Personality for free: Psychometric properties of a public domain Australian measure of the five-factor model

Fifty items from Goldberg's International Personality Item Pool were compiled to form a public-domain measure of personality, the Australian Personality Inventory (API). Data from a random community sample (N = 7615) and a university-based sample (N = 271) were used to explore psychometric properties of this 50-item measure of the five-factor model of personality (FFM). In both samples, internal reliabilities were adequate. In the university-based sample an appropriate pattern of convergent and divergent relationship was found between scale scores and domain scores from the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. After adjusting for an apparent response set (mean response across items), exploratory factor analyses clearly retrieved the FFM in both samples. It is provisionally concluded that raw scale scores from the API provide reliable estimates of the FFM, but adjustment for mean response across the 50 items might clarify the five-factor structure, especially in less educated samples.

[1]  G. Murray,et al.  NEO Five-Factor Inventory Scores: Psychometric Properties in a Community Sample , 2003 .

[2]  G. Robins,et al.  Understanding suicide in Australian farmers , 2005, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology.

[3]  Joar Vittersø,et al.  Personality traits and subjective well-being: emotional stability, not extraversion, is probably the important predictor , 2001 .

[4]  D. Dillman.  Mail and telephone surveys : the total design method , 1979 .

[5]  P. Costa,et al.  Age differences in personality traits across cultures: self‐report and observer perspectives , 2004 .

[6]  G. Saucier.  Replicable item-cluster subcomponents in the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. , 1998, Journal of personality assessment.

[7]  P. Costa,et al.  NEO inventories for the NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3), NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3 (NEO-FFI-3), NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R) : professional manual , 2010 .

[8]  Relationships among readability, reliability, and validity in a self-report adjective check list. , 1990 .

[9]  L. R. Goldberg.  The structure of phenotypic personality traits. , 1993, The American psychologist.

[10]  R. Sitgreaves.  Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). , 1979 .

[11]  G Murray,et al.  A LONGITUDINAL INVESTIGATION OF SEASONAL VARIATION IN MOOD , 2001, Chronobiology international.

[12]  Garry Robins,et al.  Rurality and mental health: the role of accessibility. , 2004, The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry.

[13]  P. Pattison,et al.  Ceremonies of the whole , 2007, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology.

[14]  J. M. Digman.  PERSONALITY STRUCTURE: EMERGENCE OF THE FIVE-FACTOR MODEL , 1990 .

[15]  D. Paulhus.  Measurement and control of response bias. , 1991 .

[16]  P. Pattison,et al.  The Five Factor Model and Accessibility/Remoteness: Novel evidence for person–environment interaction , 2005 .

[17]  B P O'Connor,et al.  SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test , 2000, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[18]  P. Costa.  Clinical use of the five-factor model: an introduction. , 1991, Journal of personality assessment.

[19]  Gilles E. Gignac,et al.  Implications relevant to CFA model misfit, reliability, and the five-factor model as measured by the NEO-FFI , 2007 .

[20]  B. O'Connor,et al.  A Quantitative Review of the Comprehensiveness of the Five-Factor Model in Relation to Popular Personality Inventories , 2002 .