Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS

The Big Five Inventory–2 (BFI-2) uses 60 items to hierarchically assess the Big Five personality domains and 15 more-specific facet traits. The present research develops two abbreviated forms of the BFI-2—the 30-item BFI-2-S and the 15-item BFI-2-XS—and then examines their measurement properties. At the level of the Big Five domains, we find that the BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS retain much of the full measure’s reliability and validity. At the facet level, we find that the BFI-2-S may be useful for examining facet traits in reasonably large samples, whereas the BFI-2-XS should not be used to assess facets. Finally, we discuss some key tradeoffs to consider when deciding whether to administer an abbreviated form instead of the full BFI-2.     

The mini-IPIP scales: tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality

The Mini-IPIP, a 20-item short form of the 50-item International Personality Item Pool-Five-Factor Model measure (Goldberg, 1999), was developed and validated across five studies. The Mini-IPIP scales, with four items per Big Five trait, had consistent and acceptable internal consistencies across five studies (= at or well above .60), similar coverage of facets as other broad Big Five measures (Study 2), and test-retest correlations that were quite similar to the parent measure across intervals of a few weeks (Study 4) and several months (Study 5). Moreover, the Mini-IPIP scales showed a comparable pattern of convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity (Studies 2-5) with other Big Five measures. Collectively, these results indicate that the Mini-IPIP is a psychometrically acceptable and practically useful short measure of the Big Five factors of personality.     

Development and validation of the Delaying Gratification Inventory

Deficits in gratification delay are associated with a broad range of public health problems, such as obesity, risky sexual behavior, and substance abuse. However, 6 decades of research on the construct has progressed less quickly than might be hoped, largely because of measurement issues. Although past research has implicated 5 domains of delay behavior, involving food, physical pleasures, social interactions, money, and achievement, no published measure to date has tapped all 5 components of the content domain. Existing measures have been criticized for limitations related to efficiency, reliability, and construct validity. Using an innovative Internet-mediated approach to survey construction, we developed the 35-item 5-factor Delaying Gratification Inventory (DGI). Evidence from 4 studies and a large, diverse sample of respondents (N = 10,741) provided support for the psychometric properties of the measure. Specifically, scores on the DGI demonstrated strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability for the 35-item composite, each of the 5 domains, and a 10-item short form. The 5-factor structure fit the data well and had good measurement invariance across subgroups. Construct validity was supported by correlations with scores on closely related self-control measures, behavioral ratings, Big Five personality trait measures, and measures of adjustment and psychopathology, including those on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. DGI scores also showed incremental validity in accounting for well-being and health-related variables. The present investigation holds implications for improving public health, accelerating future research on gratification delay, and facilitating survey construction research more generally by demonstrating the suitability of an Internet-mediated strategy.     

Measuring the Big Five with single items using a bipolar response scale

The convergence on the Big Five in personality theory has produced a demand for efficient yet psychometrically sound measures. Therefore, five single‐item measures, using bipolar response scales, were constructed to measure the Big Five and evaluated in terms of their convergent and off‐diagonal divergent properties, their pattern of criterion correlations and their reliability when compared with four longer Big Five measures. In a combined sample (N = 791) the Single‐Item Measures of Personality (SIMP) demonstrated a mean convergence of r = 0.61 with the longer scales. The SIMP also demonstrated acceptable reliability, self–other accuracy, and divergent correlations, and a closely similar pattern of criterion correlations when compared with the longer scales. It is concluded that the SIMP offer a reasonable alternative to longer scales, balancing the demands of brevity versus reliability and validity. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evidence of cross‐cultural invariance of the big five personality dimensions in work settings

This article explores the cross‐cultural invariance (construct validity) of two work‐related personality inventories based upon the Five Factor Model (the HPI and the IP/5F). The results show a good convergent and discriminant validity between scales that measure the Big Five personality dimensions. A factor analysis indicates that all personality scales load on the hypothesized Big Five dimensions. Some implications of these findings for the research and practice of personality measurement in personnel selection are discussed. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Introduction

This article reports a comprehensive meta-analysis of the criterion-oriented validity of the Big Five personality dimensions assessed with forced-choice (FC) inventories. Six criteria (i.e., performance ratings, training proficiency, productivity, grade-point average, global occupational performance, and global academic performance) and three types of FC scores (i.e., normative, quasi-ipsative, and ipsative) served for grouping the validity coefficients. Globally, the results showed that the Big Five assessed with FC measures have similar or slightly higher validity than the Big Five assessed with single-stimulus (SS) personality inventories. Quasi-ipsative measures of conscientiousness (K = 44, N = 8794, ρ = .40) are found to be better predictors of job performance than normative and ipsative measures. FC inventories also showed similar reliability coefficients to SS inventories. Implications of the findings for theory and practice in academic and personnel decisions are discussed, and future research is suggested.     

Validation of the multicultural personality questionnaire in the context of personnel selection

The present data provide support for the reliability of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire among a sample of job applicants (n=264). Factor analysis confirmed five factors: Cultural Empathy, Open‐Mindedness, Social Initiative, Flexibility, and Emotional Stability. Moreover, the data largely support the construct validity of the MPQ. Correlations with the Big Five were in the expected direction, and as predicted, Cultural Empathy and Social Initiative were both positively related to socially oriented vocational interests and Flexibility to artistic interests. Against our predictions, Cultural Empathy, Open‐Mindedness, and Flexibility appeared to be related to verbal intelligence. A comparable pattern of relations of the Big Five with intelligence and vocational interests was found. Finally, the MPQ scales predicted variance in an indicator of overall behaviour above the Big Five, supporting its incremental validity. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Validity of evaluative factors from Big Five and HEXACO questionnaires

Bifactor models were applied to the NEO-FFI-3, HEXACO PI-R, and BFI-2 questionnaires. Factor scores of factors representing the domains of the questionnaires, evaluation, and acquiescence were estimated. Simple and multiple validities of the factor scores were compared with summated scale validities. The evaluation factor was a significant predictor of GPA in all questionnaires. There was little evidence of a relation of GPA to the acquiescence factor. The validities of the domain factor scores, controlling for the evaluation and acquiescence factors, were uniformly more negative than those of corresponding summated scales. Results suggest that the evaluative contamination of Big Five and HEXACO summated scores can be isolated and used effectively with bifactor modeling techniques.     

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 Development and Validation of the Rational and Intuitive Decision Styles Scale

Decision styles reflect the typical manner by which individuals make decisions. The purpose of this research was to develop and validate a decision style scale that addresses conceptual and psychometric problems with current measures. The resulting 10-item scale captures a broad range of the rational and intuitive styles construct domain. Results from 5 independent samples provide initial support for the dimensionality and reliability of the new scale, as demonstrated by a clear factor structure and high internal consistency. In addition, our results show evidence of convergent and discriminant validity through expected patterns of correlations across decision-making individual differences and the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) Big Five traits. Research domains that would benefit from incorporating the concept of decision styles are discussed.     

A Meta-Analysis of the Reliability of Free and For-Pay Big Five Scales

The present study meta-analytically compared coefficient alpha reliabilities reported for free and for-pay Big Five scales. We collected 288 studies from five previous meta-analyses of Big Five traits and harvested 1,317 alphas from these studies. We found that free and for-pay scales measuring Big Five traits possessed comparable reliabilities. However, after we controlled for the numbers of items in the scales with the Spearman-Brown formula, we found that free scales possessed significantly higher alpha coefficients than for-pay scales for each of the Big Five traits. Thus, the study offers initial evidence that Big Five scales that are free more efficiently measure these traits for research purposes than do for-pay scales.     

Designing a brief measure of social anxiety: Psychometric support for a three-item version of the Interaction Anxiousness Scale (IAS-3)

Although social situations are enjoyable for most people, they cause extreme anxiety in others. To better understand individual differences in social anxiety, researchers have designed scales, such as the 15-item Interaction Anxiousness Scale (IAS; Leary, 1983), to measure people’s anxiousness in social situations. Despite the importance of measuring social anxiety, many research settings that require time or space constraints (e.g., field, longitudinal, daily diary studies) cannot always accommodate a 15-item scale. To address this problem, the current research aimed to create and validate a three-item version of the IAS. Studies examined the psychometric properties of a three-item measure of social anxiety (IAS-3). After choosing the best three items using item response theory methods (Study 1), we examined the IAS-3’s (a) concurrent validity with the 15-item IAS in a student sample (Studies 1 and 2), (b) test–retest reliability across 4 months (Study 2), and (c) construct validity in a diverse international sample (Studies 3 and 4). Across all studies, the IAS-3 showed good reliability and validity, supporting its use in future research.     

What are other-rated scales composed of? Sources of measurement error and true trait variance in other-ratings of the Big Five

Other-ratings of targets’ traits may consist – besides true trait variance (TTV) – of different measurement error sources, particularly due to raters, scales, items, measurement times, and random fluctuations. Using Gnambs’ (2015) and Ones, Wiernik, Wilmot, and Kostal’s (2016) procedures for partitioning variance in scales due to measurement error, available meta-analytical data on Big Five other-ratings were analyzed. They showed relatively little TTV (0–13%), which was especially decreased by both low inter-rater reliability and convergent validity of Big Five measures. Accounting for both, TTV levels rose, but were still small to medium (4–26%). These findings provide important insights on what Big Five other-ratings are composed of and how such scale scores may be interpreted and treated in further analyses (e.g., trait-outcome relations).     

Self-other agreement in personality and affectivity: the role of acquaintanceship, trait visibility, and assumed similarity

Self- and other-ratings on the Big Five and a comprehensive inventory of trait affect were obtained from 74 married couples, 136 dating couples, and 279 friendship dyads. With the exception of Surprise, all scales showed significant self-other agreement in all 3 samples, thereby establishing their convergent validity. Consistent with the trait visibility effect, however, the Big Five consistently yielded higher agreement correlations than did the affectivity scales. Conversely, the affective traits consistently showed stronger evidence of assumed similarity (i.e., the tendency for judges to rate others as similar to themselves) than did the Big Five. Cross-sample comparisons indicated that agreement was significantly higher in the married sample than in the other 2 groups; however, analyses of 3 potential moderators in the dating and friendship samples failed to identify the source of this acquaintanceship effect.     

Adjective checklist to assess the big five personality factors in the Argentine population

The aim of this work was to develop an adjective checklist to assess the Big Five personality factors in the Argentine population. The new instrument was administered to pilot (n= 112), validation (n= 372), and replication (n= 309) samples. The final version of the checklist included 67 adjectives encompassing its 5 dimensions. Factor analysis results were consistent with the Five-factor model. Internal consistency of scales was very good and convergent correlations with the Big Five Inventory (BFI; John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991) were substantial. Face validity, as evaluated by 2 independent raters, was good. Preliminary evidence of validity for the checklist is presented. Finally, the Adjective Checklist for Personality Assessment and BFI are compared, taking into consideration their psychometric properties in our cultural context. Study limitations and future research are discussed.     

Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five

Factor analyses of 75 facet scales from 2 major Big Five inventories, in the Eugene-Springfield community sample (N=481), produced a 2-factor solution for the 15 facets in each domain. These findings indicate the existence of 2 distinct (but correlated) aspects within each of the Big Five, representing an intermediate level of personality structure between facets and domains. The authors characterized these factors in detail at the item level by correlating factor scores with the International Personality Item Pool (L. R. Goldberg, 1999). These correlations allowed the construction of a 100-item measure of the 10 factors (the Big Five Aspect Scales [BFAS]), which was validated in a 2nd sample (N=480). Finally, the authors examined the correlations of the 10 factors with scores derived from 10 genetic factors that a previous study identified underlying the shared variance among the Revised NEO Personality Inventory facets (K. L. Jang et al., 2002). The correspondence was strong enough to suggest that the 10 aspects of the Big Five may have distinct biological substrates.     

Single‐item big five ratings in a social network design

To develop and validate an ultra‐short measure to assess the Big Five in social network designs, the unipolar items of the Ten‐Item Personality Inventory were adapted to create a bipolar single‐item scale (TIPI‐r), including a new Openness item. Reliability was examined in terms of the internal consistency and test–retest stability of self‐ratings and peer‐rating composites (trait reputations). Validity was examined by means of convergence between TIPI‐r and Big Five Inventory (BFI) scores, self‐peer agreement and projection (intra‐ individual correlation between self‐ and peer‐ratings). The psychometric quality of the TIPI‐r differed somewhat between scales and the different reliability and validity criteria. The high reliability of the peer‐rating composites motivates to use the TIPI‐r in future studies employing social network designs. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.