Psychometric Properties of Goldberg's 50 Personality Markers for the Big Five Model1
Abstract
Summary: The aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Spanish transparent version of Goldberg's Big Five 50 personality markers (Goldberg, 1992). The structure of the questionnaire was analyzed through exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) in a sample of 1189 university students. The Spanish version shows similar statistical properties to the English one. A reduced version of the Goldberg questionnaire with 25 items yields a better fit to the five-factor personality structure than the 50-adjective version.
References
Aluja, A. García, O. García, L.F. (2002). A comparative study of Zuckerman's three structural models for personality through the NEO-PI-R, ZKPQ-III-R, EPQ-RS, and Goldberg's 50-bipolar adjectives. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 713– 725Aluja, A. García, O. García, L.F. Seisdedos, N. submitted Invariance of the “NEO-PI-R” factor structure across exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses .Arbuckle, J.L. (1999). Amos 4.01 . Chicago: Smallwatters CorpAllport, G.W. Oldbert, H.S. (1936). Trait Names: A psycholexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47, 171–Briggs, S.R. (1992). Assessing the five-factor model of personality description. Journal of Personality, 60, 253– 293Brody, N. Ehrlichman, H. (1998). Personality Psychology. The Science of Individuality . New Jersey: Prentice-HallCaprara, G.V. Barbaranelli, C. Hahn, R. Comrey, A.L. (2001). Factor analysis of the NEO-PI-R Inventory and the Comrey Personality Scales in Italy and United Scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 217– 228Caprara, G.V. Barbanelli, C. Borgogni, L. Perugini, M. (1993). The “Big Five Questionnaire”: A new questionnaire to assess the Five-Factor Model. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 281– 288Cattell, R.B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences . New York: PlenumCosta, P.T. McCrae, R.R. (1992). NEO-PI-R Professional Manual. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment ResourcesCosta, P.T. McCrae, R.R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment ResourcesCosta, P.T. McCrae, R.R. Dye, D.A. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887– 898Costa, P.T. Terracciano, A. McCrae, R.R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and Surprising. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322– 331De Raad, B. (2000). The Big Five personality factors: The psycholexical approach to personality . Göttingen: Hogrefe & HuberDe Raad, B. Perugini, M. (2002). Big Five assessment . Göttingen: Hogrefe & HuberDerogatis, L. (1983). SCL-90: Administration, Scoring, and Procedures Manual for the Revised Version . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University PressDigman, J.M. (1997). Higher order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246– 1256Dwight, S.A. Cummings, K.M. Glenar, J.L. (1998). Comparison of criterion-related validity coefficients for the Mini-Markers and Goldberg's Markers of the Big Five Personality Factors. Journal of Personality Assessment, 70, 541– 550Eysenck, H.J. Eysenck, S.B.G. (1991). Eysenck Personality Scales (EPS Adult) . London: Hodder & StoughtonEysenck, H.J. Eysenck, S.B.G. (1997). Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (EPQ-R) and short scale (EPQ-RS) . Madrid: TEA Ediciones, S.AFiske, D.W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 44, 329– 344Goldberg, L.R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality.” The Big Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216– 1229Goldberg, L.R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big Five structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26– 42Hendriks, A.A.J. (1997). The construction of the Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI) . Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, The NetherlandsHendriks, A.A.J. Hofstee, W.K.B. De Raad, B. (1999). The Five Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI). Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 307– 325Hogan, R. (1986). Hogan Personality Inventory . Minneapolis, MN: National Computers SystemsJohn, O. (1990). The Big Five factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L.A. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality theory and research (pp. 66-100). New York: GuilfordKatigbak, M.S. Church, T.A. Akamine, T.X. (1996). Cross-cultural generalizability of personality dimensions: Relating indigenous and imported dimensions in two cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 99– 114McCrae, R.R. Costa, P.T. (1990). Personality in Adulthood . New York: GuilfordMcCrae, R.R. Costa, P.T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509– 516McCrae, R.R. Zonderman, A.B. Costa, P.T. Bond, M.H. Paunonen, S.V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552– 566Mervielde, I. (1992). A Flemish set of bipolar markers for the “Big-Five” personality factors. Psychologica Belgica, 32, 195– 210Mlacic, B. Knezovic, Z. (2000). The effect of item formats on factor structure and scale scores of Goldberg's markers: A contribution to cross-cultural validation of the Big Five model. Drustvne Istrazivanja, 9(4-5), 663– 661Muthén, B. Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of nonnormal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171– 189Peabody, D. (1987). Selecting representative trait adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 59– 71Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg's unipolar Big Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506– 516Saucier, G. (2002). Orthogonal markers for orthogonal factors: The case of the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 1– 31Schriesheim, C.A. Solomon, E. Kopelman, R.E. (1989). Grouped versus randomized format: An investigation of scale convergent and discriminant validity using LISREL confirmatory factor analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 19– 32Smith, D.R. Snell, W.E. (1996). Goldberg's bipolar measure of the Big Five personality dimensions: Reliability and validity. European Journal of Personality, 10, 283– 299Snell, W.E. (1989). Development and validation of the Masculine Behaviour Scale: A measure of behaviors stereotypically attributed to males vs. females. Sex Roles, 21, 749– 767Somar, O. Goldberg, L.R. (1999). The structure of Turkish trait descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 431– 450Spence, J.T. Helmreich, R.L. (1978). Masculinity and Femininity . Austin, TX: University of Texas PressStanton, J.M. Sinar, E.F. Balzer, W.K. Smith, P.C. (2002). Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Personnel Psychology, 55, 167– 194Trull, T.J. Geary, D.C. (1997). Comparison of the Big Five factor structure across samples of Chinese and American adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69, 324– 341Tupes, E. (1957). Personality traits related to effectiveness of junior and senior air force officers. Research Report 57.125. Lackland Air Force Base. TX:US. Personnel Training and Research CenterTupes, E. Christal, R. (1961). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. Technical Report ASD-TR.61-97. Lackland Air Force Base. TX: US Air ForceWidiger, T.A. Trull, T.J. (1997). Assessment of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 228– 250Wiggins, J.S. (1996). The five-factor model of personality. Theoretical perspective . New York: Guilford
