Comparison of Factor Structures of the Long Form Five Factor Personality Inventory and Long Form HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to compare the factor structures of the long form of the HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised (HEXACO-PI-R) and the long form The Five Factor Personality Inventory (5FPI-LF), and to examine similarities and differences between these two inventories that have different factor structures. A total of 1005 people, 483 men and 522 women, between the ages of 18 and 68 participated in the study. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to predict the HEXACO-PI-R scores with the 5FPI-LF factor and sub-dimension scores, and the 5FPI-LF scores with the HEXACO-PI-R factor and sub-dimension scores. 5FPI-LF factor and sub-dimension scores predicted the HEXACO-PI-R factors, respectively, Honesty-Humility at the rates of 27%, 21%, Emotionality at the rates of 49%, 37%, Extraversion at the rates of 65%, 62%, Agreeableness at the rates of 55%, 51%, Conscientiousness at the rates of 65%, 57%, and Openness to Experience at the rates of 38%, 35%. HEXACO-PI-R factor and subdimension scores predicted the 5FPI-LF factors, respectively, Emotional Instability at the rates of 59%, 50%, Extraversion at the rates of 58%, 55%, Agreeableness at the rates of %63, 57%, Conscientiousness at the rates of 66%, 60%, and Openness to Experience at the rates of 48%, 43%. There was no difference observed between the average values obtained in predicting factor total scores of the two inventories with each others’ sub-dimension and factor total scores. In addition, the correlation coefficient of 0.98 was computed between the rates obtained in predicting the factors and the sub-dimensions.

Keywords

• Five Factor Personality Model
• Five Factor Personality Inventory
• HEXACO Personality Model
• HEXACO Personality Inventory

Uzun Form Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri ve Gözden Geçirilmiş Uzun Form Altı Faktörlü Kişilik Envanteri Faktör Yapılarının Karşılaştırması

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, Altı Faktörlü Kişilik Envanteri uzun formunun (HEXACO-KE-100-Tr) ve Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri (5FKE-UF) uzun formunun faktör yapılarının karşılaştırılması ve farklı faktör yapılarına sahip iki envanter arasındaki benzerlik ve farklılıkların incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmaya 18-68 yaşları arasında 483 erkek, 522 kadın olmak üzere toplam 1005 kişi katılmıştır. HEXACOKE-100-Tr faktör puanlarının 5FKE-UF faktör ve alt boyut toplam puanlarıyla, 5FKE-UF faktör puanlarının da HEXACO-KE-100-Tr faktör ve alt boyut toplam puanlarıyla yordanması için çoklu doğrusal regresyon analizi yapılmıştır. HEXACO-KE-100-Tr faktörleri, 5FKE-UF alt boyut ve faktör toplam puanlarıyla, sırasıyla Dürüstlük-Alçak Gönüllülük %27, %21, Duygusallık %49, %37, Dışadönüklük %65, %62, Uyumluluk %55, %51, Sorumluluk %65, %57 ve Deneyime açıklık %38, %35 oranında yordanmıştır. 5FKE-UF faktörleri, HEXACO-KE-100-Tr alt boyut ve faktör toplam puanlarıyla, sırasıyla Duygusal Tutarsızlık %59, %50, Dışadönüklük %58, %55, Yumuşakbaşlılık / Geçimlilik %63, %57, Öz-Denetim / Sorumluluk %66, %60 ve Gelişime Açıklık %48, %43 oranında yordanmıştır. Her iki envanterin faktörlerinin, diğer envanterin alt boyut toplam puanlarıyla yordanma oran ortalamaları arasında ve faktör toplam puanlarıyla yordanma oran ortalamaları arasında farklılık görülmemiştir. Ayrıca, alt boyutlarla yordanma oranları ile faktörlerle yordanma oranları arasında 0.98 düzeyinde bağıntı katsayısı hesaplanmıştır.

Keywords

• Beş Faktör Kişilik Modeli
• Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri
• Altı Faktörlü Kişilik Modeli
• Altı Faktörlü Kişilik Envanteri

References

1. Allport, G. W. ve Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47 (1), 1-171. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093360
2. Almagor, M., Tellegen, A. ve Waller, N. G. (1995). The Big Seven Model: A cross-cultural replication and further exploration of the basic dimensions of natural language trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (2), 300-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.300
3. Ashton, M. C. ve Lee, K. (2001). A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality, 15 (5), 327-353. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.417
4. Ashton, M. C. ve Lee, K. (2005). Honesty-Humility, the Big Five, and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 73 (5), 1321-1354. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00351.x
5. Ashton, M. C. ve Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11 (2), 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294907
6. Ashton, M. C. ve Lee, K. (2008a). The HEXACO model of personality structure and the importance of the H factor. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2 (5), 1952-1962. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00134.x
7. Ashton, M. C. ve Lee, K. (2008b). The prediction of Honesty-Humility-related criteria by the HEXACO and Five-Factor Models of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 42 (5), 1216-1228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.03.006
8. Ashton, M. C. ve Lee, K. (2009). An investigation of personality types within the HEXACO personality framework. Journal of Individual Differences, 30 (4), 181-187. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.30.4.181

9. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K. ve de Vries, R. E. (2014). The HEXACO honesty-humility, agreeableness, and emotionality factors a review of research and theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18 (2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314523838
10. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K. ve Goldberg, L. R. (2004). A hierarchical analysis of 1,710 English personality-descriptive adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (5), 707-721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.707
11. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., de Vries, R. E., Perugini, M., Gnisci, A. ve Sergi, I. (2006). The HEXACO model of personality structure and indigenous lexical personality dimensions in Italian, Dutch, and English. Journal of Research in Personality, 40 (6), 851-875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.06.003
12. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., di Blas, L., …Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 (2), 356-366. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.356
13. Barrett, P. T., Petrides, K. V., Eysenck, S. B. ve Eysenck, H. J. (1998). The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire: An examination of the factorial similarity of P, E, N, and L across 34 countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 25 (5), 805-819. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00026-9
14. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C. ve Comrey, A. L. (1992). Validation of the Comrey Personality Scales on an Italian sample. Journal of Research in Personality, 26 (1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(92)90056-A
15. Cattell, R. B. (1943). The description of personality: Basic traits resolved into clusters. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38 (4), 476-506. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054116
16. Costa, P. T. ve McCrae, R. R. (1995). Primary traits of Eysenck's PEN system: Three-and five-factor solutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (2), 308-317. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.308
17. Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the Five-Factor Model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41 (1), 417-440. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221
18. Eysenck, S. B., Eysenck, H. J. ve Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the Psychoticism Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 6 (1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(85)90026-1
19. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative "description of personality": The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (6), 1216-1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216
20. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4 (1), 26-42.
21. Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48 (1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.26
22. Hogan, R. ve Hogan, J. (2007). Hogan Personality Inventory manual (3rd Ed.). Tulsa, OK: Hogan Press.
23. Lee, K. ve Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39 (2), 329-358. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8
24. Lee, K. ve Ashton, M. C. (2008). The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. Journal of Personality, 76 (5), 1001-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00512.x
25. Lee, K. ve Ashton, M. C. (2014). The Dark Triad, the Big Five, and the HEXACO model. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 2-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.048
26. Lee, K., Ogunfowora, B. ve Ashton, M. C. (2005). Personality traits beyond the Big Five: Are they within the HEXACO space? Journal of Personality, 73 (5), 1437-1463. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00354.x
27. McCrae, R. R. ve Costa, P. T. (1985). Updating Norman's "adequate taxonomy": Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49 (3), 710-721.
28. McCrae, R. R. ve Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the Five-Factor Model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (1), 81-90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
29. Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66 (6), 574-583. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040291
30. Piedmont, R. L. ve Aycock, W. (2007). An historical analysis of the lexical emergence of the Big Five personality adjective descriptors. Personality and Individual Differences, 42 (6), 1059-1068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.015
31. Saucier, G. (2002). Gone too far-or not far enough? Comments on the article by Ashton and Lee (2001). European Journal of Personality, 16 (1), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.432
32. Simms, L. J., Williams, T. F. ve Nus, E. (2017). Assessment of the Five Factor Model. In T. A. Widiger (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 353-380). New York: Oxford University Press.
33. Somer, O., Korkmaz, M. ve Tatar, A. (2002). Beş faktör kişilik envanterinin geliştirilmesi-I: Ölçek ve alt ölçeklerin oluşturulması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17 (49), 21-33.
34. Somer, O., Korkmaz, M. ve Tatar, A. (2004). Kuramdan uygulamaya Beş Faktör Kişilik Modeli ve Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri (5FKE). İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi.
35. Tatar, A. (2016). Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanterinin Kısa Formunun Geliştirilmesi. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 17 (Ek.1), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.202977
36. Tatar, A. (2017). Büyük Beş-50 Kişilik Testinin Türkçeye çevirisi ve Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri Kısa Formu ile karşılaştırılması. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 18 (1), 51-61. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.220580
37. Tatar, A. (2018a). Çok Boyutlu Kişilik Envanterinin geliştirilmesi: Madde seçimi ve faktör yapısının oluşturulması. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 19 (Ek 2), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.1977
38. Tatar, A. (2018b). Gözden Geçirilmiş Uzun ve Kısa Form Altı Faktörlü Kişilik Envanteri (HEXACO-PI-R) Türkçe Formunun psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 19 (Özel sayı.1), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.283098
39. Thielmann, I., Akrami, N., Babarovic, T., Belloch, A., Bergh, R., Chirumbolo, A., ...Lee, K. (2020). The HEXACO-100 across 16 languages: A large-scale test of measurement invariance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 102 (5), 714-726. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2019.1614011
40. Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P. ve Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The Big Three, the Big Five, and the Alternative Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65 (4), 757-768. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.757