Short assessment of the Big Five: Robust across survey methods except telephone interviewing

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 548-567

  Lang, Frieder R ^a   John, Dennis ^a   Lüdtke, Oliver ^b   Schupp, Jürgen ^c,d   Wagner, Gert G ^c,e,f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^c DIW BERLIN   (Germany)

^d FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^e TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^f MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Big Five; Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM); Face to face; Personality; Self administrated questionnaire; Survey method; Telephone interview

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERVIEW; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY; PERSONALITY TEST; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARD;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY; PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT; PERSONALITY INVENTORY; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 79956258617     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: 15543528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-011-0066-z     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Allemand, M., Zimprich, D., & Hendriks, A. A. J. (2008). Age differences in five personality domains across the life span. Developmental Psychology, 44, 758-770. doi: 10. 1037/0012-1649. 44. 3. 758.
2. Allemand, M., Zimprich, D., & Hertzog, C. (2007). Cross-sectional age differences and longitudinal age changes of personality in middle adulthood and old age. Journal of Personality, 75, 323-358. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-6494. 2006. 00441. x.
3. Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait names: A psycholexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47(1), Whole No. 211.
4. Aluja, A., García, O., García, L. F., & Seisdedos, N. (2005). Invariance of the "NEO-PI-R" factor structure across exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1879-1889. doi: j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001/j. paid. 2004. 11. 014.
5. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397-438. doi: 10. 1080/10705510903008204.
6. Baltes, P. B., Reese, H. W., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1977). Life-span developmental psychology: Introduction to research methods. Monterey: Brooks Cole.
7. Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Paronto, M. E., Weekley, J. A., & Campion, M. A. (2004). Applicant reactions to different selection technology: Face-to-face, interactive voice response, and computer-assisted telephone screening interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 135-148. doi: 10. 1111/j. 0965-075X. 2004. 00269. x.
8. Benet-Martinez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 729-750. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 75. 3. 729.
9. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 107. 2. 238.
10. Blickle, G., Kramer, J., & Mierke, J. (2010). Telephone-administered intelligence testing for research in work and organizational psychology. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 154-161. doi: 10. 1027/1015-5759/a000022.
11. Borghans, L., Duckworth, A. L., Heckman, J. J., & ter Weel, B. (2008). The economics and psychology of personality traits. Journal of Human Resources, 43, 972-1059.
12. Borkenau, P., & Ostendorf, F. (1990). Comparing exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: A study on the 5-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 515-524. doi: j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001/0191-8869(90)90065-Y.
13. Brannick, M. T. (1995). Critical comments on applying covariance structure modeling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 201-213. doi: 10. 1002/job. 4030160303.
14. Cattell, R. B. (1946). Description and measurement of personality. Yonkers-on-Hudson: World Book.
15. Cercone, J. J., Danielson, C. K., Ruggiero, K. J., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2009). Telephone surveys of traumatic experiences and other sensitive topics. In D. Buchanan, C. B. Fisher, & L. Gable (Eds.), Research with high-risk populations: Balancing science, ethics, and law (pp. 77-92). Washington: American Psychological Association.
16. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504. doi: 10. 1080/10705510701301834.
17. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2001). The effects of model parsimony and sampling error on the fit of structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 236-264. doi: 10. 1177/109442810143004.
18. Church, A. T., & Burke, P. J. (1994). Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the Big Five and Tellegen's three- and four-dimensional models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 93-114. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 66. 1. 93.
19. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1995). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 21-50. doi: 10. 1207/s15327752jpa6401_2.
20. Davis, J. A., & Smith, T. W. (1992). The NORC General Social Survey: A user's guide. Newbury Park: Sage.
21. Donnellan, M. B., & Lucas, R. E. (2008). Age differences in the Big Five across the life span: Evidence from two national samples. Psychology and Aging, 23, 558-566. doi: 10. 1037/a0012897.
22. Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192-203. doi: 10. 1037/1040-3590. 18. 2. 192.
23. Eysenck, H. (1947). Dimensions of personality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
24. Gagné, P., & Hancock, G. R. (2006). Measurement model quality, sample size, and solution propriety in confirmatory factor models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 65-83. doi: 10. 1207/s15327906mbr4101_5.
25. Gerlitz, Y., & Schupp, J. (2005). Zur Erhebung der Big-Five-basierten Persönlichkeitsmerkmale im SOEP [Assessment of Big Five personality characteristics in the SOEP]. German Institute of Economic Research (Research Notes 4). Berlin: DIW.
26. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative "description of personality": The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 59. 6. 1216.
27. Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528. doi: j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001/S0092-6566(03)00046-1.
28. Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Jr., Coupler, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.
29. Groves, R. M., & Mathiowetz, N. A. (1984). Computer assisted telephone interviewing: Effects on interviewers and respondents. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 356-369. doi: 10. 1086/268831.
30. Hansell, S., Sparacino, J., Ronchi, D., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1984). Ego-development responses in written questionnaires and telephone interviews. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1118-1128. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 47. 5. 1118.
31. Headey, B., Muffels, R., & Wagner, G. G. (2010). Long-running German panel survey shows that personal and economic choices, not just genes, matter for happiness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 17922-17926. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 1008612107.
32. Heineck, G., & Anger, S. (2010). The returns to cognitive abilities and personality traits in Germany. Labour Economics, 17, 535-546. doi: j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001/j. labeco. 2009. 06. 001.
33. Herman, J. B. (1977). Mixed-mode data collection: Telephone and personal interviewing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 399-404. doi: 10. 1037/0021-9010. 62. 4. 399.
34. Holbrook, A. L., Green, M. C., & Krosnick, J. A. (2003). Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires: Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 79-125. doi: 10. 1086/346010.
35. Holden, R. R., & Troister, T. (2009). Developments in the self-report assessment of personality and psychopathology in adults. Canadian Psychology, 50, 120-130. doi: 10. 1037/a0015959.
36. Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How should the internal structure of personality inventories be evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 332-346. doi: 10. 1177/1088868310361240.
37. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102-138). New York: Guilford.
38. Klages, L. (1926). Die Grundlagen der Charakterkunde [Foundations of characterology]. Leipzig: Bart.
39. Lang, F. R. (2005). Erfassung des kognitiven Leistungspotenzials und der "Big Five" mit Computer-Assisted-Personal-Interviewing (CAPI): Zur Reliabilität und Validität zweier ultrakurzer Tests und des BFI-S [Assessment of cognitive capabilities and the Big Five with Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI): Reliability and validity]. German Institute of Economic Research (Research Notes 9/2005), Berlin: DIW.
40. Lang, F. R., Baltes, P. B., & Wagner, G. G. (2007). Desired lifetime and end-of-life desires across adulthood from 20 to 90: A dual-source information model. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Science, 62, 268-276.
41. Lang, F. R., Lüdtke, O., & Asendorpf, J. (2001). Testgüte und psychometrische Äquivalenz der deutschen Version des Big Five Inventory (BFI) bei jungen, mittelalten und alten Erwachsenen [Validity and psychometric equivalence of the German version of the Big Five Inventory in young, middle-aged and old adults]. Diagnostica, 47, 111-121. doi: 10. 1026//0012-1924. 47. 3. 111.
42. Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2009). Age differences in personality: Evidence from a nationally representative Australian sample. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1353-1363. doi: 10. 1037/a0013914.
43. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 181-220. doi: 10. 1207/s15327906mbr3302_1.
44. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralising Hu & Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341. doi: 10. 1207/s15328007sem1103_2.
45. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U., et al. (2010). A new look at the big-five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471-491. doi: 10. 1037/a0019227.
46. Marsh, H. W., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Morin, A. J. S., et al. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Applications to students' evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 439-476. doi: 10. 1080/10705510903008220.
47. Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., & Morin, A. J. S. (2011). Measurement invariance of big-five factors over the lifespan: ESEM tests of gender, age, plasticity, maturity, and La Dolce Vita effects. Manuscript under review.
48. Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2006). Integration of multidimensional self-concept and core personality constructs: Construct validation and relations to well-being and achievement. Journal of Personality, 74, 403-455. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-6494. 2005. 00380. x.
49. Marshall, M. B., De Fruyt, F., Rolland, J.-P., & Bagby, R. M. (2005). Socially desirable responding and the factorial stability of the NEO PI-R. Psychological Assessment, 17, 379-384. doi: 10. 1037/1040-3590. 17. 3. 379.
50. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509-516. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 52. 5. 509.
51. McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T., Jr., Bond, M. H., & Paunonen, S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552-566. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 70. 3. 552.
52. McHorney, C. A., Kosinski, M., & Ware, J. E., Jr. (1994). Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: Results from a national survey. Medical Care, 32, 551-567. doi: 10. 1097/00005650-199406000-00002.
53. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543. doi: 10. 1007/BF02294825.
54. Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246-268. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 102. 2. 246.
55. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2008). Mplus user's guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
56. Rammstedt, B., Goldberg, L. R., & Borg, I. (2010). The measurement equivalence of the Big-Five factor markers for persons with different levels of education. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 53-61. doi: j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001/j. jrp. 2009. 10. 005.
57. Rammstedt, B., Holzinger, B., & Rammsayer, T. H. (2004). Zur Äquivalenz der Papier-Bleistift- und einer computergestützten Version des NEO-Fünf- Faktoren-Inventars (NEO-FFI) [Equivalence of a paper-pencil- and a computer-based version of the NEO-FFI]. Diagnostica, 50, 88-97. doi: 10. 1026/0012-1924. 50. 2. 88.
58. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203-212. doi: j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001/j. jrp. 2006. 02. 001.
59. Rentfrow, P. J. (2010). Statewide differences in personality. Toward a psychological geography of the United States. American Psychologist, 65, 548-558. doi: 10. 1037/a0018194.
60. Richman, W. L., Kiesler, S., Weisband, S., & Drasgow, F. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 754-775. doi: 10. 1037/0021-9010. 84. 5. 754.
61. Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1-25. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 132. 1. 1.
62. Schräpler, J. P., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2010). Changing from PAPI to CAPI: Introducing CAPI in a longitudinal study. Journal of Official Statistics, 26, 233-269.
63. Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93-105. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 54. 2. 93.
64. Siedler, T., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2011). Innovative methods within in the context of archival data: Examples from household panel surveys. In K. H. Trzesniewski, M. B. Donnellan, & R. E. Lucas (Eds.), Secondary data analysis (pp. 103-118). Washington: American Psychological Association.
65. Smith, T. W., & Williams, P. G. (1992). Personality and health: Advantages and limitations of the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 60, 395-423. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-6494. 1992. tb00978. x.
66. Stoop, I., Billiet, J., Koch, A., & Fitzgerald, R. (2010). Improving survey response: Lessons learned from the European Social Survey. Chichester: Wiley.
67. Sutin, A. R., Costa, P. T., Miech, R., & Eaton, W. W. (2009). Personality and career success: Concurrent and longitudinal relations. European Journal of Personality, 23, 71-84. doi: 10. 1002/per. 704.
68. Swanberg, A. B., & Martinsen, O. L. (2010). Personality, approaches to learning and achievement. Educational Psychology, 30, 75-88. doi: 10. 1080/01443410903410474.
69. Taylor, M. F., Brice, J., Buck, N., & Prentice-Lane, E. (2009). British household panel survey user manual: Vol. A. Introduction, technical report and appendices. Colchester: University of Essex.
70. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10. doi: 10. 1007/BF02291170.
71. Tun, P. A., & Lachman, M. E. (2008). Age differences in reaction time and attention in a National Telephone sample of adults: Education, sex, and task complexity matter. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1421-1429. doi: 10. 1037/a0012845.
72. Vassend, O., & Skrondal, A. (1997). Validation of the NEO Personality Inventory and the five-factor model: Can findings from exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis be reconciled? European Journal of Personality, 11, 147-166. doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199706)11: 2< 147:: AID-PER278> 3. 0. CO; 2-E.
73. Wagner, G. G., Frick, J. R., & Schupp, J. (2007). The German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP): Scope, evolution and enhancements. Schmollers Jahrbuch, 1, 139-170.
74. Winkelmann, L., & Winkelmann, R. (2008). Personality, work, and satisfaction: Evidence from the German Socio-Economic Panel. Journal of Positive Psychology, 3, 266-275. doi: 10. 1080/17439760802399232.