Big five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior.

The authors compared the Big 5 factors of personality with the facets or traits of personality that constitute those factors on their ability to predict 40 behavior criteria. Both the broad factors and the narrow facets predicted substantial numbers of criteria, but the latter did noticeably better in that regard, even when the number of facet predictors was limited to the number of factor predictors. Moreover, the criterion variance accounted for by the personality facets often included large portions not predicted by the personality factors. The narrow facets, therefore, were able to substantially increase the maximum prediction achieved by the broad factors. The results of this study are interpreted as supporting a more detailed approach to personality assessment, one that goes beyond the measurement of the Big 5 factors alone.

What is beyond the big five? Plenty!

In a recent analysis of personality data, Saucier and Goldberg (1998) sought to answer the question, What is beyond the Big Five? Those authors evaluated numerous clusters of English person-descriptive adjectives that have been suspected of referring to non-Big Five dimensions of personality. Their results led them to conclude that most, if not all, traits of personality can be adequately subsumed within the Big Five factor space. In contrast, our reanalysis of Saucier and Goldberg's own data, using a more realistic criterion for deciding on whether a variable does or does not fall within a particular factor space, contradicts their claim. We are led to the conclusion that there are plenty of dimensions of behavior beyond the Big Five.

On the accuracy of ratings of personality by strangers.

Past studies in person perception have shown unexpectedly high correlations between targets' self-ratings of personality traits and ratings of those targets made by stranger judges. Possible reasons for the apparent accuracy of strangers' ratings are examined, including personality judgments that are based on (a) the perceived social desirability of targets, (b) known sex-linked base rates of behavior, and (c) the inevitable presence of valid personality cues in the typical stranger rating study. A computer simulation study is then described that illustrates that a relatively small number of nonrandom accurate judgments among many random judgments can produce substantial overall correlations between self-ratings and stranger ratings. The data of the study provide some clarification of past empirical results of both stranger and acquaintance ratings of personality.

The structured nonverbal assessment of personality.

This article describes the development of a structured nonverbal measure of personality based on Murray's (1938) system of needs. The items of the Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire consist of line drawings of a central figure performing trait-relevant behaviors in specific situations; respondents are asked to indicate the likelihood of engaging in similar behaviors. The nonverbal form was administered to three Canadian samples of respondents and one Finnish sample. Reliability and validity data for the initial item pool and for a revised form are reported. The utility of the nonverbal inventory for cross-cultural and theoretical work in personality is discussed.

Test Construction and Targeted Factor Solutions Derived by Multiple Group and Procrustes Methods.

An hypothesized multidimensional structure for items comprising a psychological measure generally requires empirical verification. Least-squares confirmatory factor strategies have involved (a) multiple group factor analysis and (b) targeted (Procrustean) rotations of arbitrary factor solutions. Alternatively, inferences of structure have been based simply on (c) product-moment correlations of item responses with total scale scores. All three methods were used in this study to verify empirically the assumed structures of data from four published psychological test batteries. Confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis was similarly evaluated in supplementary analyses. Because, among other reasons, solutions derived by multiple group analysis and item-total correlation analysis were generally most interpretable from a psychological perspective, it was concluded that their application to test construction is to be preferred over Procrustean or confirmatory maximum likelihood approaches.