Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 20 - Universal Features of Personality Traits 05

    Uploaded by

    rezautama
    5 views15 pages
    PERSONALITY TRAITS INFORMATION UNIVERSAL

    Original Title

    20- Universal Features of Personality Traits 05

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    PERSONALITY TRAITS INFORMATION UNIVERSAL

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    5 views15 pages

    20 - Universal Features of Personality Traits 05

    Uploaded by

    rezautama
    PERSONALITY TRAITS INFORMATION UNIVERSAL

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 15
    PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Universal Features of Personality Traits From the Observer’s Perspective: Data From 50 Cultures Robert R, McCrae and Antonio Terracciano National Institute on Aging, Netional Inettutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services 78 Members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures Project, “Totest hypotheses about the miversaiy of personality tras, college stents in 5O cultures identified an adult ce colege aged an of woman whom they knew well and rated the 985 targets using he 3d: person version of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Factor analyses within eultores showed that the normative Amorcan selfrepor sirctare wae clearly replicated in most coltares ard was recogalzable in all Sex differences replicated eater selfrepet resus, with the mest pronoticed Aifecoces in Western cules. Cross-sectional age eferences for 3 iciors followed the pater ‘etfed in slf-epons, with moderate rates of change during college age and Slower changes sr age 40, With few exceptions, hese dala support the hypothese that features of personality teste ere cormon tall burn groupe Strong claims have recently been made sbout the universality of| personality traits. McCrae and Coste (1997) argued that the five- factor model (FFM) of personality is found in all cultures! = hhypotbesis subsequently supported in a wider range of cultures Rolland, 2002), McCrae etal. (1999) reported that cross-sectional age differences were similar in different cultures whose cohorts hhad experienced very different life histories, and Costa, Terrac- Robert R. McCrae and Antonio Terracciano, Gerontology Research ‘Centr, National Tastiaze on Aging; the 78 contbutng members of the Personality Profiles of Cultura Psject. "The 78 members ofthe Personality Profs of Cultures Project are sted {in onde of dita subisson in the Appendix. Robert R. MeCrae receives royals from te Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NO.PLR). Portion ofthese data were prosanted athe Second World Coagess on Women's Moni) Health, Washington, DC, March 2004, Coech paticipation was supported by Grant 40/DU/ISD7 from the ‘Grant Ageney of the Czech Republic and is related to Research Plan AV (027025918 ofthe Insite of Psychology, Academy of Sciences ofthe (Cuach Republic Seri Gulg’s participation wa supported by the Turkish Acideniy of Sciences, Buskinahd and French Swiss paiipation was supposed by a grat ffom the Swiss National Science Foundaton to J. Rossier. The data collection in Hong Kong was supprted by RC Diret Allocation Grants DAGO2I03 HSSI4 and DAGORO4HSS14 awarded to M. Vik Data collection in Malaysia wae suppored by UKM Fandanentl Research Grant 1ID/015/2003 ‘We thank Dave Schmit for contact information on potential collabora- toss, Bob Smith fr authorizing use of tbe NEO.PI-R, and the tansators \whose eller work on Form Sof the NEO-PLR me this projet feasb or asistance oa this project we thank Herbert Biggs, Luciana de Almoids, Hiaéson W. Carvalho, Marco Montastoyos Calgaro, Andis da Siva Be, “Zheng Li, Ana Butkovi, Ole Dreyer, Susy Ball, Anna Gramberg, Ho: nathan Hlavow, V. S. Bose, Suguna Kennan, K. Sarita, K. Mixa ser iano, and McCrae (2001) reported pancultural pattems of gender \ifferences, MeCrae, Costa, Marin et al. (2004) provided data on ‘cross-observer agreement suggesting that even in collectivistic cultures, where there is purportedly a greater emphasis on rele tionships than on traits, people accurately perceive their own and others” traits, These recurring regularities —despte differences in Tanguage, history, religion, and eulture—soggest that personality Lidwina Dominica R, Vinx Bucyamin, Hiromi Inte, Kenji Sugiyama, Midori Takayama, Rezita Kemi, Rosin! Ismail, Anna Nedtwig, Zack ary Smith, Aaron Wolen, Mays Tamir, Chiste Naps Seollon, Valery (Oyl, Ivan G. Seni J.C. Munene, ilve Kozel, Manca Jaki, Simona ‘Zistaik, Nadia Messoulan, Facando Abul, Fermenda Melina, Daitna Bon, Sebastén Mosquera, Ludnila Fispo, Lorena Fichoverry, Femando Vera, Catherine Curl, Richard Chan, Chistopher Pak, Herbert roudenthalr, Andes Fink, and Cornelia Hohesbeller. German, Russian, and Czech daa were taken fam ever ste (Me- ‘Cra, Costs, Bibitkovs, ee, 2004; Ostendort & Angleliner, 2008, ard prone of the Bralian, Lebanese, and That data aro also reprted in chapters in MeCree (in pres), McCrae, Tesraccian, and Khouty (i ‘ress and Costa and MeCrae in press, respectively. Correspondence concerning thistle should be addressed to Robert. ‘MeCeee, Gerontology Research Center, National Intute on Aging, Ne Vina! Instiues of Health, Departneat of Health and Human Sevies, Box #03, $600 Nathan Shack Diive, Bakimoro, MID 2224-5825, E-mail: mecraej@groniasiger "Throughout this ale, we use the tem cures looely 10 seer 1 ‘ations or subgroups within naons, We ae aware tht rations donot eve monolithic cules and that our samples do not necessary eet te full calla avery seen within nations, iaanennessteae sh 548 McCRAB BT AL ‘oats are basic features of the human species (AMik & MeCae, 2002), The present study offers new tests of these hypotheses of sniversality ‘One obvious Imitation to prior claims is that cultures and subcultures heve not been exhaustively studied. Only 2 few Afti- ‘cen—and no Arsbio—coltues. have been included in previous studies using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PIR; Costa & McCrae, 1992s) or other measures of the FFM (eg., Heaven, Connors, & Stones, 1994). No preliterate cultures have been examined; in fact, most studies have used college student samples, whose members may be relatively Westernized. ‘A second limitation is that most studies have relied exclusively conselfrepor methods, leaving the possibility that method artifacts may be responsible for some or all of the findings. Observer stings fonm an alternative method of personality measurement, {known to be convergent but not wholly redundant with self-reports (MoCrae, Costa, Martin, etal, 2004). In American studies, ob- server ratings typically yield similar conclusions about structure ‘and about age and gender differences (eg, Costa & McCrae, 19926), but this is not invariably the case im eross-caltaral re- search. For example, Bxtraversion and Openness to Experience both appeared to decline cros-sectionally in Gorman adults when self-reports were analyzed but not when observer ratings were analyzed (MeCrae et al, 2000), In a Czech sample, age associa. tions found in self-reports wese replicated in ebserver ratings for Extraversion and Openness bat not for Nevroticism or Agreeable- ness (McCrae, Costa, Hiebfékov4, etal, 2004). “The NEO-PER offers two versions: a self-report Form S and an ‘observer rating Focm R, with the same items rephrased inthe third person, The factor structure of Form R in Americen semples closely resembles that of Form $ (e.g, Piedmont, 1994), and the same is true in German, Russian, and Czech-language versions (McCrae, Coste, Martin, et a, 2004; Ostendorf & Angleitne, 2004). However, there appear to be no published stodies of the factor strctare of observer rating measures of the FFM in non- Western cultures. The present article includes data from move than a dozen, Past and Present Designs ‘Most previous cross-cultural studies of the FFM were based on secondary analyses of data collected for a varisty of purposes (Costa et a.,2001; MeCree, 2002; Rolland, 2002). Samples varied in size and composition (althoogh only normal volunteer data were sed) and in the time period of data collection. Jn many cases, only summary statistics were available, and demographic data were generally not available. No atempt was made fo assess or control the quality of the data. It is testimony to the robustness of the underlying effects that clear regularities emerged despite these limitaions In the present study, we collected data from college stodents ‘who were asked to identify an individual from one of four target groups—-college-aged men, college-aged women, adult men, and adult women—and provide ratings ofthat target on Form R ef the NEO-PL-R. Because a uniform approach was taken to data collee- tion, results are more likely to Be comparable across cultures (ef. Schwvartz, 1992). Samples are similar in size, age and sex of targets, and time period in which data were collected. In addition, item-level data and basic demographics are available for each sample, ‘The use of college student raters also offers advantages. College students are not, in general, representative oftheir natiousl popu- lations, and this is particularly ikely to be true in less affluent cultures. However, tis fact is less problematic in observer rating studies than in self-report studies: Raters could choose anyone they new well as a target, yielding a wider age and educational range than would normally be abtcined in self-report studies, For exam- ple, sbout 119% ofthe targets in the present study had fewer than 9 years of education. In alton, college students may be more familiar and comfort able with questionnaire methods than members of the general population, especially in non-Western cultures (cf. Marsclla, Do- ‘banoski, Hamada, & Morse, 2000), yielding more meaningful dats, However, even college students may differ across cultures in testsking experience and attiudes; in panicalsr, cultural difer- fences in acquiescence have been noted (Smith, 2004). In the present stady, we attempted to assess the quality of the dat in each sample to compare cultures on data quality, and to take quality {nto account in interpreting results, t must be stresed that quality 4g primarily a fonction of the fit between an imported Western personality measure and the experiences and attitudes of each calture; poorer data quality should not be seen as evidence of problems with ether the instrument or the respondents but rather of their mismatch, Finally the use of observer ratings permits an analysis of certain aspects of person perception and assessment, When self-reports are examined, target and rater are completely confounded, making it impossible to know whether ratings are a function ofthe person being rated or the person making the ratings. It is possible, for example, that women everywhere score higher on Neuroicism not because they are less emotionally stable but merely because they ‘are betier able to perceive negative affect (ef. Feldman Barrett, Lane, Sechrest, & Schwartz, 2000; Teracciano, Merit, Zender- ‘man, & Evans, 2003) or more willing to abuse it toa target than ‘men are. In the present design both mien and women rato men and ‘women, soit is possible to estimate sex differences in rating styles cor biases, Method : Cultures ‘We resritedeolaboriors fromm a wide rango of colts, subject to the segusement that prospective participants would be feat in Poglish or one ‘ofthe other langages for which an authorized NEO-PL translation was available. Collabacstors wore pxmarlyIndivdoals who bed previously ved the NEO-PLR in their ova research or who had been rembes of another multinational study (Schmit ete, 2008. To increase repaseas: sion of Ain and Arabic cultures, we seasched the Inert an Paye- INFO for personally psychologists from those area, Data gathered so far are from 50 coltures representing six continents, using anslaiont Into Indo Horopesn, amito-Semitc, SinoTbetan, Daic, Usalic, Maley Polynesian, Dravidian, and Alas Tangunges. American end Brazilian dota were gueied from several sites. Genman, Rosin and Czech data were ‘obtained by selecting targets of the Inended ages from existing observer rating data (Mere, Coss, Mann ts, 2004; Ostendor de Angleter, 2004). Cates andthe language in which the NEO-PLR was administered are given inte first two columns of Table 1. As noted in the table, 22 of these cultures have not previously been studied wsing the NEOPIR, UNIVERSAL FEATURES OF TRAITS 549 Table 1 Characteristics of the Samples Raters ‘Tegets Mean age Mean age Cute Language N Smale yeas) mle gears) —_ducationt Agent ‘spanish 204 49 216 510 353 24 ‘Austalid® lish 206 aL 212 510. 342 24 Austia German’ 158 132 23 505 a3 7 Belgium Femi 29 182 ter Sia 337 20 Botan 16, 312 212 su 460 22 Brazil a7 23 244 313 3 23 Burkina Faso m3 248 3 Bt 20 Canada Enlist 13 253 200 263 299 26 Chit Spanish? 194 237 204 435 343 28 Chine Chinese m a5 2a S18 3s 24 Croatia Cromian 191 35 203 503, 345 25 eech Republic 0 BD an 45 455 22 Denmark 153 138 249 a 385 24 Batosia 23 m9 98 537 337 26 Bihiopia® i772 28 503 345 1s France m 83 m 493. 373 23 Gemany Gernact 3300 MT 401 263 419 = Hong Kong Chinese 207 3 20.1 sor 344 23 Ieeland? Teele 199 503 2569 497 356 25 India 185 492 210 503, 33 22 Tdowesi 388 197 495 353 21 Italy 9s 87 234 492 359 24 Japan 191 92 195 503, 34 26 Kawai? 468s 201 466 352 25 Lebanon 2 3RS 89 410 313 23 Malaysia 2 ma 20 239 370 23 Malt 22 267 209 500 336 26 esi? m 80 239 538 aa 26 Moreeeo™ m aid 24 33 330 23 ‘New Zealand 2m ons 9 505 345 23 Nigeis" i467 283 49 342 25 Pers 286 213 85 352 26 Prlipines 197 253 153 503, 233 27 Poland 7 97 21 47 349 26 Portugal 8207 247 310 MB 23 Presto Rica BL — Sa 339 28 Rusia 30000 iB 361 481 367 o Serbia 200 205 2s 505 BAT 26 Slovaks Slovakian 505 201 495 335 23 Slovenia? Slovene 29 7 28 414 356 23 Scat Keres Korean® 196 0s 229 Sis 240. 26 Spain Spanish 200 180 210 500 359 23 Stiverlant Geeman® 2a A 204 ass 373 26 ‘Sowkzerland repci® 26s a7 213 «83 365 23 ‘Tiland™ Ths 2 BS 36 507 347 27 ‘Turkey ‘Tutine 208 442 3 500 341 26 Uganda English 1 446 238 500 353. 23 Unied Kingdom: Englane™ Engst we 7 Ba 490 372 27 Unled Kingdom: Nother Heland™ ——ngih® 10s 3 213 491 333 26 Unites Sates English vis a9 205 196 34 26 ‘Note, Dashes in cells indicate data were nt avaiable, NEO-P-R = Revised NEO Mean lev, where 0 = no edveation, I primary, 2 = secondary, 3 = college. Not inched in previous cross culture! comparisons using the NEO-PL-R, “Used a ptlished version ofthe NEO-P-R in pateipant native language Instrument ‘The NEO-PLR is e 240.tom measuse of the FFM. It conains 20 clehtitem fcc sales, sx for each ofthe five Basie personality fcr, [Neurotiism (8), Extavesion (8), Openness to Expetienes (0), Agree ableness (A), and Consienionsnes (C) Responses are made on 5-poit Likert scale, from srongly disagree fo strongly agree. The fctors can be timated by domain scores, which sum the relevant 6 facet, or more precisely by factor scores, which ace » weighted combination of al 30, facets (Costa & McCrae, 19925, Table 2). Two parallel forms have beea ‘developed: Form $ for selfreports and Form R for observer ratings, in hich the tems have been rephrased in the thed person. Evidence onthe 550 McCRAB BY AL. reliability nd obidity‘of the English version are presented inthe NEO- PLR manual (Costa & MeCra, 1922). Although the NEO-PLR dees not Include a socal desiailiy scale Piedmon,, MoCrae, Riemann, & Angleiner, 2000), it does provide some checks for peeteal validity, ana protocols deemed invalid have substanlly lower sees sabi (Canter et a, 2000), Form S ofthe NBO-PLR hos been translated into over 30 languages 1m almost all cases, wanslaions were done by Uilingual psychologists aatve tothe culture. An independent back-translation was reviewed by the test authors, and modifications were made as needed. In some cass, the translations have been extensively validated and published (eg Hoekstra, Onnel, & De Pruyt, 1996; Shimonaka, Nakazato, Gondo, & Takayam, 1999}; In other cases, the translations ean be considered research instroments. For the present study, collaborators modified the fire-pereon version to crest third-person version. They elo tans Iated the instructions, which were reviewed in back-transation by Robet R. MeCrte and Antonio Terraceiane, Revisions were made based on these reviews. Participants, Targets, and Procedures Parcipnts were ootege stdens? who volimtcere to participate anon _yoously in a sudy of personality across cultures. The composition of the “amples by sex and the mean age ofthe raters are given in the thd and ‘ovr colamns of Table {. "The gsea majoiy of raters were native-born chizens of thee counties and generally reflected the clinic make-up of, their counses? [Roters were randomly stsigned to one of four target conditions and ‘were asked for ratings of collegeaged women, cllege-aged men, adult (over 40) men, or adelt weren, For the colege-aged targets, rites were ashe the flowing: Please think of a woman {man aged 18-PF whom you know well She fhe] should te somsoxe who is 2 native-born elizen of yout ‘country, She he] can be aelative ora fiend orneghbor—romeone you Uke, ar someano you do not lke. She he) can be a college ‘seat, but she fe] need not be, Inthe adult conditions the age specified was over age 4010 form a cleat conta to the collegeaged ares, Raters were then asked to estimate the age and years of forual education Coane, IB yeas, 9-12 years, over 12 yeas) af he target and to provide demographic information on themselves before completing the NEO-PLR. Data onthe compositions of the target samples by fe, their mean age, hd thoi degre af education aro giver ia the ast thes columns of Table 1 Data Quatity Assessment ‘When insiuments and methods developed and validated in one culture sre exported to sather, their psyehomesrc propenies may be affect “That might be due to el diferences in psychological functioning, but it right alo be die to cultare elated aifets, bless of meaning ray be lost in translation; response sgles may vary aross cules the tsk of ‘conletng a questionnaire may be unfaniiar and coafusing. Healy, an fsexsment ofthe quality ofthe dats should be made before substantive ress reconsidered Deviations from srct epliaten ein Be dtcouned iF there ae independent indicators that the-instament itl is les than ‘optimal in some ell contents, "The NEO-PER manual (Costa & McCrae, 19928) specifies tat pote cols with more than 40 missing sesponses ae considered fnvalid. In setten, repetitive responses (eg. more thon 9 consecutive disagree respons of 10 consecutive netral sponses), which ae rare in volunteer ‘arpls, se considoced evidence of random responding. Cases considered invalid by citer of these esteia were eliminated. However, we also considered that the fequency of valid responses in a sample probably reflec’ the quali of data in that administration in genera, and we wed the pereeatage of valid protocols in the unsereened snp (anging fom 85.1% to 100%) as 2 fst indeator of data quay. ‘Acqpiescence can be estimated by counting the numer of agree and strongly agree responses to all tems. Because NBOLPI- scales ae bal anced in keying, the net effect of acqucscent responding is limited and soyuiecence does not invalidate a prtocol, However, iti a possible Indicator of poorer quality dt Using de cutoff scores in the mana, we calcolted the frequency of quiescent (150 agree or strongly agree responses) or nay-saying (250 agree or strongly agre responses) prote- cal ineach unscrened sample (fom 0% to 21.5%) as second (reversed) ex of data quay. Where fewer than 40 tems ave missing, missing dita are tested by sofsttming a vevtral response. Before making that substittion, we ‘counted the numberof missing responses and used the sample mean (from ‘to 11 items) as third (revered indicator of date quality. ‘We considered ir likely that fewer problems would gccue when tater ‘completed the quesonnare inter native languaye o when the samples tsa whole were jadged by oar cllhoratees a being ent in the second Tangvage that wat used, Our fourth indicator of data quality Was scored 2 for native language, 1 for very Huent inthe second language, and 0 for somewhat unt in the second langvage. Although many ofthe uapl lished NEO-FLR translations ave excellent, its probably fir assume that polished versione ae farther along in paychometic development han ‘mest unpublished versions. All samples that were tesied in a second Tanguage used a published version (English or French); for samples in ich the naive language was sed our fifth ineator was seored 1 for ‘publised and 0 for unpublished tslatons (ee Table 1 now). ‘inl, we asked collsboratrsdzely i thee were any problems. The ‘most comuron problem mentioned war the length ofthe qvesionnsires end the time required to complete them, Presence or absence of x problema was ‘our sinth indicator of data quality, Results and Discussion Data Quality and Internal Consistency ‘The six indicators of data quality were modestly intercorrelated (rank-order rs ~ 09-66; coefficient a ~ 76; all indices were significantly reisted to at least two other indices), so we expressed each as a rank score and used the mean of the six indicators a an overall measure of data quality. This value is reported in the second columa of Table 2, and the entries are listed in descending drder. By and large, the entzies atthe top of the list are from affluent, mostly Western nations, whereas those at the botiom are from underdeveloped nations. In part, this is probably due to the availability of translations in most Buropean languages bat rela- Lively Few Afiiean languages, In pat, it probably also reflects the fact thatthe NEO-PI-R was developed within the Wester tradition of psychological measurement, and completing it is perhaps more meaningful task for Westerners In item analyses, we examined the comected item/domain cor relations inthe full sample and in each culture, Ia te fll sarmple, * In Gennany, Russa, and dhe Czech Republi, where existing data were ‘wed, raters were usually spouses or same-age pees of the targets. Non- stent ravers were also rarely included i the new data collection. 2 Byceptions were Russia and Malaysia, where samples were almost centely composed of ele Russians and Malays, respectively + Because of « misunderstanding, partcpents in Uganda end France ‘ere asked to compete al four veesions, which many raters found bur ensome. UNIVERSAL FEATURES OF TRAITS 551 Table 2 Quality, Reliability, and Factor Replicability of the Semples Internal consistency Congruenc eooticients* itare Quy ON BO Ac ON FO AC tol Germany 39 kM) KGS Spain ss 23st 85 French Switzer 30 k's ets sg Denar sso 33) 2 ss tga Farce 359383 T9586 sts German Switresand m7 33 sts 586 Chile 42ST 8384989395 New Zestend m3 92 tk 8s T3888 Belgiom B32 tks 5H Portugal 290 wd 85 ss ‘Tunkey m3 390 3083985558585 Poland 370k Ss Seria 31830 mks mee Male 36 tO 9884 Sg (Czech Repatiie L090 8 BSG 8586 ston gor 83 otk 695979 United Kingdom: Nontern Leland = 3059280908558] Slovakia 5od 9093 8969s Teeland 2s 908883 85985 ‘Ausiie wi 930k 93k bss United Kingdom: England ms ts 8s tw Canada m9 8s 07 zo 833 Oss Austalia 73 20S 8S 95s 86 Japan 9 0738s South Korea 276 gs ik ws Hong Kong 3 32 83g 8585 Brea 26390 0B kr 58k Ialy 28 97th 86s United Sates 7 3837 e566 7 Thailand 20008887 3 3 ts Indonesia 2s 8 B 9 3 eG Argentina 2s Mw Si 95 ese Borkina Faso 216 8h ks st 3 35 ts Kuwait B37 Bt Bo sss Mexica 987 B92 9583S Ss Piippines a3 BL BH 83 7 hs (Croatia 7300 2 95 3565s 86 Russa 166380 9 tbs China 37s 7 3s 058g Indie fel 3770 8 88 3 Pera BE a 1 95 83 Slovenia Be 90 St 8 55s 8686 Malaysia Bs 30 8 ot nO 80 Bossivana Bs os So 92 RSD Nigeria Boa 5 rT Poerto Rico Bo 308s sc 9s e858 Ethiopia, om m7 a ee a a | Lebaron oo ess 6558s ss Ugande co 3 7 1 9 3 ee BM os 50 Mecoseo Ss 8 SS ote. Alpha les than 70 an congruence coelficens les than 85 are given in boldface ype. N= Neazticiny = Bstraversion O = Openness, A = ‘Agreesbeness; = Conseienioustss These ae factor and ttl eangrence coefficients comparing fve Procriste-rotaed principal components in each ample wth the American normative selteepon stnctre (Costa & McCrae, 1923), these correlations were postive for 239 tems, tem 17, “Chav & leisurely style in work and play” (reversed), was the exception; in some evltues it was 2 good indicator of Extraversion, but in most it appeared to assess Introversion, Within cultures, 394 of the 12,000 (i. 240 X 50) comreeted itewvtomain correlations (3.3%) were negative, These tended ta cocur forthe same items across cultures (such as Tem 17) and for the same subset of cultures, Jeading to lower internal consistency. Alihough poorly performing, items might be tated as missing, we retained them in the present study. The third through seventh columns of Table 2 report coef: ficient alpha for the 48-item domain scales. In general, these are 4uite high, with median values of 90, 80, 88, 92, and 94 for N, 992 MCRAE , O, A, and C, respectively, Nevertheless, there are some in- stances of low alphas (12 of 250, oF 4.8%, ze lower than .70), especially for O—a domain that hes also shown problematic reliability in self report data in Malaysia and Zimbabwe (Mastoe, Jin, & Cooper, 2000; Piesimont, Bain, McCrae, & Costa, 2002), ‘The value of 25 in Nigesia is particularly notable, suggesting the possibilty that O is not a meaningful dimension In that culture However, an altemative interpretation is that low alphas reflect ‘only poor data quality. That hypothesis is supported by rank-order corelations of column 2, Quality, with columns 3-1 (rs = 63-82, P< 001), Careless or soquiescent responding, fatigue, or failure to understand the nuances of language cen have serious conse quences for item-level analyses, When aggregated into facet scales, however, some of this error may be reduce. Factor Structure ‘The first substantive question addressed here isthe universality of the FFM in observer ratings. An analysis combining raw data from each sample would confound the covariation of tits aoross individuals with covariation across cultures (Bond, 2001). We therefore standardized data within each culture Go that the means of all facets in each culture were transformed to 0, the standard deviations to 1.0), and factored the 30 facet scales The first six igenvalues were 6.67, 4.40, 351, 2.43, 1.46, and 0.84, unmistake ably suggesting x five-fector solution. After varimax rotation, the ‘expected structure of the FEM was clealy replicated, with factor congruence coefficients ranging from .96 10 .98. The principal ifference between this matrix ané the normative sel-report mi ‘tix is that the Form R factors account for more total variance than Form § factors (61.6% vs. 56.9%), and the A and C factors account for a larger percentage of the common variance (23.9% and 26.4%) in observer ratings than in self-reports (19.8% and 22.2%). ‘That phenomenon had already been noted in American Form R ata Costa & McCrae, 19928) ‘Although the varimax-rotted strctore i almost identical to the American self report normative structure, comparisons of factor structures are most direct when orthogonal Procruses rotation is ‘used to align factors maximally with tho target (McCrae, Zonder. man, Costa, Bond, & Paunonen, 1996). Table 3 reports the factor stracture forthe total sample and gives variable, Factor, and total ‘congruence coefficients. In this study, E3: Assertiveness has a ‘somewhat stronger (negative) loading on A than on F, but all other facets have their primary loading on the intended factor, and secondary loadings (uch as N2: Angry Hostility on A. and 03: Feelings on B) are also replicated, as attested to by the large varisble congruence coefficients, The FFM structure was also replicated within each ofthe four age-and-sex target groups, with factor congruence coefficients after Procrustes rotalion ranging from 96 10 98° Although itis clear from Table 3 that the FEM does in fact represent the stuctare of observer-ated personality traits across cultures, its possible tht there is 2 minority of cultures in which the structure is not found. Factor analyses with Procrustes rotation were therefore conducted in each sample separately; results are ssammarized as foctor and total congruence coefficients in the lest six columns of Table 2. By the 85 esiterion of factor repicability (Haven & ten Berge, 1977), 94.4% of the factors are replications fof the American normative Farm $ structure Statistically, there is AL, ‘Table 3 Factor Loodlings for Observer-Rated NEO-PLR Facet Scales in the Combined Sample Factor NEOPRiee NFO A vee NI: Anxiety SL 07) -05 06 12 98 1N2: Angry Hostty 2 05 12-37 0 oe 3: Depression my M18 02 “og —li7 ow NéSeliConciouness 68 23-518 Ot 9 NS: Impisiveness| 33g I 36 oP Ne: Vainerablty I -be 1 06 23 (9 EI: Warmth “Mom se BD Gregaroasness, = =12, 76 Os 5 ow" EX Asetvencet <2 ao 10 at 38 oF Bat Activity = 8 os = 25 aw FS Excitement Seeking 07 (S431 -=25 29 “a FG Positive Emotions” = —.14 703217 a9 01: Fansy 13 27 6) -32 9 (02: Aextetes 16 1¢ 75 i410 9 2s as it ots ot

    You might also like