Social Networking Websites,Personality Ratings,and the Organizational Context: More Than Meets the Eye?1

We examined the psychometric properties of the Big Five personality traits assessed through social networking profiles in 2 studies consisting of 274 and 244 social networking website (SNW) users. First, SNW ratings demonstrated sufficient interrater reliability and internal consistency. Second, ratings via SNWs demonstrated convergent validity with self‐ratings of the Big Five traits. Third, SNW ratings correlated with job performance, hirability, and academic performance criteria; and the magnitude of these correlations was generally larger than for self‐ratings. Finally, SNW ratings accounted for significant variance in the criterion measures beyond self‐ratings of personality and cognitive ability. We suggest that SNWs may provide useful information for potential use in organizational research and practice, taking into consideration various legal and ethical issues.     

Examination of the Discriminant,Convergent, and Criterion‐Related Validity of Self‐Ratings on the Emotional Competence Inventory

We found that self‐ratings on the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) had small relationships with, but a distinct factor structure from, the Big‐Five personality dimensions. ECI self‐ratings were unrelated to academic performance and general mental ability. ECI self‐ratings had significant, albeit small, correlations with EC‐related behaviors and peer nominations of influence during a leaderless group discussion, coworkers' ratings of managerial skills, and number of promotions received. However, with one exception, these significant relationships disappeared after controlling for personality and age.     

Resilients,Overcontrollers, and Undercontrollers: The replicability of the three personality prototypes across informants

The study of patterns in personality structure reveals three replicable prototypes: Resilients, Overcontrollers, and Undercontrollers. The three prototypes were first identified in children using ratings based on the California Child Q‐set (see Block, 1971). Only recently, the three prototypes were replicated in self‐reports on questionnaires intended to assess the Big Five (see e.g. Asendorpf, Borkenau, Ostendorf, & van Aken, 2001). This paper addresses the question of whether the three prototypes are replicable across different data sources. Cluster structures in self‐, peer, and behaviour ratings, all based on the Big Five, were examined in a sample of 600 monozygotic and dizygotic twins ranging in age from 18 to 70 years. The three prototypes could be clearly identified in the self‐reports only, whereas in ratings by others only the Resilient prototype could be replicated. In both peer and behaviour ratings, the second and the third cluster reflected a Non‐desirable and an Average type. The analysis of cross‐data consistency revealed only moderate agreement in assignments of individual subjects to types. The findings suggest that personality types depend strongly on personality measures and informants. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Asymmetry in judgments of personality: others are less differentiated than the self

Previous evidence suggests that judges rely more heavily on implicit personality theories when they rate relatively unfamiliar others. One further implication of this evidence is that correlations among traits should be stronger in other ratings than in self-ratings, particularly when (a) judges lack trait relevant information and/or (b) motivational accuracy is low. We tested these predictions by comparing self- versus other ratings on the Big Five in two studies. Study 1 used previously published data to demonstrate clear self/peer differences in the average relations between Big Five dimensions (excluding Extraversion). Study 2 was based on self- versus other ratings in 12 samples. Overall, the intercorrelations among Big Five traits (excluding Extraversion) tended to be significantly stronger in peer ratings than in self-ratings. The most consistent effect involved the relation between Neuroticism and Agreeableness (overall r=-.43 and -.29 in the peer ratings and self-ratings, respectively). In addition, as expected, the degree of relation among traits varied depending upon the type of target being rated (i.e., spouse vs. dating partner vs. friend vs. stranger). Implications of these findings are discussed.     

The Impact of Contextual Self‐Ratings and Observer Ratings of Personality on the Personality–Performance Relationship1

This study examined 2 possible ways of increasing the predictive validity of personality measures: using observer (i.e., supervisor and coworker) ratings and work‐specific self‐ratings of Big Five personality factors. Results indicated that among general self‐ratings of Big Five personality dimensions, Conscientiousness was the best predictor of in‐role performance, and Agreeableness and Emotional Stability were the best predictors of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Observer ratings of personality accounted for incremental variance in job performance (in‐role performance and OCB) beyond that accounted for by general self‐ratings. However, contrary to our expectations, work‐specific (i.e., contextual) self‐ratings of personality generally did not account for incremental variance in job performance beyond that accounted for by general self‐ratings.     

Development and Validation of Research Scales for the Leadership Multi‐rater Assessment of Personality (LMAP)

This article presents large‐sample developmental and validation research for a set of research scales of an existing 360‐degree personality measure, the LMAP 360 (Leadership Multi‐rater Assessment of Personality). In Study 1 (N = 1,771), we identified 6 broad domains underlying LMAP item clusters: Neuroticism, Dominance, Enthusiasm, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Scales measuring these broad domains and their constituent facets showed strong internal consistency, inter‐rater reliability, and self‐informant correlations. In Study 2 (N = 729 and N = 694), we examined LMAP research scales’ convergent and discriminant validity against three well‐validated personality inventories (Goldberg's adjectives, the Big Five Inventory, and the Big Five Aspects Scales) and one measure of cognitive ability (the International Cognitive Ability Resource). LMAP research scales correlated strongly with corresponding scales from other inventories and were distinct from cognitive ability.     

The Reliability and Validity of Big Five Inventory Scores With African American College Students

The reliability and validity of scores on the Big Five Inventory (BFI; O. P. John, E. M. Donahue, & R. L. Kentle, 1991) were examined in a sample of 336 African American college students. Results indicated moderate reliability and structural validity for BFI scores. Additionally, BFI subscales had few meaningful correlations with self‐esteem and social desirability. La fiabilidad y la validez de los resultados del Inventario “Big Five” (BFI; O. P. John, E. M. Donahue, y R. L. Kentle, 1991) se examinan en una muestra de 336 estudiantes universitarios afro‐americanos. Los resultados indican una fiabilidad moderada y una validez estructural para los resultados del BFI. Adicionalmente, las subescalas del BFI tuvieron pocas correlaciones importantes con el auto‐estima y el deseo social.     

Intersibling agreement for Goldberg's big five adjective markers

In a sample of 240 college students intersibling agreement was examined for Goldberg's 100 unipolar Big Five adjective markers. Participants showed self-enhancement by rating themselves more favorably on three of the five traits (Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Culture/Intellect); however, self-ratings on Neuroticism were higher than siblings' ratings. Correlations among raters were moderate (mean r = .41) and comparable to values obtained in studies using peer ratings. The type of the sibling relationship, based on ratings of relationship quality, moderated the rank-order measures but not the mean agreement.     

On Being the Same in Different Places: Evaluating Frame‐of‐Reference Effects Across Two Social Contexts

Frame‐of‐reference (FOR) effects in personality assessment are demonstrated when self‐rated items oriented to specific contexts (e.g., workplace) show better predictive validity than noncontextualized items. Empirical support of FOR effects typically relies on job performance ratings or academic grades for criteria. The current study evaluates FOR effects using ratings of personality provided by informants from the home or school context. Items from the NEO Five‐Factor Inventory (NEO‐FFI; Costa & McCrae, 1992) were contextualized to the home and school contexts to create NEO‐Home and NEO‐School versions. One hundred fifty‐eight college students completed the NEO‐Home and NEO‐School questionnaires, and 161 college students completed the standard, noncontextualized NEO‐FFI. All participants recruited one peer from college and at least one parent to complete standard rater versions of the NEO‐FFI. Contextualized self‐ratings did not show FOR effects. NEO‐Home self‐ratings did not correlate higher with parent ratings than with peer ratings, and NEO‐School self‐ratings did not correlate higher with peer ratings than with parent ratings. Standard NEO‐FFI self‐ratings generally showed higher self‐informant agreement with both types of informants than contextualized self‐ratings. The pattern of correlations suggests that validity is enhanced more by specific trait‐informant combinations than by the contextualization of items to social contexts.     

Construct Validity of Multi‐Source Performance Ratings: An Examination of the Relationship of Self‐, Supervisor‐, and Peer‐Ratings with Cognitive and Personality Measures

Although more and more organizations prefer using multi‐source performance ratings or 360° feedback over traditional performance appraisals, researchers have been rather skeptical regarding the reliability and validity of such ratings. The present study examined the validity of self‐, supervisor‐, and peer‐ratings of 195 employees in a Dutch public organization, using scores on an In‐Basket exercise, an intelligence test, and a personality questionnaire as external criterion measures. Interrater agreement ranged from .28 to .38. Variance in the ratings was explained by both method and content factors. Support for the external construct validity was rather weak. Supervisor‐ratings were not found to be superior to self‐ and peer‐ratings in predicting the scores on the external measures.     

Self-esteem, personality and achievement in high school: a prospective longitudinal study in Texas

Abstract This research explored four empirical questions: (1) Is self‐esteem a better predictor of academic success and adjustment than other aspects of personality? (2) How is self‐esteem related to Big‐Five dimensions of personality during the transition from middle school to high school? (3) Do dispositions like Agreeableness or Openness relate to an adolescent's adaptation and affect reactions to the self? and (4) Do sources of information about adolescents (e.g., self‐rating, other rating, objective “life history”) converge? We also explored the general hypothesis that personality, self‐esteem, and teachers' ratings of adjustment during the middle school years predict later life outcomes during high school. Overall, results indicate Big‐Five personality characteristics were more stable than self‐esteem across this transition period. Agreeableness and Openness assessed in middle school are related to later scholastic competence and behavioral conduct, academic success, and adjustment in high school. Results were discussed in terms of personality development and self‐evaluation.     

Subdimensional Structure of the Hogan Personality Inventory

This study examined the subdimensional structure of the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI). A sample of 200 Spanish applicants completed the HPI as a requirement of a selection process for several jobs at a large international company. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted with the homogenous item composites (HIC) included in the HPI. Globally, the results indicated that the Big Five are divided into 13 subdimensions, which explained the variance of the HICs. Based on these results, we suggest that the HPI can be described as a personality inventory consisting of a hierarchical structure of three levels (Big Five – subdimensions – HICs).     

A sixth personality domain that is independent of the Big Five domains: The psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory in a Japanese sample

We investigated the reliability of the HEXACO‐Personality Inventory (HEXACO‐PI) using the NEO Five‐Factor Inventory (NEO‐FFI) and the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) Big Five scales in a Japanese sample of 492 respondents (mean age = 20.4 years). The psychometric properties of the HEXACO‐PI were examined and found to be satisfactory. The results of the factor analysis showed that the six hypothesized personality domains were found independently. A total of 307 participants responded to the NEO‐FFI and the IPIP Big Five scales. The results showed that the five domains of the HEXACO model corresponded to the Five‐Factor domains and were relative to the Big Five personality domains as a whole, but the sixth domain, Honesty‐Humility, showed weak to moderate correlations with some factors of the NEO‐FFI and the IPIP Big Five scales. These results suggest that the Honesty‐Humility domain is independent of the five fundamental personality factors and that the HEXACO‐PI is a useful and reliable questionnaire for investigating personality structure in cross‐cultural and other context.     

A multilevel multitrait‐multimethod analysis of self‐ and peer‐reported daily affective experiences

We examined the psychometric properties of an experience‐sampling measure of affect (PANAS) using data from self‐ and peer reports. A multivariate multilevel model was used to assess the reliability of the latent PANAS scales at the within‐ and between‐person level. Findings suggest satisfying internal consistencies for self‐ and peer reports of affective experiences at both levels of analysis. Convergent and discriminant validity of the two affect scales were examined by means of a multilevel multitrait‐multimethod approach (MLM‐MTMM) indicating distinct findings at the within‐ and between‐person level. These findings provide further insights into the structural relations between the two PANAS scales: Whereas positive and negative affect were unrelated at the between‐person level; they were negatively correlated at the within‐person level. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German

To provide a measure of the Big Five for contexts in which participant time is severely limited, we abbreviated the Big Five Inventory (BFI-44) to a 10-item version, the BFI-10. To permit its use in cross-cultural research, the BFI-10 was developed simultaneously in several samples in both English and German. Results focus on the psychometric characteristics of the 2-item scales on the BFI-10, including their part-whole correlations with the BFI-44 scales, retest reliability, structural validity, convergent validity with the NEO-PI-R and its facets, and external validity using peer ratings. Overall, results indicate that the BFI-10 scales retain significant levels of reliability and validity. Thus, reducing the items of the BFI-44 to less than a fourth yielded effect sizes that were lower than those for the full BFI-44 but still sufficient for research settings with truly limited time constraints.     

Emerging Late Adolescent Friendship Networks and Big Five Personality Traits: A Social Network Approach

ABSTRACT The current study focuses on the emergence of friendship networks among just‐acquainted individuals, investigating the effects of Big Five personality traits on friendship selection processes. Sociometric nominations and self‐ratings on personality traits were gathered from 205 late adolescents (mean age=19 years) at 5 time points during the first year of university. SIENA, a novel multilevel statistical procedure for social network analysis, was used to examine effects of Big Five traits on friendship selection. Results indicated that friendship networks between just‐acquainted individuals became increasingly more cohesive within the first 3 months and then stabilized. Whereas individuals high on Extraversion tended to select more friends than those low on this trait, individuals high on Agreeableness tended to be selected more as friends. In addition, individuals tended to select friends with similar levels of Agreeableness, Extraversion, and Openness.     

Conscientiousness and agreeableness as predictors of rating leniency

The authors studied the relationship between the Big Five personality factors and rating elevation among 111 students making peer evaluations. It was hypothesized that Conscientiousness (C) scores would be negatively correlated with rating level and that Agreeableness (A) scores would be positively correlated with rating level. We further predicted that individuals who were low on C and high on A would produce the most elevated ratings. As predicted, A scores were positively related to rating level (.33, p < .01) and C scores were negatively correlated with rating level (-.37, p < .01). Using the strong hypothesis test (P. Bobko, 1986), the authors found that ratings by low C and high A individuals were more elevated than all other groups of students combined (p < .01).     

Self‐efficacy in the Workplace: Linking personality to domain‐specific efficacy beliefs

Based on a social cognitive approach to personality, the role of domain‐specific efficacy beliefs were examined in two studies. Study 1 developed a measure of expectations about success in 10 different domains of common work activities with domain‐specific expectancy ratings obtained for 157 individuals along with self‐ and peer ratings of personality. Results showed that predictable relationships emerged, with the traits of the five‐factor model being important determinants of construct‐relevant efficacy beliefs. Study 2 focused on expectations about activities related to conscientiousness as a link between personality and performance across jobs. Results (N = 97) confirmed the proposed relationships and found that efficacy beliefs about trait‐relevant tasks functioned as a mediator linking conscientious and supervisor ratings of performance.