scholarly journals Mental Motivation and its Relationship with the Big Five Factors among Yramouk University Students

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (03) ◽  
pp. 589-624
Author(s):  
Omar M. Shawashereh ◽  
Muawiya M. Abu Ghazal ◽  
Faisal K. Al-Rabee
Keyword(s):  
University Students ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Big Five Factors

Using Principal Component Scores to Enhance the Validity and Reliability of Big Five Personality Measures

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-93
Author(s):  
Jeffrey M. Cucina ◽  
Nicholas L. Vasilopoulos ◽  
Arwen H. DeCostanza
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Big Five Factors ◽  
Component Scores

Abstract. Varimax rotated principal component scores (VRPCS) have previously been offered as a possible solution to the non-orthogonality of scores for the Big Five factors. However, few researchers have examined the reliability and validity of VRPCS. To address this gap, we use a lab study and a field study to investigate whether using VRPCS increase orthogonality, reliability, and criterion-related validity. Compared to the traditional unit-weighting scoring method, the use of VRPCS enhanced the reliability and discriminant validity of the Big Five factors, although there was little improvement in criterion-related validity. Results are discussed in terms of the benefit of using VRPCS instead of traditional unit-weighted sum scores.

Cross‐culturally recurrent personality factors: analyses of three factors

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 451-474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boele De Raad ◽  
Dean Peabody
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Emotional Stability ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Big Five Factors

This study proceeds from an earlier one that examined the ‘Big Five’ factors (Peabody & De Raad, 2002). That study considered the substantive nature of five factors from six European psycholexical studies. The results supported Big Five Factor III (Conscientiousness), but Factors I (Extraversion) and II (Agreeableness) often split into two factors. Big Five Factors IV (Emotional Stability) and V (Intellect) often failed to appear in coherent form. The failures might cause the splits, with five factors required. For three factors, the splits might not occur, and the three large (‘Big Three’) factors could appear. The present study pursues this implication, using three factors from the same six studies. The factors that split are now generally unified. This supports the Big Three and not the Big Five. This result is generally confirmed for several additional studies. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Factor Analysis of the NEO-PI and the Comrey Personality Scales

1994 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 355-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raegyu Hahn ◽  
Andrew L. Comrey
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Response Bias ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Emotional Stability ◽  
Single Factor ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Big Five Factors ◽  
Major Factors

The 1985 version of the NEO-PI of Costa and McCrae and the Comrey Personality Scales were administered to a sample of 227 volunteers. The former was designed to measure the “Big Five” factors of personality, using single scales for the factors of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, and six “facet scales” each to measure the factors of Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness. The Comrey Personality Scales consist of 40 personality subscales (FHIDs) that have been shown repeatedly to define eight major factors of personality. In this study, these 40 subscales, the CPS Response Bias Scale, the two NEO-PI single factor scales, the 18 NEO-PI facet scales, and sex were factor analyzed. All eight Comrey factors were clearly identified. NEO-PI scales Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness matched well with Comrey factors Emotional Stability, Extraversion, and Orderliness, respectively. NEO-PI Agreeableness was substantially related to two other Comrey factors, Trust and Empathy. NEO-PI Openness was identified as a separate ninth factor.

Emergence and Construct Validation of the Big Five Factors in Early Childhood: A Longitudinal Analysis of Their Ontogeny in Sweden

2002 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 1517-1524 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael E. Lamb ◽  
Susan S. Chuang ◽  
Holger Wessels ◽  
Anders G. Broberg ◽  
Carl Philip Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Longitudinal Analysis ◽  
Construct Validation ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Big Five Factors

Constructive Thinking Inventory: Evidence of Validity among Iranian Managers

2005 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nima Ghorbani ◽  
Ahad Framarz Ghramaleki ◽  
P. J. Watson
Keyword(s):  
Perceived Stress ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Constructive Thinking ◽  
Perceived Stress Scale ◽  
Stress Scale ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Theoretical Assumptions ◽  
Big Five Factors

This study examined the validity and incremental validity of the Constructive Thinking Inventory in a sample of Iranian managers. These 159 men were 39.9 yr. old ( SD = 2.5) and volunteered to participate in a project in which they responded to the Constructive Thinking Inventory, the Big Five Factors, the Costello and Comrey Depression and Anxiety Scales, and the Perceived Stress Scale. Numerous findings confirmed the validity of the Constructive Thinking Inventory, and the Global Constructive Thinking subscale displayed incremental validity. These data supported the validity of the Constructive Thinking Inventory and its associated theoretical assumptions in a sample of Iranian managers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document