The dynamics of structured personality tests: 1971.

Jackson, Douglas N.

doi:10.1037/h0030852

Cited by 433 publications

(278 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

268

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The method we used for our mapping of PI scales is informative in this respect. PI scales are clearly functions of the items they contain (Jackson, 1971). Therefore, theoretically, it would be possible to create a scale measuring any of the facets in the AB5C by examining the correlations of individual items with the lexical Big Five.…”

Section: Criterion Validity Of Pis In Applied Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Jackson, 1971). Regardless of the approach taken to the item design, the PI is refined by emphasizing scale internal consistency (see for example, the 16PF5; Conn & Reike, 1994), and analysing the factor structure underlying the items and facets, with the objective of achieving a stable facet structure that can be replicated in either exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis (Jackson, 1971; see for example Lee & Ashton, 2007 for the case of the HEXACO PI).…”

Section: Organizing Personality Factorial Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Toward a periodic table of personality: Mapping personality scales between the five-factor model and the circumplex model.

Woods¹,

Anderson²

2016

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study we examine the structures of ten personality inventories widely used for personnel assessment, by mapping the scales of personality inventories (PIs) to the lexical Big Five circumplex model resulting in a 'Periodic Table of Personality'. Correlations between 273 scales from ten internationally popular PIs with independent markers of the lexical Big Five are reported, based on data from samples in two countries (UK N = 286; USA N = 1,046), permitting us to map these scales onto the AB5C framework. Emerging from our findings we propose a common facet framework derived from the scales of the PIs in our study. These results provide important insights into the literature on criterion-related validity of personality traits, and enable researchers and practitioners to understand how different PI scales converge and diverge and how compound PI scales may be constructed or replicated. Implications for research and practice are considered. How do personality inventories (PIs) represent personality structure for the purposes of assessment in organizations, and how do the scales of different inventories converge and diverge? These are important questions for industrial, personnel selection, and personality psychology practitioners and researchers. Yet, the field lacks data and a standardized methodology to enable mapping of PI scales, and as a consequence there remains uncertainty over how to organize the personality domain in applied psychology research. Keywords: PeriodicThe conceptual problems presently facing the field of applied personality research suggest an intriguing parallel with the field of chemical science in the Nineteenth Century. Prior to the development of the periodic table, chemistry researchers arguably focused solely on chemical elements due to a lack of general understanding over the relations between elements and their underlying structure. In 1869, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev, the eminent Russian chemist, published his now seminal periodic table of chemical elements allowing researchers to codify the underlying structure of relationships between individual elements (Mendeleev, 1869).This was a significant historical advance. Similarly, within personality measurement in applied settings the lack of an equivalent 'periodic table of personality' has hampered our understanding of underlying structures, measurement comprehensiveness, and synergistic developments. Yet despite past calls for, or commentaries on, the merits of attaining a so-called periodic table of personality traits (Hofstee, Goldberg & De Raad, 1992;Lamiell, 2000), we remain some way short of achieving it.Addressing this gap would bring greater coherence to assessment research and practice, it would advance our understanding of criterion effects of personality variables, and crucially, it PERIODIC TABLE OF PERSONALITY 4 will help assessment users to better understand how to integrate and differentiate information or data from different inventories. This study addresses these issues with the objective of advancing u...

show abstract

Section: Criterion Validity Of Pis In Applied Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Organizing Personality Factorial Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a periodic table of personality: Mapping personality scales between the five-factor model and the circumplex model.

Woods¹,

Anderson²

2016

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Especially in children, the response style of acquiescence is an important source of systematic error (Soto et al, 2008). Balanced scales have been proposed as a solution to control for acquiescence (Jackson, 1971), but the reason why they work has not been fully explicated using modern psychometric models.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acquiescence and Person Differential Functioning: Solving Person DIF with Balanced Scales

Primi¹,

Santos²,

Fruyt³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Likert-type self-report scales are frequently used in large-scale educational assessment of social-emotional skills. Self-report scales rely on the assumption that their items elicit information only about the trait they are supposed to measure. However, different response biases may threat this assumption. Specifically in children, the response style of acquiescence is an important source of systematic error. Balanced scales have been proposed as a solution to control for acquiescence, but the reasons why this design feature worked from the perspective of modern psychometric models have been underexplored. Three methods for controlling for acquiescence are compared: (a) Classical ipsatization by partialling out the mean, (b) an Item Response Theory method to measure Person Differential Functioning (DPF), and (c) random intercept item factor analysis. Comparative analyses are conducted on simulated ratings and on self-ratings provided by 40,649 students (aged 11 to 18) on a fully balanced 30-item scale assessing Conscientious Self-management. Acquiescence bias was explained as person differential item functioning and it was demonstrated that: (a) the acquiescence index is highly related to DPF, (b) balanced scales resolve DPF, and (c) that random intercept factors are highly related to DPF and the substantive factor is controlled for DPF.

show abstract

“…That is, both the construct interpretation and the test content would be edited in the light of negative empirical evidence. (Jackson, 1971;. The substantive approach in general and this convergentdiscriminant extension in particular make explicit reference to test scores as part of the item.…”

Section: Substantive Ccm?onent Of Construct Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%