{"title":"The NB5I","authors":"M. Bäckström, F. Björklund, R. Maddux, M. Lindén","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Personality is usually measured by means of self-ratings. Despite some drawbacks, the method is here to stay, and improving on it, particularly regarding social desirability, is essential. One way to do this is evaluative neutralization, that is, to rephrase items such that it is less obvious to the respondent what would be a desirable response. We present a 120-item evaluatively neutralized five-factor inventory and compare it to the IPIP-NEO ( Goldberg et al., 2006 ). Psychometric analyses revealed that the new inventory has high factor homogeneity, relatively independent facets with acceptable homogeneity and normally distributed ratings, and relatively evaluatively neutral ratings (as indicated by the level of item popularity). In sum, this new inventory captures the same personality variance as other five-factor inventories but with less influence from individual differences in evaluative responding, resulting in less correlation between factors and a factor structure more in line with the simple structure model than many other five-factor inventories. Evaluatively neutralized inventories should be particularly useful when the factor structure is central to the research question and focuses on discriminant validity, such as identifying theoretically valid relationships between personality traits and other concepts.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000687","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Abstract. Personality is usually measured by means of self-ratings. Despite some drawbacks, the method is here to stay, and improving on it, particularly regarding social desirability, is essential. One way to do this is evaluative neutralization, that is, to rephrase items such that it is less obvious to the respondent what would be a desirable response. We present a 120-item evaluatively neutralized five-factor inventory and compare it to the IPIP-NEO ( Goldberg et al., 2006 ). Psychometric analyses revealed that the new inventory has high factor homogeneity, relatively independent facets with acceptable homogeneity and normally distributed ratings, and relatively evaluatively neutral ratings (as indicated by the level of item popularity). In sum, this new inventory captures the same personality variance as other five-factor inventories but with less influence from individual differences in evaluative responding, resulting in less correlation between factors and a factor structure more in line with the simple structure model than many other five-factor inventories. Evaluatively neutralized inventories should be particularly useful when the factor structure is central to the research question and focuses on discriminant validity, such as identifying theoretically valid relationships between personality traits and other concepts.
摘要个性通常是通过自我评价来衡量的。尽管存在一些缺点,但这种方法仍将继续存在,并且对其进行改进,特别是在社会可取性方面,是必不可少的。这样做的一种方法是评估中性化,也就是说,重新表述项目,这样对被调查者来说,什么是理想的回答就不那么明显了。我们提出了一个120项评估中和的五因素清单,并将其与IPIP-NEO进行比较(Goldberg et al., 2006)。心理测量分析表明,新量表具有较高的因素同质性,相对独立的方面具有可接受的同质性和正态分布的评分,以及相对评价中性的评分(如项目受欢迎程度所示)。总而言之,这一新的五因素量表捕获了与其他五因素量表相同的人格差异,但受评估性反应的个体差异的影响较小,导致因素之间的相关性较小,因素结构比许多其他五因素量表更符合简单结构模型。当因素结构是研究问题的中心并侧重于判别效度时,例如确定人格特征和其他概念之间理论上有效的关系时,评估中性清单应该特别有用。
期刊介绍:
The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.