You are on page 1of 37

SYMPOSIUM: VALIDATION OF

THE MAPA NG LOOB, ITS


ENGLISH VERSION, AND ITS
SHORT FORM
The Mapa ng Loob and the Panukat ng Pagkataong
Pilipino: A Validation Study
The Development of the English Version
of the Mapa ng Loob

Validating the Mapa English


with the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP)

Personality Predicts Mate Retention Tactics in Filipino Samples


THE MAPA NG LOOB AND THE
PANUKAT NG PAGKATAONG
PILIPINO: A VALIDATION STUDY
Gregorio E. H. del Pilar and Anna Margarita F. Mangahas
Personality Research Laboratory
University of the Philippines Diliman

53rd Annual Convention


Psychological Association of the Philippines
Fontana Convention Center, Clark Freeport Zone, Pampanga
September 14, 2016
The Masaklaw na Panukat ng Loob
(Mapa ng Loob)
 Started in 2010, completed in 2013: 5 semesters
 Administered to more than 4,000 participants
during scale development
 Total sample mostly of students from UP Diliman, but
final sample made up also of students from 3 other
institutions in Metro Manila and Luzon, plus an adult
sample: N=576
 188 items: 22 scales with 8 items each, 12-item
Social Desirability scale
The Mapa ng Loob: based on the Five-Factor Model
of personality traits

 The Five-Factor Model : A breakthrough model


 Put an end to 40 years of inquiry into the structure of
the trait universe: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness
to Experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness
 A powerful model, comprehensive and consensual, that
has organized findings related to work, health, intimate
relationships, creativity, political attitudes, problem
behaviors, psychopathology, etc.
Scales of the Mapa ng Loob
 Neuroticism – Hina ng Loob, Pagkamaramdamin,
Pagkamapag-alala, Pagkasumpungin
 Extraversion – Pagkamasayahin, Pagkapalakaibigan,
Pagkamasigla, Pagkamadaldal
 Openness to Experience – Kakaibang pag-iisip, Hilig sa
Bagong Kaalaman, Pagkamakasining, Pagkamaharaya
 Agreeableness – Pagkadimayabang, Pagkamapagtiwala,
Pagkamaunawain, Pagkamapagparaya
 Conscientiousness – Pagkamasikap, Pagkamapagplano,
Pagkaresponsable, Pagkamaingat
 Also: NA Dalas Makaramdam ng Galit; AC Pagkamatapat;
Social Desirability
The Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino
 Created by Annadaisy J. Carlota in 1985
 Made up of 19 scales, 15 of which were based on
asking a sample of 360 participants to describe a
person they liked, a person they disliked, and
themselves; the other 4 measured traits related to
creativity
 Two hundred ten (210) items: scales of varying length
(6-14 items)
 Originally, the Mapa was meant to be an update of the
PPP as a five-factor instrument. This idea was
abandoned, and all overlap between the two
instruments have been removed.
Significance of the study
 The Mapa: sought to measure its target constructs,
but also the five factors

 The PPP: sought only to measure its target constructs

 To what extent has the Mapa succeeded in validly


measuring its target constructs, despite the
constraints imposed by the Five-Factor model?
Constraints imposed by
the Five-Factor Model
 Note: Four facet scales make up each of the domain
scales

 Constraints: 1) for some scales, items were selected


on the basis of high convergent correlations with the
other scales that make up the target domain, and
low discriminant correlations with scales belonging
to the other domains; 2) the inventory was
considered completed only when a five-factor
structure was obtained
PCA of the Mapa ng Loob after the final item
selection study N=576
Method
Method
 Participants: Two hundred forty-five (245)
introductory psychology students from UP Diliman,
71% were female; Mean age: 19.01 (1.66)
 Instruments: the Mapa ng Loob and the PPP
 Procedure: The participants were administered the
online version of the Mapa at the beginning of the
semester. The PPP was administered towards the
end of the semester.
Scales hypothesized to correlate
Mapa ng Loob Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino
N1 Hina ng Loob Pagkamahinahon (-)
N2 Pagkamaramdamin Pagkamaramdamin
E1 Pagkamasayahin Pagkamasayahin
E2 Pagkapalakaibigan Pagkapalakaibigan
O1 Kakaibang Pag-iisip Pagkamalikhain
A1 Pagkadimayabang Pagkamapagkumbaba
A3 Pagkamaunawain Pagkamaunawain
C1 Pagkamasikap Pagkamasikap
C3 Pagkaresponsable Pagkaresponsable
NA Dalas Makaramdam ng Galit Pagkamahinahon (-)
AC Pagkamatapat Pagkamatapat
The poles of Pagkamahinahon

Hina ng Loob (N)

Pagkamahinahon

Dalas Makaramdam ng
Galit (NA)
RESULTS

Reliability
Factor structure of the Mapa
Convergent-discriminant correlations
Internal Consistency Reliability N=245
Mapa ng Loob Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino
SCALE Reliability SCALE Reliability
N1 Hina ng Loob .70 Pagkamahinahon (-) .80
N2 Pagkamaramdamin .76 Pagkamaramdamin .72
E1 Pagkamasayahin .81 Pagkamasayahin .78
E2 Pagkapalakaibigan .88 Pagkapalakaibigan .90
O1 Kakaibang Pag-iisip .80 Pagkamalikhain .76
A1 Pagkadimayabang .79 Pagkamapagkumbaba .80
A3 Pagkamaunawain .77 Pagkamaunawain .79
C1 Pagkamasikap .73 Pagkamasikap .48
C3 Pagkaresponsable .80 Pagkaresponsable .68
NA Dalas Makraramdam ng .77 Pagkamahinahon (-) .80
Galit
AC Pagkamatapat .68 Pagkamatapat .69
MEAN .77 MEAN .74
PCA of the Mapa ng Loob, N=245
Validity: intercorrelation matrix
Mapa PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP
Hin Ram Say Kai Lik Baba Una Sik Res Hin* Tap

HL -.48 .35 -.36 -.25 -.42 -.22 -.23 -.23 -.14 -.48 -.13
Ram -.59 .63 -.29 -.15 -.23 -.42 -.34 -.15 -.16 -.59 -.27
Say .12 -.19 .75 .65 .25 -.10 .26 .25 -.02 .12 .03
Kai .08 -.09 .59 .83 .33 -.16 .13 .32 .08 .08 -.00
KPI .07 .02 .20 .18 .61 -.13 -.04 .23 .04 .07 .07
Dim .31 -.43 -.11 -.24 -.02 .64 .34 -.09 .05 .31 .37
Una .46 -.44 .12 .08 .15 .47 .66 .07 .11 .46 .34
Sik .10 -.04 .20 .17 .36 .15 .14 .50 .32 .10 .26
Res .18 -.07 .21 .17 .39 .16 .11 .48 .42 .18 .25
DMG -.66 .55 -.16 -.03 -.20 -.55 -.61 -.16 -.11 -.66 -.28
Tap .27 -.31 .22 .02 .12 .44 .31 .18 .20 .27 .45
Validity: intercorrelation matrix
Mapa PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP PPP
Hin Ram Say Kai Lik Baba Una Sik Res Hin* Tap

HL -.48 .35 -.36 -.25 -.42 -.22 -.23 -.23 -.14 -.48 -.13
Ram -.59 .63 -.29 -.15 -.23 -.42 -.34 -.15 -.16 -.59 -.27
Say .12 -.19 .75 .65 .25 -.10 .26 .25 -.02 .12 .03
Kai .08 -.09 .59 .83 .33 -.16 .13 .32 .08 .08 -.00
KPI .07 .02 .20 .18 .61 -.13 -.04 .23 .04 .07 .07
Dim .31 -.43 -.11 -.24 -.02 .64 .34 -.09 .05 .31 .37
Una .46 -.44 .12 .08 .15 .47 .66 .07 .11 .46 .34
Sik .10 -.04 .20 .17 .36 .15 .14 .50 .32 .10 .26
Res .18 -.07 .21 .17 .39 .16 .11 .48 ns .42 .18 .25
DMG -.66 .55 -.16 -.03 -.20 -.55 -.61 -.16 -.11 -.66 -.28
Tap .27 -.31 .22 .02 .12 .44 .31 .18 .20 .27 .45
Convergent and discriminant validity
correlations
Mapa ng Loob Panukat ng Pagkataong Validity Mean
Pilipino coefficients |discriminant
validity|
N1 Hina ng Loob Pagkamahinahon (-) -.48 .26
N2 Pagkamaramdamin Pagkamaramdamin .63 .26
E1 Pagkamasayahin Pagkamasayahin .75 .21
E2 Pagkapalakaibigan Pagkapalakaibigan .83 .20
O1 Kakaibang Pag-iisip Pagkamalikhain .61 .11
A1 Pagkadimayabang Pagkamapagkumbaba .64 .22
A3 Pagkamaunawain Pagkamaunawain .66 .25
C1 Pagkamasikap Pagkamasikap .50 .19
C3 Pagkaresponsable Pagkaresponsable .42 .23
NA Dalas Makaramdam ng Pagkamahinahon (-) -.66 .29
Galit
AC Pagkamatapat Pagkamatapat .45 .23
Convergent validity correlations:
validity coefficients
Mapa ng Loob Panukat ng Pagkataong Validity coefficients
Pilipino
N1 Hina ng Loob Pagkamahinahon (-) -.48
N2 Pagkamaramdamin Pagkamaramdamin .63
E1 Pagkamasayahin Pagkamasayahin .75
E2 Pagkapalakaibigan Pagkapalakaibigan .83
O1 Kakaibang Pag-iisip Pagkamalikhain .61
A1 Pagkadimayabang Pagkamapagkumbaba .64
A3 Pagkamaunawain Pagkamaunawain .66
C1 Pagkamasikap Pagkamasikap .50
C3 Pagkaresponsable Pagkaresponsable .42
NA Dalas Makraramdam ng Pagkamahinahon (-) -.66
Galit
AC Pagkamatapat Pagkamatapat .45
Why only a moderate correlation between N1
Hina ng Loob and PPP Pagkamahinahon?
The poles of Pagkamahinahon

Hina ng Loob (N)

Pagkamahinahon

Dalas Makaramdam ng
Galit (NA)
Why only a moderate correlation between
Mapa Pagkamatapat and PPP Pagkamatapat?
Mapa Pagkamatapat = Sincerity

PPP Pagkamatapat = Honesty


Why only a moderate correlation between C3
Pagkaresponsable and PPP Pagkaresponsable?
Mapa PPP
• Pagkaresponsable
ability
The tendency to have the desire and
 Pagkaresponsable
Pagkaresponsable  the ability to carry out
The tendency to have the desire and one's tasks on one's own
ability to carry out one's duties and to
fulfill one's commitments. High scorers initiative
try their best to finish assigned tasks on  doesnot procrastinate in
time, and seek to overcome problems
standing in the way of fulfilling completing assigned tasks
obligations. Low scorers find it difficult
to honor their commitments, and are
unable to summon enough will power to
complete assigned tasks.
commitments. High scorers try their best to finish assigned tasks on time, and seek to
overcome problems standing in the way of fulfilling obligations. Low scorers find it difficult
to honor their commitments, and are unable to summon enough will power to complete
assigned tasks.
PCA of PPP Pagkaresponsable:
Number of components

Factor 1 – Agarang Pagtatrabaho


Factor 2 – Pananagutan
Factor 3 - Kusa
PCA of Mapa Pagkaresponsable
Internal Consistency Reliability N=245
Mapa ng Loob Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino
SCALE Reliability SCALE Reliability
N1 Hina ng Loob .70 Pagkamahinahon (-) .80
N2 Pagkamaramdamin .76 Pagkamaramdamin .72
E1 Pagkamasayahin .81 Pagkamasayahin .78
E2 Pagkapalakaibigan .88 Pagkapalakaibigan .90
O1 Kakaibang Pag-iisip .80 Pagkamalikhain .76
A1 Pagkadimayabang .79 Pagkamapagkumbaba .80
A3 Pagkamaunawain .77 Pagkamaunawain .79
C1 Pagkamasikap .73 Pagkamasikap .48

C3 Pagkaresponsable .80 Pagkaresponsable .68


NA Dalas Makraramdam ng .77 Pagkamahinahon (-) .80
Galit
AC Pagkamatapat .68 Pagkamatapat .69
MEAN .77 MEAN .74
“Karagdagang Katanungan 1”
 Gaanong kaingat ang naging pagsagot mo sa
palatanungang ito?

 1 – walang kaingat-ingat, kung anu-ano lang


nilagay ko
 2 - di gaanong maingat
 3 - maingat
 4 - maingat na maingat
Spearman’s rho correlation with
Karagdagang Katanungan 1

PPP .15
Pagkaresponsable p < .05

p < .05
Mapa
Pagkaresponsable
.26
p < .001
Summary of findings
 Of eleven Mapa scales which have equivalents or
similar scales in the Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino,
eight have high, and three have moderate convergent
validity correlations with the PPP scales.
 All convergent validity correlations are the highest
correlations for each of the eleven scales, except for
Pagkaresponsable, which is lower than the correlation
for Pagkamasikap, though not significantly.
 Moreover, the means of the absolute value of the
discriminant validity correlations of each scale is
markedly lower than the convergent validity correlation.
Summary of findings
 The moderate correlations are consistent with
somewhat different conceptualizations of the
corresponding traits.
 In the case of Pagkaresponsable, the differing
breadth of conceptualization has not resulted in an
inferior correlation with a meaningful criterion,
namely, the care with which the participant claimed
to have answered the Mapa ng Loob in a research
setting.
Conclusion
 It appears from the present study that the
constraints imposed on the development of the
Mapa scales as a five-factor inventory have not
impacted the validity of its scales negatively.
fin
Summary of findings
 The moderate correlation of Pagkaresponsable with
PPP Pagkaresponsable seems due to the wider
scope of the latter, which incorporates the tendency
to work on tasks immediately, initiative, as well as
responsibility to others.
 All convergent validity correlations are the highest
correlations for each of the eleven scales, except
for Pagkaresponsable, which is lower than the
correlation for Pagkamasikap, though not
significantly.
Summary of findings
 The moderate correlations are consistent with
somewhat different conceptualizations of the
corresponding traits.
 In the case of Pagkaresponsable, the differing
breadth of conceptualization has not resulted in an
inferior correlation with a meaningful criterion,
namely, the care with which the participant claimed
to have answered the Mapa ng Loob.

You might also like