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.     

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 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.     

Measures to assess maladaptive variants of the five-factor model

The five-factor model (FFM) is the predominant dimensional model of general personality structure. A considerable body of research supports the hypothesis that personality disorders can be conceptualized as extreme or maladaptive variants of the domains and facets of the FFM. However, existing measures of the FFM are confined largely to the normal variants. The purpose of this special section of the Journal of Personality Assessment is to provide the development and initial validation of self-report inventory scales to assess obsessive-compulsive, borderline, narcissistic, avoidant, and dependent personality traits from the perspective of the FFM, which complement the similarly constructed existing measures for psychopathic, histrionic, and schizotypal personality traits.     

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.     

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).     

Self- and other-reports of traits from the five-factor model: relations to personality disorder

The current study used a psychiatric sample (N = 69) to examine: (1) the correspondence between self- and other-reports of general personality, as measured by the Five-Factor Model (FFM; Costa & McCrae, 1990), and personality disorder (PD) traits, as measured by a structured interview, (2) the relations between these two sets of ratings (FFM and PD traits) and consensus ratings of PD and impairment, and (3) the incremental validity of other-rated personality scores. Agreement between raters for the five domains of the FFM ranged from .23 (agreeableness) to .71 (openness); for the PD traits agreement ranged from .37 (avoidant) to .69 (antisocial). At both the domain and facet level, the personality profiles reflected in the correlations between the FFM scores and PD criteria were consistent across raters with the exception of narcissistic PD. Substantial evidence was found for the incremental validity of other-rated personality scores, with these ratings accounting for an additional 8 to 20% of the overall variance in PD features. The other-rated FFM scores also accounted for more variance in consensus ratings of impairment in the domains of romance, work, and social relations.     

A comparison of Agreeableness scores from the Big Five Inventory and the NEO PI-R: consequences for the study of narcissism and psychopathy

Despite being significantly correlated, there is evidence to suggest that the scales measuring Agreeableness from the Big Five Inventory (BFI) and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) do not capture identical constructs. More specifically, NEO PI-R Agreeableness contains content related to "honesty and humility" that is not contained by the BFI. In a sample of undergraduates (N = 290), the authors compared the correlations between these two measures of Agreeableness with traits from the HEXACO-PI-R as well as measures of narcissism, narcissistic personality disorder, and psychopathy. As expected, the two scores were significantly correlated but NEO PI-R Agreeableness manifested stronger correlations with the domains/facets of Honesty-Humility, narcissism/NPD, and aspects of psychopathy; these differences appear to be due primarily to the inclusion of the NEO PI-R facets of Straightforwardness and Modesty. These differences have important implications for the assessment and conceptualization of personality and personality disorder.     

Evidence for the criterion validity and clinical utility of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory

In this study, the authors evaluated aspects of criterion validity and clinical utility of the grandiosity and vulnerability components of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) using two undergraduate samples (N = 299 and 500). Criterion validity was assessed by evaluating the correlations of narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability with established indices of normal personality traits, psychopathology and clinical concerns, and pathological personality traits. Overall, the pattern of correlations supported the convergent and discriminant validity of grandiose and vulnerable conceptualizations of pathological narcissism as measured by the PNI. Clinical utility was assessed by evaluating the extent to which clinicians without specific training in pathological narcissism as well as clinicians with expertise in pathological narcissism could accurately predict the correlates of PNI grandiosity and vulnerability with normal and pathological personality traits and psychopathology. The r(contrast-cv) coefficient provided a global index of accuracy in clinicians' predictions that was more fully elaborated by examining systematic discrepancies across groups. Overall, novice and expert clinicians were generally able to predict criterion correlations, with some exceptions (e.g., counter to predictions, pathological narcissism was negatively associated with treatment resistance). These results provide further evidence regarding the validity and utility of the narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability constructs as measured by the PNI.     

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.     

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).     

Perfectionism and the five-factor model of personality

In this study of the discriminant, convergent, and incremental validity of the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (APS-R), university students completed the APS-R, additional measures of perfectionism, the NEO Five-Factor Inventory-Form S, and measures of self-esteem and depression. The results revealed expected significant, but not completely overlapping, associations between the APS-R Discrepancy subscale scores and the Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM) dimension of Neuroticism, and between the APS-R High Standards and Order subscales and the FFM dimension of Conscientiousness. The incremental validity of APS-R scores over FFM dimensions was supported in analyses of self-esteem but not depression. The implications of these findings for further psychometric and clinical studies of perfectionism and facets of FFM dimensions are discussed.     

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.     

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.     

Validity of observer ratings of the five-factor model of personality traits: a meta-analysis

Conclusions reached in previous research about the magnitude and nature of personality-performance linkages have been based almost exclusively on self-report measures of personality. The purpose of this study is to address this void in the literature by conducting a meta-analysis of the relationship between observer ratings of the five-factor model (FFM) personality traits and overall job performance. Our results show that the operational validities of FFM traits based on observer ratings are higher than those based on self-report ratings. In addition, the results show that when based on observer ratings, all FFM traits are significant predictors of overall performance. Further, observer ratings of FFM traits show meaningful incremental validity over self-reports of corresponding FFM traits in predicting overall performance, but the reverse is not true. We conclude that the validity of FFM traits in predicting overall performance is higher than previously believed, and our results underscore the importance of disentangling the validity of personality traits from the method of measurement of the traits.