Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

The Big Five Inventory (BFI)

Reliability and Validity of its Italian Translation in Three Independent Nonclinical Samples

Published Online:January 14, 2011https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000043

Abstract

The internal consistency reliability, factor structure, and convergent-discriminant validity of the Italian translation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI) were assessed in two independent samples of nonclinical adult volunteers (Sample 1: N = 500; Sample 2: N = 316) and in one sample of adolescent volunteers (Sample 3: N = 223). Two adult subsamples (n = 70, and n = 141, respectively) also provided 2-month retest reliability data. The internal consistency reliabilities were adequate for all five BFI scales (mean α values were .77, .78, and .81 for Sample 1, Sample 2, and Sample 3, respectively); all test-retest correlations were greater than .75 in both adult participant subsamples. Principal component analyses showed that only the first five components of the BFI item correlation matrix could be reproduced safely across the three samples. The BFI scales showed adequate convergent-discriminant validity coefficients in all three samples. These findings suggest that the BFI is a succinct measure of the Big Five personality traits and it provides satisfactory reliability and validity data.

References

  • Barrick, M.R. , Mount, M.K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Benet-Martínez, V. , John, O.P. (1998). Los cinco grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 729–750. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Buja, A. , & Eyuboglu, N. (1992). Remarks on parallel analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 509–540. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T. , Furnham, A. , & Ackerman, P.L. (2006). Incremental validity of the typical intellectual engagement scale as predictor of different academic performance measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 261–268. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Costa, P.T. , McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Denissen, J.J. , Geenen, R. , van Aken, M.A. , Gosling, S.D. , Potter, J. (2008). Development and validation of a Dutch translation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 152–157. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Donnellan, M.B. , Burt, S.A. , Levendosky, A.A. , Klump, K.L. (2008). Genes, personality, and attachment in adults: A multivariate behavioral genetic analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 3–16. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Everett, J.E. (1983). Factor comparability as a means of determining the number of factors and their rotation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 197–218. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Feeney, J.A. , Noller, P. , Hanrahan, M. (1994). Assessing adult attachment. In M.B. Sperling, W.H. Berman, (Eds.), Attachment in adults: Clinical and developmental perspective (pp. 128–152). New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Fossati, A. , Feeney, J.A. , Donati, D. , Donini, M. , Novella, L. , Bagnato, M. et al. (2003). On the dimensionality of the Attachment Style Questionnaire in Italian clinical and nonclinical subjects. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20, 55–79. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Goldberg, L.R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, F. Ostendorf, (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Griffin, D. , Bartholomew, K. (1994). Models of self and other: Fundamental dimensions underlying measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hurtz, G.M. , Donovan, J.J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869–879. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • John, O.P. , Donahue, E.M. , Kentle, R.L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory – Version 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

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

  • Johnson, J.A. (2005). Ascertaining the validity of individual protocols from web-based personality inventories. European Journal of Personality, 39, 103–129. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lang, F.R. , Ludtke, O. , & Asendorpf, J.B. (2001). Validity and psychometric equivalence of the German Version of the Big Five Inventory in young, middle-aged and old adults. Diagnostica, 47, 111–121. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Matthews, G. , Deary, I.J. , Whiteman, M.C. (2003). Personality traits. Cambridge: University Press. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, 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, 552–566. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Noftle, E.E. , Shaver, P.R. (2006). Attachment dimensions and the big five personality traits: Associations and comparative ability to predict relationship quality. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 179–208. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Plaisant, O. , Srivastava, S. , Mendelsohn, G.A. , Debray, Q. , John, O.P. (2005). Relations between the French version of the Big Five Inventory and the DSM classification in a French clinical sample of psychiatric disorders. Annales Medico-Psychologiques, 163, 161–167. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Shaver, P.R. , Papalia, D. , Clark, C.L. , Koski, L.R. , Tidwell, M.C. , Nalbone, D. (1996). Androgyny and attachment security: Two related models of optimal personality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 582–597. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Soto, J.C. , 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 articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Worrell, F.C. , Cross Jr., W.E. (2004). The reliability and validity of big five inventory scores with African American college students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32, 18–32. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zwick, W.R. , Velicer, W.F. (1986). A comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432–442. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar