The validity of DSM-IV predictions [Widiger, T. A., Trull, T. J., Clarkin, J. F., Sanderson, C. J., & Costa, P. T., (2002). A description of the DSM-IV personality disorders with the five-factor model of personality. In Costa, P. T. & Widiger, T. A. (Eds.), Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (2nd ed.). Washington DC: American Psychological Association] concerning Antisocial Personality Disorder and the validity of the hypothesized associations between the Five-Factor Model and psychopathy were examined in 48 male forensic-psychiatric patients. Prevalence of psychopathy and comorbid personality pathology was also investigated, as well as the convergent validity of two Dutch personality disorder inventories. Patients provided self-descriptions on the NEO-PI-R [Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R., (1992b). Professional Manual: Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor-Inventory (NEO-FFI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources], and were administered the VKP [Duijsens, I. J., Haringsma, R., & EurelingsBontekoe, E. H. M., (1999). Handleiding VKP (Vragenlijst voor kenmerken van de persoonlijkheid). Gebaseerd op DSM-IV en ICD-10. Leiderdorp: Datec] and the ADP-IV [Schotte, C. K. W., & De Doncker, D. A. M., (1994). ADP-IV Questionnaire. Antwerp Belgium: University Hospital Antwerp] to assess personality pathology. Psychopathy was assessed using Hare's Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; [Hare, R. D., (1990). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised Manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems]) based on a semi-structured interview and file records of psychiatric and psychological evaluations and criminal history. Results underscored the validity of the FFM Antisocial PD associations, but the hypothesized correlations between the FFM and Psychopathy were less supported. Results supported the convergent validity of the ADP-IV and the VKP, both at the dimensional and categorical level. Around 55% met the diagnostic threshold of psychopathy, and Antisocial PD was the most prevalent disorder in the psychopathic group, consistent with previous research. Sizeable personality comorbidity was also observed.
Neo Five Factor Inventory Manual
The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) is a personality inventory that assesses an individual on five dimensions of personality, the so-called Big Five personality traits. These traits are openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. In addition, the NEO PI-R also reports on six subcategories of each Big Five personality trait (called facets).
In the most recent publication, there are two forms for the NEO, self-report (form S) and observer-report (form R) versions. Both forms consist of 240 items (descriptions of behavior) answered on a five-point Likert scale. Finally, there is a 60-item inventory, the NEO FFI. There are paper and computer versions of both forms.
The test-retest reliability of the NEO PI-R has also been found to be satisfactory. The test-retest reliability of an early version of the NEO after 3 months was: N = .87, E = .91, O = .86.[9] The test-retest reliability for over 6 years, as reported in the NEO PI-R manual, was the following: N = .83, E = .82, O = .83, A = .63, C = .79. Costa and McCrae pointed out that these findings not only demonstrate good reliability of the domain scores, but also their stability (among individuals over the age of 30). Scores measured six years apart varied only marginally more than scores measured a few months apart.[10]
Rolland, on the basis of the data from a number of countries, asserted that the neuroticism, openness, and conscientiousness dimensions are cross-culturally valid.[43] Rolland further advanced the view that the extraversion and agreeableness dimensions are more sensitive to cultural context. Age differences in the five-factors of personality across the adult life span are parallel in samples from Germany, Italy, Portugal, Croatia, and South Korea.[44] Data examined from many different countries have shown that the age and gender differences in those countries resembled differences found in U.S. samples.[45] An intercultural factor analysis yielded a close approximation to the five-factor model.
Otto Kernberg has developed a model of personality and psychological functioning centered on the concept of personality organization. The purpose of this study is to empirically examine the relationships between this model, the five-factor model, and mental health. The Personality Organization Diagnostic Form (Diguer et al., The Personality Organization Diagnostic Form-II (PODF-II), 2001), the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Costa and McCrae, Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. 1992a), and the Health-Sickness Rating Scale (Luborsky, Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1962;7:407-417) were used to assess these constructs. Results show that personality organization and personality factors are distinct but interrelated constructs and that both contribute in similar proportion to mental health. Results also suggest that the integration of personality organization and factors can provide clinicians and researchers with an enriched understanding of psychological functioning.
The NEO-PI-SF (Costa P. & McCrae, R. 1989; McCrae, R. & Costa, P. 2004) is a widely used personality inventory to tap the "Big 5" dimensions of personality (i.e., neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness). It provides an assessment of emotional, interpersonal, experiential, attitudinal and motivational personality styles. The NEO is a self-report measure in which the participant rates the degree to which he/she thinks the statement is true about themselves (e.g. I shy away from crowds of people) on a 5 point Likert scale (1=disagree strongly to 5=agree strongly). This short form contains 120 items, making it useful for calculating dimension scores (of the five dimensions listed above), but not reliable enough to produce all facet scores (more fine-grained component scores that can be combined into dimension scores).
Over the last decade, a consensus has emerged that five dimensions might be sufficient both to cover personality space and to represent the deductions from major theoretical approaches (Goldberg, 1993). This view has come to be known as the five-factor model (FFM) of personality (for a review, see O'Connor, 2002). The vast research output associated with Costa and McCrae's (1992) NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) has led some researchers to identify this particular formulation with the FFM (Digman, 1990). The five domains of personality as described by Costa and McCrae are labelled Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Openness to Experience (O), Agreeableness (A), and Conscientiousness (C). The NEO formulation has proven useful in clinical research (e.g., Groth-Marnat & Jeffs, 2002; Rector, Hood, Richter, & Bagby, 2002) and has been explored as a tool in clinical practice (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1991; Miller, 1991).
The NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI; Costa & McCrae, 1992) is an abbreviated 60-item version of the 240-item NEO-PI-R. As described by Costa and McCrae, the NEO-FFI was constructed by first selecting the 12 items with the largest structure coefficients for each of the five factors. Subsequently, 10 substitutions were made to permit reverse keying of some items in each scale, diversify item content, and eliminate items with joint coefficients. In a sample of 1,539 employees of a large national corporation, Costa and McCrae found coefficients of internal consistency ranging from .68 (A) to .89 (N).
Because of its brevity, comprehensiveness, and ease of administration, the NEO-FFI has great promise as both a clinical and a research tool (Tokar, Fischer, Snell, & Harik-Williams, 1999). However, beyond the original samples investigated by Costa and McCrae (1992), the psychometric properties of scores from the NEO-FFI have not been widely tested. It has been argued that researchers and others are overly optimistic about generalizing psychometric findings from parent instruments to their associated short forms (Smith, McCarthy, & Anderson, 2000), and the NEO-FFI has yet to receive the psychometric attention that it warrants. Exploratory factor analyses have been the focus of three studies. Using an availability sample of 243 female college students, Holden and Fekken (1994) concluded that the latent structure of the instrument was consistent with its scoring key and that the internal consistency of the five scales was adequate. Exploratory factor analyses identified only five items that were misplaced (i.e., primary pattern coefficients were not on the scale to which they belonged). It is worth noting that the study of Holden and Fekken did not meet sample size criteria for factor analysis (N> 300; Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). 2ff7e9595c
Comments