Skip to main content
Open AccessOriginalarbeit

Die Facettenstruktur des Big Five Inventory (BFI)

Validierung für die deutsche Adaptation des BFI

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000161

Zusammenfassung. Die für die angloamerikanische Version des Big Five Inventory (BFI) entwickelte und validierte Facettenstruktur (Soto & John, 2009) wurde für die deutsche Adaptation des BFI übertragen und auf ihre Angemessenheit geprüft. Basierend auf drei umfangreichen Stichproben – einer studentischen, einer bildungsheterogenen Stichprobe und einer bevölkerungsrepräsentativen Zufallsstichprobe – konnte gezeigt werden, dass die 10 Facetten des deutschen BFI substantielle und mit der angloamerikanischen Version vergleichbare Reliabilitäten und Konvergenzen zwischen Selbst- und Bekanntenurteil und mit den entsprechenden Facetten und Globalskalen des NEO-PI-R (NEO-Personality Inventory) und NEO-FFI (NEO-Five Factor Inventory) aufweisen. Ferner konnte eine diskriminante Validität zu den jeweils anderen Facetten der gleichen sowie zu den Facetten der anderen Big Five Dimensionen gezeigt werden. Die Nützlichkeit der Verwendung dieser Facetten, zusätzlich zu den Globalskalen, wurde durch deren spezifische Zusammenhänge mit verschiedenen soziodemografischen und Einstellungsmerkmalen nachgewiesen. Insofern existiert auch für den deutschen Sprachraum ein ökonomisches Maß, um spezifischere Persönlichkeitsaspekte abzubilden.


The Facet Structure of the Big Five Inventory (BFI): Validation for the German Adaptation of the BFI

Abstract. The facet structure (Soto & John, 2009) developed and validated based on the original US version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI) was applied and validated for the German adaptation of the BFI based on three comprehensive samples: a student sample, a sample heterogeneous with regard to education, and a population-representative random sample. Results indicate that the 10 German BFI facets show substantial (a) reliabilities, (b) convergences between self- and partner ratings, and with the corresponding NEO-PI-R (NEO-Personality Inventory) and NEO-FFI (NEO-Five Factor Inventory) facet and domain scales, as well as (c) discriminant validity within and across domains that are all comparable in size to those reported for the original US version. Differential correlations with several sociodemographic and attitude measures proved the utility of using the BFI facets compared with the domain scales. These BFI facets offer researchers the opportunity to assess efficiently more specific aspects of the Big Five.

Literatur

  • Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Manitoba: University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other „authoritarian personality.“ Advances in experimental social psychology, 30, 47 – 92. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Andresen, B. (2002). Das Hamburger Persönlichkeitsinventar (HPI). Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Asparouhov, T. & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397 – 438. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Borkenau, P. & Ostendorf, F. (1993). NEO-Fünf-Faktoren Inventar (NEO-FFI) nach Costa und McCrae. Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W. & Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 453 – 484. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chapman, B. P. (2007). Bandwith and Fidelity on the NEO Five-Factor Inventory: replicability and reliability of Saucier’s (1998) item cluster subcomponents. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88, 220 – 234. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NEO Five Factor Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P. T., Terracciano, A. & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322 – 331. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cronbach, L. J. & Gleser, G. C. (1957). Psychological tests and personnel decisions. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • De Raad, B. (2000). The Big Five personality factors. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • De Raad, B. & Perugini, M. (2002). Big Five Assessment. Ashland, US: Hogrefe & Huber. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Diener, E. & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In D. KahnemanE. DienerN. SchwarzEds., Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213 – 229). New York, NY: Russell. Sage Foundation. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M. & Zakrisson, I. (2004). What matters most to prejudice: Big Five personality, Social Dominance Orientation, or Right-Wing Authoritarianism? European Journal of Personality, 18, 463 – 482. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Feingold, A. (1994). Gender differences in personality – a metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 429 – 456. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Feldt, L. S., Woodruff, D. J. & Salih, F. A. (1987). Statistical inference for coefficient alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 93 – 103. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In L. WheelerEd., Review of Personality and Social Psychology (S. 141 – 165). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative „description of personality“: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216 – 1229. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Goldberg, L. R., Sweeney, D., Merenda, P. F. & Hughes, J. E. (1998). Demographic variables and personality: The effects of gender, age, education, and ethnic/racial status on self-descriptions of personality attributes. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 393 – 403. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Herzberg, P. Y. & Brähler, E. (2006). Assessing the Big-Five personality domains via short forms. A cautionary note and a proposal. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22, 139 – 148. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • John, O. P., Donahue, E. M. & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory – versions 4a and 5. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • John, O. P., Naumann, L. P. & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P. JohnR. W. RobinsL. A. PervinEds., Handbook of personality: Theory and research (S. 114 – 158). New York, NY: Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • John, O. P. & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. PervinO. P. JohnEds., Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102 – 138). New York, NY: Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Körner, A., Geyer, M. & Brähler, E. (2002). Das NEO-Fünf-Faktoren Inventar (NEO-FFI). Validierung anhand einer deutschen Bevölkerungsstichprobe. Diagnostica, 48, 19 – 27. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Lang, F. R., Lüdtke, O. & Asendorpf, J. B. (2001). Testgüte und psychometrische Äquivalenz der deutschen Version des Big Five Inventory (BFI) bei jungen, mittelalten und alten Erwachsenen. Diagnostica, 47, 111 – 121. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • McCrae, R. R., Herbst, J. H. & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2001). Effects of acquiescence on personality factors structures. In R. RiemanF. M. SpinathF. OstendorfEds., Personality and temperament: Genetics, evolution, and structure (pp. 217 – 231). Berlin: Pabst Science Publishers. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Meng, X.-L., Rosenthal, R. & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing Correlated Correlation Coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 172 – 175. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Murray, G., Rawlings, D., Allen, N. B. & Trinder, J. (2003). NEO Five-Factor Inventory Scores: psychometric properties in a community sample. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 36, 140 – 149. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (1998 – 2010). Mplus User’s Guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Ostendorf, F. & Angleitner, A. (2004). NEO-Persönlichkeitsinventar nach Costa und McCrae, revidierte Fassung. Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Paunonen, S. V. & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 524 – 539. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Paunonen, S. V. & Jackson, D. N. (2001). What is beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of Personality, 68, 821 – 835. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Raghunathan, T. E., Rosenthal, R. & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Comparing correlated but nonoverlapping correlations. Psychological Methods, 1, 178 – 183. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. (1997). Die deutsche Version des Big Five Inventory (BFI): Übersetzung und Validierung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung des Fünf-Faktoren-Modells der Persönlichkeit. Unveröffentlichte Diplomarbeit. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. (2007a). Who worries and who is happy? Explaining individual differences in worries and satisfaction by personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1626 – 1634. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. (2007b). The 10-Item Big Five Inventory (BFI-10): Norm values and investigation of socio-demographic effects based on a German population representative sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 193 – 201. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. & Farmer, R. (2013). The effects of acquiescence on the Big Five and the moderating role of education. Psychological Assessment, 25, 1137 – 1145. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B., Goldberg, L. R. & Borg, I. (2010). The measurement equivalence of Big-Five factor markers for persons with different levels of education. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 53 – 61. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. & John, O. P. (2005). Kurzversion des Big Five Inventory (BFI-K): Entwicklung und Validierung eines ökonomischen Inventars zur Erfassung der fünf Faktoren der Persönlichkeit. Diagnostica, 51, 195 – 206. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. & Kemper, C. J. (2011). Measurement equivalence of the Big Five: Shedding further light on potential causes of the educational bias. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 121 – 125. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B., Kemper, C. J. & Borg, I. (2013). Correcting Big Five measurements for acquiescence: An 18-country cross-cultural study with representative samples. European Journal of Personality, 27, 71 – 81. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Roberts, B. W., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S. & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). The structure of conscientiousness: An empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Personnel Psychology, 58, 103 – 139. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A. & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313 – 345. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E. & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132 (1), 1 – 25. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Saucier, G. (1998). Replicable item-cluster subcomponents in the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 70, 263 – 276. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schumann, S. (2001). Persönlichkeitsbedingte Einstellungen zu Parteien. Der Einfluß von Persönlichkeitseigenschaften auf Einstellungen zu politischen Parteien. München, Wien: Oldenbourg. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schumann, S. (2004): Persönlichkeit und Wahlverhalten 2003. GESIS Data Archive, Köln. ZA4052 data file version 1.0.0. doi: 10.4232/1.4052 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schumann, S. (2005). Persönlichkeit. Eine vergessene Größe der empirischen Sozialforschung. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Soto, C. J. & John, O. P. (2009). Ten facet scales for the Big Five Inventory: Convergence with NEO PI-R facets, self-peer agreement, and discriminant validity. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 84 – 90. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Soto, C. J., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D. & Potter, J. (2008). The developmental psychometrics of Big Five self-reports: Acquiescence, factor structure, coherence, and differentiation from ages 10 to 20. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 718 – 737. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Soto, C. J., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D. & Potter, J. (2011). Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65: Big Five domains and facets in a large cross-sectional sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 330 – 348. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D. & Potter, J. (2002). Development of personality in early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1041 – 1053. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vassend, O. & Skrondal, A. (1995). Factor analytic studies of the NEO-Personality-Inventory and the Five-Factor model: The problem of high structural complexity and conceptual indeterminacy. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 135 – 147. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vecchione, M. & Caprara, G. V. (2009). Personality determinants of political participation: The contribution of traits and self efficacy beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 487 – 492. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vecchione, M., Schoen, H., González Castro, J. L., Cieciuch, J., Pavlopoulos, V. & Caprara, G. V. (2011). Personality correlates of party preference: The Big Five in five big European countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 737 – 742. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Viken, R. J., Rose, R. J., Kapiro, J. & Koskenvuo, M. (1994). A developmental genetic analysis of adult personality: Extraversion and neuroticism from 18 to 59 years of age. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 722 – 730. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar