Reply to Comments on Byravan and Ramanaiah's 1995 Study of the Structure of the 16Pf Fifth Edition from the Perspective of the Five-Factor Model

1996 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-126
Author(s):  
Anupama Byravan ◽  
Nerella V. Ramanaiah
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Revised Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Major Factors

This article provides a reply to Cattell's 1995 comments on some methodological issues related to Byravan and Ramanaiah's 1995 study and shows that their study was methodologically sound. It was concluded that the results of Byravan and Ramanaiah's study were different from those of Cattell's 1995 factor analyses mainly due to the fact that the former involved the factor analysis of 16PF primary scales from the perspective of the five-factor model using Revised NEO Personality Inventory domain scales and Goldberg's 1992 scales as markers for the five major factors whereas the latter investigated the structure of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory facet scales from the perspective of the 16PF global scales.

Structure of Personality Disorders from the Perspective of the Revised Neo Personality Inventory Domain Scales and the Psychopathology-5 Scales

1999 ◽  
Vol 85 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1119-1122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anupama Byravan ◽  
Nerella V. Ramanaiah
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Principal Axis ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Adjective Checklist ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Revised Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Separate Factor ◽  
Personality Disorder Scales

This study tested the generality and comprehensiveness of the five-factor model of personality as applied to the Personality Adjective Checklist's (Strack, 1987) personality disorder scales. A sample of 258 undergraduates (113 men and 145 women) completed the Personality Adjective Checklist, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, and the Psychopathology-5 Scales for partial course credit. A combined principal axis analysis with varimax rotation was performed for nonoverlapping scales of the Personality Adjective Checklist, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory domain scales and the Psychopathology-5 scales. The results indicated four factors which were identified as Neuroticism, Extraversion, Disagreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Openness did not emerge as a separate factor. These results supported the comprehensiveness but not the generality of the five-factor model as applied to personality disorders.

Neediness and connectedness and the five‐factor model of personality

2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Dunkley ◽  
Kirk R. Blankstein ◽  
David C. Zuroff ◽  
Sandra Lecce ◽  
Denise Hui
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
University Students ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Revised Neo Personality Inventory

This study examined maladaptive and relatively more adaptive forms of dependency, as measured by the neediness and connectedness factors of the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, D'Afflitti, & Quinlan, 1976), within a comprehensive scheme of personality provided by the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). University students (n = 475) completed the DEQ, NEO‐PI‐R, and a measure of depressive symptoms. Results indicated that neediness reflected anxiety, self‐consciousness, vulnerability, unassertiveness, and inactivity, whereas connectedness reflected anxiety, warmth, agreeableness, and valuing of relationships. Neediness demonstrated stronger relations than connectedness with depressive symptoms. These results support the validity of DEQ neediness and connectedness as measures of maladaptive and relatively more adaptive forms of dependency. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Weinberger Adjustment Typology and the Five Factor Model of Personality

1996 ◽  
Vol 78 (2) ◽  
pp. 432-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nerella V. Ramanaiah ◽  
Anupama Byravan ◽  
Nguyen ThuHien
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Types ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Profiles ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Revised Neo Personality Inventory

Construct validity of Weinberger's Six-group Typology of Adjustment was investigated by testing the hypothesis that the six personality types have different personality profiles. The Weinberger Adjustment Inventory and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory were completed by 170 psychology undergraduates (84 men and 86 women). Results strongly supported the tested hypothesis.

Structure of the Jackson Personality Inventory from the Perspective of the Five-Factor Model

1996 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred R. J. Detwiler ◽  
Nerella V. Ramanaiah
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Introductory Psychology ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Neo Five Factor Inventory ◽  
Major Factors ◽  
Course Credit

The generality and comprehensiveness of the five-factor model was tested using the Jackson Personality Inventory. The Interpersonal Adjective Scales Revised-B5 and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory scales were used as markers for the five-factor model. 220 introductory psychology students (104 men and 116 women) voluntarily completed the three inventories for partial course credit. Combined factor analysis of the 25 scales from the three inventories yielded six major factors. Five of these factors were similar to the five major factors of personality, namely, Extraversion, Neuroticism, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness, and the sixth factor was identified as Social Adroitness. These results supported the generality but not the comprehensiveness of the five-factor model.

Development and Validation of the Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM)

Assessment ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Watson ◽  
Ericka Nus ◽  
Kevin D. Wu
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Validity Data ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Five Phases

The Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM) is a comprehensive hierarchical measure of personality. The FI-FFM was created across five phases of scale development. It includes five facets apiece for neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness; four facets within agreeableness; and three facets for openness. We present reliability and validity data obtained from three samples. The FI-FFM scales are internally consistent and highly stable over 2 weeks (retest rs ranged from .64 to .82, median r = .77). They show strong convergent and discriminant validity vis-à-vis the NEO, the Big Five Inventory, and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Moreover, self-ratings on the scales show moderate to strong agreement with corresponding ratings made by informants ( rs ranged from .26 to .66, median r = .42). Finally, in joint analyses with the NEO Personality Inventory–3, the FI-FFM neuroticism facet scales display significant incremental validity in predicting indicators of internalizing psychopathology.

California Psychological Inventory and the Five-Factor Model of Personality

1993 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
William M. Deniston ◽  
Nerella V. Ramanaiah
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
California Psychological Inventory ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Psychological Inventory

The generality and comprehensiveness of the five-factor model was tested using the California Psychological Inventory, with the Interpersonal Adjective Scales Revised—B5 and the NEO-Personality Inventory scales as markers for the five major personality factors. The three inventories were completed by 88 male and 99 female undergraduates. Results provided strong empirical evidence for the generality of four factors (Extraversion, Neuroticism, Openness, and Conscientiousness) but not for the comprehensiveness of the five-factor model.

Person‐factors in the California Adult Q‐Set: closing the door on personality trait types?

2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert R. McCrae ◽  
Antonio Terracciano ◽  
Paul T. Costa ◽  
Daniel J. Ozer
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
Personality Trait ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Types ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Item Endorsement ◽  
Major Factors

To investigate recent hypotheses of replicable personality types, we examined data from 1540 self‐sorts on the California Adult Q‐Set (CAQ). Conventional factor analysis of the items showed the expected Five‐Factor Model (FFM). Inverse factor analysis across random subsamples showed that none of the previously reported person‐factors were replicated. Only two factors were replicable, and, most importantly, these factors were contaminated by mean level differences in item endorsement. Results were not due to sample size or age heterogeneity. Subsequent inverse factor analysis of standardized items revealed at least three replicable factors; when five person‐factors were extracted, they could be aligned precisely with the dimensions of the FFM. The major factors of person similarity can be accounted for entirely in terms of the FFM, consistent with the hypothesis that there are no replicable personality types in the CAQ. Published in 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document