shown to have good internal consistency, convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity. These psychometric results were replicated in a clinical sample of female residents at a substance abuse treatment facility (n = 94).     

Five-Factor Measure of Borderline Personality Traits

This study provides psychometric data for a new self-report measure of borderline personality traits from the perspective of the Five-factor model (FFM) of general personality. Subscales were constructed in an undergraduate sample (n = 109) to assess maladaptive variants of 12 FFM traits (e.g., Affective Dysregulation as a maladaptive variant of FFM Vulnerability). On the basis of data from a second undergraduate sample (n = 111), the Five Factor Borderline Inventory (FFBI) subscales were shown to have good internal consistency, convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity. These psychometric results were replicated in a clinical sample of female residents at a substance abuse treatment facility (n = 94).     

Maladaptive personality functioning within the big five and the five-factor model

The five-factor model (FFM) of general personality functioning was derived originally from lexical studies of trait terms within the English language. Many studies have been conducted on the relationship of the FFM to personality disorder symptomatology but, as yet, no lexical study of the representation of maladaptive personality functioning within a language has been conducted. The current study identified the distribution of socially undesirable trait terms within each of the poles of the Big Five and compared this distribution to findings obtained with FFM personality disorder measures. The implications of the results for a FFM of personality disorders and for the FFM assessment of maladaptive personality functioning are discussed.     

Comparing personality disorder models: cross-method assessment of the FFM and DSM-IV-TR

The current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) defines personality disorders as categorical entities that are distinct from each other and from normal personality traits. However, many scientists now believe that personality disorders are best conceptualized using a dimensional model of traits that span normal and abnormal personality, such as the Five-Factor Model (FFM). However, if the FFM or any dimensional model is to be considered as a credible alternative to the current model, it must first demonstrate an increment in the validity of the assessment offered within a clinical setting. Thus, the current study extended previous research by comparing the convergent and discriminant validity of the current DSM-IV-TR model to the FFM across four assessment methodologies. Eighty-eight individuals receiving ongoing psychotherapy were assessed for the FFM and the DSM-IV-TR personality disorders using self-report, informant report, structured interview, and therapist ratings. The results indicated that the FFM had an appreciable advantage over the DSM-IV-TR in terms of discriminant validity and, at the domain level, convergent validity. Implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.     

Assessing the basic traits associated with psychopathy: development and validation of the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment

A new self-report assessment of the basic traits of psychopathy was developed with a general trait model of personality (five-factor model [FFM]) as a framework. Scales were written to assess maladaptive variants of the 18 FFM traits that are robustly related to psychopathy across a variety of perspectives including empirical correlations, expert ratings, and translations of extant assessments. Across 3 independent undergraduate samples (N = 210-354), the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment (EPA) scales proved to be internally consistent and unidimensional, and were strongly related to the original FFM scales from which they were derived (mean convergent r = .66). The EPA scales also demonstrated substantial incremental validity in the prediction of existing psychopathy measures over their FFM counterparts. When summed to form a psychopathy total score, the EPA was substantially correlated with 3 commonly used psychopathy measures (mean r = .81). Finally, in a small male forensic sample (N = 70), the EPA was significantly correlated with scores on a widely used self-report psychopathy measure, disciplinary infractions, alcohol use, and antisocial behavior. The EPA provides an opportunity to examine psychopathy and its nomological network through smaller, more basic units of personality rather than by scales or factors that blend these elements.     

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.     

The validity of the five-factor model prototypes for personality disorders in two clinical samples

The authors examined the validity of D. R. Lynam and T. A. Widiger's (2001) prototypes for personality disorders (PDs) derived from the facets of the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality in 2 clinical samples. In the 1st sample (N = 94), there was good agreement between the prototypes generated by experts and the profiles reported by patients. These FFM PD similarity scores also demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity with results from a semistructured interview and a self-report measure of Axis II pathology. In the 2nd sample (N = 132), the FFM PD similarity scores demonstrated excellent longitudinal stability and good predictive validity with regard to consensus ratings of PD features. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Borderline personality disorder from the perspective of general personality functioning

The authors extended previous work on the hypothesis that borderline personality disorder (BPD) can be understood as a maladaptive variant of personality traits included within the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality. In each of 3 samples, an empirically derived prototypic FFM borderline profile was correlated with individuals' FFM profiles to yield a similarity score, an FFM borderline index. Results across all samples indicated that the FFM borderline index correlated as highly with existing borderline measures as they correlated with one another, and the FFM borderline index correlated as highly with measures of dysfunction, history of childhood abuse, and parental psychopathology as did traditional measures of BPD. Findings support the hypothesis that BPD is a maladaptive variant of FFM personality traits.     

Testing the latent factor structure and construct validity of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory

Recent efforts have aimed to develop relatively short measures of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality, particularly for when time and/or space is limited. We evaluate the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI), a non-proprietary FFM measure with two items per dimension. We use a latent variable methodology to examine the TIPI’s factor structure and convergent validity with the 50-item International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) FFM measure. We provide correlations between the scale scores and latent factors, and compare each measure’s pattern of correlations with measures of other individual difference constructs. Results were favorable in terms of the factor structure and convergent validity of the TIPI, particularly regarding the correlations between the respective latent factors of the TIPI and the IPIP–FFM measures.     

Testing the latent factor structure and construct validity of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory

Recent efforts have aimed to develop relatively short measures of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality, particularly for when time and/or space is limited. We evaluate the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI), a non-proprietary FFM measure with two items per dimension. We use a latent variable methodology to examine the TIPI’s factor structure and convergent validity with the 50-item International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) FFM measure. We provide correlations between the scale scores and latent factors, and compare each measure’s pattern of correlations with measures of other individual difference constructs. Results were favorable in terms of the factor structure and convergent validity of the TIPI, particularly regarding the correlations between the respective latent factors of the TIPI and the IPIP–FFM measures.     

A Five-Factor Measure of Avoidant Personality: The FFAvA

A new self-report assessment of the basic traits of avoidant personality disorder (AVD) was developed using a general trait model of personality (Five-factor model; FFM) as a framework. Scales were written to assess maladaptive variants of 10 FFM traits found to be robustly related to AVD across a variety of methods. In a sample of 291 undergraduates, the scales from the Five Factor Avoidant Assessment (FFAvA) proved to be internally consistent and strongly related to the original FFM scales from which they were derived. The FFAvA scales also demonstrated substantial incremental validity in the prediction of existing AVD measures and indexes of social discomfort over their FFM counterparts. The FFAvA provides an opportunity to examine AVD and its correlates using smaller, more basic units of personality rather than more global symptoms that might blend these elements.     

A Five-Factor Measure of Avoidant Personality: The FFAvA

A new self-report assessment of the basic traits of avoidant personality disorder (AVD) was developed using a general trait model of personality (Five-factor model; FFM) as a framework. Scales were written to assess maladaptive variants of 10 FFM traits found to be robustly related to AVD across a variety of methods. In a sample of 291 undergraduates, the scales from the Five Factor Avoidant Assessment (FFAvA) proved to be internally consistent and strongly related to the original FFM scales from which they were derived. The FFAvA scales also demonstrated substantial incremental validity in the prediction of existing AVD measures and indexes of social discomfort over their FFM counterparts. The FFAvA provides an opportunity to examine AVD and its correlates using smaller, more basic units of personality rather than more global symptoms that might blend these elements.     

The effect of varying the number of response alternatives in rating scales: Experimental evidence from intra-individual effects

Despite a hundred years of questionnaire testing, no consensus has been reached on the optimal number of response alternatives in rating scales. Differences in prior research may have been due to the use of various psychometric models (classical test theory, item factor analysis, and item response theory) and different performance criteria (reliability, convergent/discriminant validity, and internal structure of the questionnaire). Furthermore, previous empirical studies on this issue have tackled the experimental design from a between-subjects perspective, thus ignoring intra-individual effects. In contrast with this approach, we propose a within-subjects experimental design and a comprehensive statistical methodology using structural equation models for studying all of these aspects simultaneously, therefore increasing statistical power. To illustrate the method, two personality questionnaires were examined using a repeated measures design. Results indicated that as the number of response alternatives increased, (1) internal consistency increased, (2) there was no effect on convergent validity, and (3) goodness of fit worsened. Finally, the article assesses the practical consequences of this research for the design of future personality questionnaires.     

Hormones and personality: Testosterone as a marker of individual differences

Recently, testosterone (T) has been linked to behaviors that are conceptually related to dominance as a personality characteristic. Although evidence for this association is growing, the psychometric properties of T as an individual difference variable have been largely neglected. For T to be considered a biological marker of dispositional dominance it is critical that it demonstrates high test–retest reliability and good convergent and discriminant validity. Two studies tested the temporal stability of salivary T in humans and the relationship between T and traditional measures of personality. Across both studies, test–retest reliability for T was high and comparable to the short-term stability of questionnaire-based and implicitly assessed personality assessment instruments. In being modestly correlated with self-reported dominance, T showed some evidence of convergent validity. In being statistically independent from conceptually unrelated personality constructs (such as Emotional Stability and Openness to Experience) it showed good evidence of discriminant validity. The findings strengthen the psychometric foundation for using T as a hormonal marker of individual differences.