A estrutura fatorial do inventário de características da personalidade

Abstract

Este artigo discute a natureza valorativa dos traços do modelo big five e investiga a validade do Inventário de Características da Personalidade, analisando sua estrutura fatorial. Fizeram parte da amostra 716 estudantes do ensino fundamental e médio de uma escola particular de Belo Horizonte. Foi empregada a Análise Fatorial Exploratória, com extração pelo método da máxima verossimilhança e rotação Geomin. Foram empregados o alfa de Cronbach e o índice de determinação do fator. Foram estipulados critérios para a eliminação de itens. A solução escolhida entre as diversas obtidas foi aquela com oito fatores (χ²=345,39, gl=163, índice comparativo de ajuste=0,99, raiz quadrada média do erro de aproximação=0,04, raiz quadrática média residual estandartizada=0,02). Os oito traços identificados são: abertura a novas experiências, extroversão, mutabilidade, estabilidade, foco em relações humanas, introversão, foco no objeto e foco no objetivo. O alfa dos fatores variou de 0,59 a 0,80, e a determinação do fator variou de 0,80 a 0,92. Implicações são discutidas.

Comparing the ESEM and CFA approaches to analyze the Big Five factors

“…The Personality Characteristics Inventory (PCI) has a property that makes it a singular instrument to measure the domains of the Big Five model. Its items were created in order to avoid words or terms that possess intrinsic negative values, for example the words "lazy" or "unreliable" (Gomes, 2012). The motive is simple and straightforward.…”

“…The majority of the traditional questionnaires of the Big Five model possess an unbalanced quantity of items that have negative values and this condition should provoke an imbalance among the 10 polarities of the five broad factors from the Big Five model. For example, there are more negative words for introversion than for extroversion (the two polarities of extroversion), and neuroticism possesses more negative words or terms than its opposite polarity, which is stability (Gomes, 2012). Furthermore, the presence of "negative" items tend to bring undesirable consequences, as the increment of error in the measurement of the domains, since these items tend to elicit respondent' answers with stronger social desirability (Bäckström, Björklund & Larsson, 2009;Bäckström & Björklund, 2013;Bäckström & Björklund, 2014).…”

“…A detailed commentary about the occurrence of unbalanced negative items in the 10 polarities of the five broad factors from the Big Five model is presented in Gomes (2012). He shows that this condition occurs in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa, McCrae & Jónsson, 2002), as well as, in the Five-Factor Personality Inventory (Hendriks, Hofstee & Raad, 2002), in the Big Five Questionnaire (Barbaranelli & Caprara, 2002), in the Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (Mervielde & Fruyt, 2002), in the Five-Factor Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire (Paunonen & Ashton, 2002), in the Global Personality Inventory (Schmit, Kihm & Robie, 2002), in the Traits Personality Questionnaire (Tsaousis, 2002), in the Big Five Marker Scales (Perugini& Di Blas, 2002), and in others as well.…”

“…Until now, the Personality Characteristics Inventory (PCI) structural validity has been evaluated by Gomes (2012) through an item exploratory factor analysis. Because his motivation was to achieve the best solution that could measure the biggest number of polarities of the Big Five broad factors, with good loadings, he deleted 23 items from the questionnaire, selecting the 27 remained items and found an eight correlated factors solution.…”

“…The factors identified measure eight of the 10 polarities of the Big Five broad factors. Gomes (2012) avoided giving names that could implicitly or explicitly assume a negative value both for the items, as well as for the polarities. He named the eight polarities as: Open to New Experiences, Extraversion, Introversion, Mutability, Stability, Focus on Human Relations, Focus on Objects, and Objective.…”