Search

The structure and psychometric characteristics of the NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3), a more readable version of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R), are examined and compared with NEO-PI-R characteristics using data from college student observer ratings of 5, 109 adolescents aged 12 to 17 years from 24 cultures. Replacement items in the PI-3 showed on average stronger item-total correlations and slightly improved facet reliabilities compared with the NEO-PI-R in both English-and non-English-speaking samples. NEO-PI-3 replacement items did not substantially affect scale means compared with the original scales. Analyses across and within cultures confirmed the intended factor structure of both versions when used to describe young adolescents. The authors discuss implications of these cross-cultural findings for the advancement of studies in adolescence and personality development across the lifespan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3) is a modification of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) designed to be more understandable to adolescents. Data from adults aged 21 to 91 showed that the NEO-PI-3 also functions as well or better than the NEO-PI-R in adults. Age trends from combined adolescent (n = 500) and adult (n = 635) samples confirmed previous cross-sectional findings and demonstrated the importance of studying age changes especially at the facet level and during the decade of the 20s. Normative data for self-report and observer rating forms for adolescents, younger and older adults, and all adults are discussed, as well as for a combined-age group. It is argued that combined-age norms may be most appropriate for depicting the personality scores of individuals, but the utility for some purposes of within-age group scores is also acknowledged.

The lexically based Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI) was correlated with the factors and facets of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) in Belgian (N = 265), American (N = 116), and Hungarian (N = 320) samples. Results were similar across the three cultures. Analysis of orthogonalized FFPI factors showed that three of them--emotional stability, extraversion, and agreeableness--showed a direct correspondence to their NEO-PI-R counterparts. Autonomy, however, was not clearly related to openness, and facet analysis suggested that it might be interpreted as a dominance factor Better matches to NEO-PI-R conscientiousness and openness could be obtained by using vectors rotated 30 degrees from the FFPI positions. Raw scale scores showed similar results. Researchers should not assume that all measures of the Five-Factor Model are qualitatively similar

Although developmental theories and popular accounts suggest that midlife is a time of turmoil and change, longitudinal studies of personality traits have generally found stability of rank order and little or no change in mean levels. Using data from 2,274 men and women in their 40s retested after 6 to 9 years, the present study examined two hypotheses: (a) that retest correlations should be no higher than about .60 and (b) that there should be small decreases in Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness, and small increases in Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. The study also explored the effects of recalled life events on subsequent personality scores. Results did not support the first hypothesis; uncorrected retest correlations uniformly exceeded .60. This was true for all personality traits, including facets of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness not previously included in longitudinal studies. The hypothesized decreases in Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness were found, but Conscientiousness showed a small decrease instead of the predicted increase. Life events in general showed very little influence on the levels of personality traits, although some effects were seen for changes in job and marital status that warrant further research.

The finding of personality stability in adulthood may be counterintuitive to people who perceive a great deal of change in their own personality. The purpose of this study is to determine whether self-reported perceived changes in personality are associated with actual changes based on a 6- to 9-year follow-up of 2,242 middle-aged male and female participants of the UNC Alumni Heart Study (UNCAHS). Respondents completed the Revised NEO Personality Inventory on two occasions and were asked to reflect back over a 6-year period and assess changes in their personality. The majority of respondents (n = 1,177; 52.5%) reported they had "stayed the same," while 863 (38.5%) reported they had "changed a little" and 202 (9%) reported they had "changed a good deal." Coefficients of personality profile agreement computed to evaluate global personality change for the three perceived change groups were essentially equivalent. Further, directional analyses of domain-specific changes in personality showed that perceived changes were weak predictors of residual gain scores. In an absolute sense, perceptions of stability or change were discordant in 8 of 15 (53%) comparisons. Self-perceptions of change are not an adequate substitute for objective assessments.

In musical counterpoint, two or more different voices sound together in ways that illuminate the possibilities of the musical theme. Similarly, self-reports and observer ratings together may tell us more about personality than either could separately. This article reviews convergence between these two data sources and illustrates ways in which they can be used jointly in personality research to rule out response biases and estimate stability and heritability of personality traits. A measure of profile agreement is introduced and a rule of thumb is proposed for distinguishing agreement from disagreement on specific traits in individual cases. Averaging may be useful when there is agreement about individuals across observers; when there is disagreement, further information should be sought to resolve the competing hypotheses offered by the discrepant ratings.