Resolving a scientific embarrassment: A comment on the articles in this special issue

The controversy concerning the two dominant interpretations of Factor V reflects a confusion in the scientific literature between two different five‐factor models, each proposed for a different purpose. In the ‘Five‐Factor Model’ of genotypic personality dispositions, the fifth factor is interpreted as a broad dimension of Openness to Experience. On the other hand, in the ‘Big‐Five’ model of phenotypic personality‐trait descriptors, Factor V is best labeled as Intellect or Imagination, and Openness is viewed as a narrower and more specific attribute at a lower level in the hierarchy of lexicalized personality characteristics. As future investigators begin to differentiate more clearly between the two purposes of these models, their differential use of the two labels should serve to signal their scientific intents.

[1]  Robert R. McCrae,et al.  Why I Advocate the Five-Factor Model: Joint Factor Analyses of the NEO-PI with Other Instruments , 1989 .

[2]  L. R. Goldberg.  How Not to Whip a Straw Dog , 1994 .

[3]  P. Costa,et al.  An assessment of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule from the perspective of the five-factor model. , 1992, Journal of personality assessment.

[4]  P. Costa,et al.  Normal Personality Assessment in Clinical Practice: The NEO Personality Inventory. , 1992 .

[5]  D. Buss,et al.  A cross‐cultural comparison using the act frequency approach (AFA) in West Germany and the United States , 1990 .

[6]  P. Costa,et al.  Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. , 1989, Journal of personality.

[7]  L. R. Goldberg,et al.  Integration of the big five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Paul T. Costa,et al.  Adjective Check List Scales and the Five-Factor Model , 1991 .

[9]  Robert R. McCrae,et al.  Openness to Experience: Expanding the boundaries of Factor V , 1994 .

[10]  L. R. Goldberg,et al.  The language of personality: Lexical perspectives on the five-factor model. , 1996 .

[11]  Paul T. Costa,et al.  From catalog to classification: Murray's needs and the five-factor model. , 1988 .

[12]  P. Costa,et al.  Age differences in personality structure: a cluster analytic approach. , 1976, Journal of gerontology.

[13]  Chris Brand,et al.  Open to experience—closed to intelligence: Why the ‘Big Five’ are really the ‘Comprehensive Six’ , 1994 .

[14]  Paul T. Costa,et al.  Folk concepts, natural language, and psychological constructs: The California Psychological Inventory and the five-factor model. , 1993 .

[15]  B. D. Raad.  An expedition in search of a fifth universal factor: Key issues in the lexical approach , 1994 .

[16]  R. McCrae.  Traits and trait names: How well is Openness represented in natural languages? , 1990 .

[17]  P. Costa,et al.  The structure of interpersonal traits: Wiggins's circumplex and the five-factor model. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  G. Saucier.  Trapnell versus the Lexical Factor: More Ado About Nothing? , 1994 .

[19]  P. Costa,et al.  Toward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. , 1996 .

[20]  P. Costa,et al.  Correlations of MMPI factor scales with measures of the five factor model of personality. , 1986, Journal of personality assessment.

[21]  O. John,et al.  Towards a taxonomy of personality descriptors in German: A psycho‐lexical study , 1990 .

[22]  John A. Johnson.  Clarification of Factor Five with the help of the AB5C Model , 1994 .

[23]  O. John,et al.  Gordon Allport: Father and critic of the Five-Factor Model. , 1993 .

[24]  John A. Johnson,et al.  Clarification of the Five-Factor Model With the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex , 1993 .

[25]  P. Trapnell.  Openness versus intellect: A lexical left turn , 1994 .