Big Five Inventory Analysis

Personality is a complex area of Psychology, which has been studied for many years, by many experts in the field. Each having their own ideas about how to understand, study and evaluate it. Here I will introduce personality briefly, looking at the theories behind it. Then explain the need for testing. As there are many test that are available to use, for the purpose of this essay I will look at The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) and discuss the reliability and validity of some studies around these tests.

The five-factor model (FFM) is a contemporary construct describing personality. It incorporates five traits – openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism also referred to as OCEAN. Within each dimension, there are specific personality attributes, for example, openness includes subcategories of feelings and actions. The FFM was influenced by Cattell’s 16-factor model (1957) and shares traits with many other personality theories such as Eysenck’s PEN model. There has been an ongoing debate discussing how many factors appropriately represent the brain structure of personality, suggestions have varied from 2-7, recently Almagor et al. (1995) advocated that a 7-factor model unfolds when evaluative traits are involved. Costa & Mcrae (1992) claim that the FFM is the best theory of personality, however, the model has received much criticism. Through examining different aspects of the model its credibility can be explored.

This paper introduces the overview of personality assessment approaches in use currently in society. It proceeds to review the big five personality measures, its validity in prediction of personality types (Archer, 2011). The topic on MIPS questionnaires use in personality measurements and scoring methods used by the system is reviewed. Aspects on the social desirability trait and the distortion produced in responses to evaluation questionnaires, being a significant part of the problems in personality assessment is examined. Social desirability does not have an influence on the predictive validity of personality assessments. It is not related to performance in the job. Various strategies used for reduction of social desirability have been studied. The various tools used in assessments are recapitulated including some methodological aspects (Weiner, 2009). Cultural aspects in evaluation of personality discussed are touched upon. Two case studies are used to show the real life situation of personality assessment.

The mean age of the participants was 19.3 which means our sample was very close to the average age of college students. The standard deviation between participants was .955, the minimum age was 18 years old and the maximum was 22 years old. 3 out of the 102 participants age were missing from the data. The question responses were used to find the standard deviation and mean for the Big Five personality trait score. The Big Five personality traits are extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experiences. The response scales for these were from a 1 to 7, with a range of 6. The higher the response score the more the participant agreed with the statement and the lower the score less the participant

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an evaluative personality tool that is widely used throughout the world today. It is important for a tool that is popularly utilized in a variety of fields and at numerous professional institutions worldwide to be a credible one. So, is the MBTI really the valid reliable personality inventory instrument it claims to be? Evaluating this tool will show that empirically sound evidence does not exist to support the MBTI as an accurate, reliable, or valid instrument for profiling one’s personality type.

A test was conducted using the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP; Goldberg, 1999) by Maples et. al. (2014) using 120-item questionnaire test of the

Personality can be defined through the model used in Parker’s et al. (2004) study which includes agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, neuroticism, and extraversion. Agreeableness is getting along with other people, conscientiousness is the ability to stay on task, openness is how a person adapts to change, neuroticism is a predisposition to negative emotions, and extraversion is the need for sensation-seeking. Together those personality dimensions describe individual differences. To measure these dimensions, a common tool used was the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. This was a self-report questionnaire containing 60 items, and a score is calculated to indicate the level of each dimension.

The five personality dimensions are listed above. To get an accurate understanding of the five traits, different types of data test must be used. The four types of data tests are: S-Data (self report data), O-Data (observer report data), T-Data (test data), and L-Data (life outcome data).

This theory consists of broad, long-lasting dispositions that can be assessed. The five-factor model consists of representations of the core description of human personality, the only dimensions necessary to understand what makes us tick. The “Big Five” in the model are openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. The advantages of this theory are being able to identify personality traits using assessments and questionnaires as a more reliable method of assessing personality. Disadvantages of the trait theory includes a focus on broad dimensions instead of uniqueness of individuals and the tendency for biased

The purpose for this interview assessment is to measure an individual’s personality by having two interviewees who know them very well answer questions about them. The Informant Report Data approach and the qualitative method are used for this test. The reliability, validity, and generalization of the test are examined separately in order to see how effective they are. The results provide characteristics of the individual and a reflection of their personal thoughts about the test. The findings concluded low degree of reliability and validity. The generalizability of the assessment was found to be moderately applicable to others. In my reflection, I concluded a pattern from the Self interview assessment and found motivation from my interviewees’ answers.

Overall, I believe that the test was fairly accurate in measuring certain factors of my personality so much so that it was difficult for me to find certain factors that I did not agree with. However there were two factors, E (dominance) and Q1 (rebelliousness), which I believe were a bit overrated in myself. Aside from these the test seemed to adequately define facets of my personality. For “warmth” (factor A) my sten score read 4, indicating that I am slightly more reserved and critical that easygoing and good-natured. I scored a 7 in “ego strength” (factor C), classifying me as more stable and emotionally mature and less emotional and changeable in attitudes. In dominance (factor E) my sten score read 8, meaning I am more assertive, competitive and stubborn rather than submissive, dependent and humble. I received an average score of 5 in “impulsivity” (factor F) indicating a slightly more serious and sober approach to the world over the cheerful and enthusiastic view. As for “boldness” (factor H), I received a sten score of 4 signifying a more shy and restrained approach to things as opposed to an adventurous genial one. I received a median score of 5 for “emotional sensitivity” (factor I) demonstrating my slightly more tough-minded and self-reliant view in contrast to a sensitive insecure one. For “imagination” (factor M) a score of 8, indicating that I am more imaginative, unconventional and absorbed in ideas and am less so for practicality and the prosaic.

Recently we discussed the Myers Briggs types and how although these types are a very well known and popular measure of personality, that the Big 5 personality Types (OCEAN) are a more scientifically backed measure of personality. While the Myers Briggs types measure individuals based on four traits, on which individuals are usually generalized either to be at one extreme end of the scale or the other based on their placement on a scale. This allows individuals to be labeled as personalities such as “ENFJ” or “INTP”. However, The OCEAN model rates people on a scale of how much of a certain trait they possess. Individuals are often deemed to be “high” or “low” on a certain trait. The 5 traits (also known as OCEAN) are as follows: openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. Individuals who are high in the trait of openness tend to enjoy new experiences and trying new things. Those who are high in the trait of conscientiousness are very organized and detail-oriented. People high in extraversion are very outgoing and talkative. Individuals who are very agreeable tend to be trustworthy, kind and affectionate. Individuals high in neuroticism tend to be emotionally

This paper looked at a variety of factors that could be predicted using the Big Five inventory such as: academic performance, social media use, work performance and satisfaction, mental and physical health, and satisfaction within romantic relationships; as well as the relationships between these variables. As mentioned prior, the Big Five inventory has been implemented by many researchers regarding a multitude of studies because of its simplicity and validity. As referenced throughout the paper, there were a variety of studies which implemented the Big Five inventory and the results of these studies were similar with synonymous studies. Although the Big Five is one of the primary modes for assessing personality, personality psychologists are

The study was conducted using the IPIP measure scales; (Extraversion, Neuroticism, Openness, Agreeableness & Conscientiousness), (Goldberg, 1999) and the Big Five Factor Model which measure the personality factors of the Big Five (Costa & McCrae, 1992). The four goals of Psychology was taken into consideration using the 25-item translated questionnaire with a 5 point Likert scale.

Personality is a large part of being human, as each person has a unique set of characteristics and traits. One person can be kind and patient and another can be rude and ill tempered. This variability is both what makes the study of personality fascinating and incredibly difficult. Although there are a myriad of different personality traits that can be used to describe a person, psychologists have narrowed it down to five overarching ideas. These are commonly referred to as the “Big Five” personality traits and they consist of, neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, openness, and conscientiousness. In particular, this study will focus on neuroticism, the trait that is characterized by high emotionality and instability, anxiety, and irritability (Soto, John, Gosling, & Potter 2011). Of the five, neuroticism is the only one with a negative connotation, which separates it from the others. Nonetheless, despite its poor reputation, neuroticism is an incredibly important trait to study as it is often linked with anxiety and depression (Soto et al., 2011). For example, one study found that participants who were clinically depressed and those who were not but scored highly on the neuroticism scale both had significantly greater negative self-perceptions (Thomson, 2016). Although currently there is only a correlation between these mental disorders and neuroticism, further experimentation could lead to more conclusive result. Recently, mental health has