Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure.

Hofstee, Willem; Raad, Boele De; Goldberg, Lewis R.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.1.146

Cited by 716 publications

(781 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

748

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We suggest this may be due to what Hofstee et al (1992) (Hofstee et al's, 1992, original, nondynamic, metaphor was ustror~ornical-in the sky one sees clusters of stars in some areas and blank space in others.) Whatever the source of the factors' natural coupling tendency, it is a fact that certain blends tend to be overrepresented, both in Hofstee et alls (1992) analysis and in the current one.…”

Section: The Natzlre Of the Big Five From An Ab5cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clarification of the five-factor model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex.

Johnson

Ostendorf

1993

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

150

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

American and 1,285 German Ss. Replicated results formed standard designation codes representing trait adjectives' primary and secondary factor loadings. These codes unveiled the unique coloring imparted by secondary loadings to different scales proffered by researchers to represent the 5 factors.Recent reviews (Digman, 1990; John, 1990a John, , 1990bMcCrae & John, 1992) have indicated that the universe of personality traits can be represented at an abstract level by five broad dimensions: (Factor I) Extraversion, (Factor II) Agreeableness, (Factor III) Conscientiousness, (Factor IV) Emotional Stability, and (Factor V) Intellect or Openness. Although the clear intent of these reviews is to stress commonality, consensus, and agreement of thinking about the Big Five or five-factor model (FFM), a prominent section of each review discusses disagreements concerning the precise nature of, and best labels for, the five factors. This article describes how the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex (AB5C; Hofstee, de Raad, & Goldberg, 1992) might clarify these disputes.A truism of factor analysis is that the nature of the factors is determined by the content of the variables entered into the analysis (Guilford, 1975). Obviously, if a personality inventory lacks items that assess agreeableness, an Agreeableness factor will not emerge in a factor analysis of its items or scales (see

show abstract

Section: The Natzlre Of the Big Five From An Ab5cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clarification of the five-factor model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex.

Johnson

Ostendorf

1993

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

150

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Abstract: Periodicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Goldberg, 2006). An alternative is the circumplex perspective, exemplified by the Abridged Five Dimension Circumplex Model (AB5C; Hofstee, De Raad and Goldberg, 1992). Goldberg (1993) argued that for purposes of trait structure research, models that emphasise horizontal relations (such as circumplex models) will typically be more informative than hierarchical models, because even after orthogonal rotation of factors, most personality variables have substantial secondary loadings.…”

Section: Organizing Personality Factorial Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…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 understanding of the structures of a variety of PIs used in organizational assessment by mapping personality scales from different inventories to a common circumplex framework based on the lexical Big Five personality factors.…”

mentioning

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

“…Authoritarianism (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950) might be a combination of conscientiousness (+), agreeableness (-), and openness (-) (these two examples from Funder, 2001). Psychoticism (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1968) might be a combination of conscientiousness (-) and agreeableness (- (Hofstee, de Raad, & Goldberg, 1992). For particular purposes, and perhaps for understanding, the compound variables may in some circumstances be quite useful, even more so than the five factors themselves, although it is not at all clear that this represents a lack of comprehensiveness to the Big 5 scheme, as some have argued (Funder, 2001).…”

Section: Personality Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Noncognitive Constructs and Other Background Variables in Graduate Education

Kyllonen

Walters²,

Kaufman

2011

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report reviews the literature on noncognitive and other background predictors (e.g., personality, attitudes, and interests) as it pertains to graduate education. The first section reviews measures typically used in studies of graduate school outcomes, such as attrition and time to degree. A review of qualities faculty members and administrators say they desire and cultivate in graduate programs is conducted. There appears to be a divergence between the qualities faculty members say are important and the measures researchers typically use in validity studies.The second section reviews three categories of noncognitive variables that might predict outcomes (general personality factors, quasi-cognitive factors, and attitudinal factors) and the definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. The role of background factors, both environmental and group, is part of this review.Key words: noncognitive, personality, admissions, GRE ® , selection, assessment, new constructs ii Executive SummaryMany GRE ® studies conducted in the past several years have asked faculty members about the qualities that are important to success in graduate school. A consistent finding is that graduate faculty members believe that noncognitive factors, such as motivation, creativity, personality, interests, and attitude, ought to be considered in graduate admissions (e.g., Briel et al., 2000). Many faculty members believe that including such factors would increase both fairness and the validity of the current admissions process. At the same time there is a lack of knowledge about what the scientific literature says on what the noncognitive factors are, how important they are, how they could best be measured, and on whether it might be practical to use them in admissions decisions. The purpose of this review is to address these questions. This report reviews various noncognitive factors and definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. Graduate School Outcomes and Their DeterminantsA notional path model illustrates the relationships between noncognitive predictor factors and graduate school outcome factors. Graduate school outcome factors are divided into traditional measures of convenience and performance factors. Traditional measures are attrition, time-to-degree, and grade point average. Performance factors are domain proficiency, general proficiency, communication, effort, discipline, teamwork, leadership, and management. The noncognitive predictor factors are divided into three main categories: personality (e.g., extroversion), quasi-cognitive (e.g., metacognition), and motivation factors (e.g., self-efficacy).In addition, there are two background categories assumed to affect the noncognitive factors:environmental (e.g., mentor support) and group factors (gender and ethnicity). The review is organized according to this model. Personality FactorsA consensus has emerged within the field that there are five major personality factors: extroversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, ...

show abstract

Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure.

Cited by 716 publications

References 21 publications

Clarification of the five-factor model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex.

Clarification of the five-factor model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex.

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

The Role of Noncognitive Constructs and Other Background Variables in Graduate Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About