1 / 32

Improving the Measurement of the “Big Five” Personality Traits in a Brief Survey Instrument

Improving the Measurement of the “Big Five” Personality Traits in a Brief Survey Instrument. Matthew DeBell Ted Brader Catherine Wilson Simon Jackman Stanford University University of Michigan Stanford University Stanford University. The Big Five. C onscientiousness A greeableness

feleti
Download Presentation

Improving the Measurement of the “Big Five” Personality Traits in a Brief Survey Instrument

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving the Measurement of the “Big Five” Personality Traits in a Brief Survey Instrument Matthew DeBell Ted Brader Catherine Wilson Simon Jackman Stanford University University of Michigan Stanford University Stanford University

  2. The Big Five • Conscientiousness • Agreeableness • Neuroticism • Openness • Extraversion

  3. Standard Measures are Really Long

  4. Ten Item Personality Inventory(Gosling et al. 2003) Here are a number of personality traits that may or may not apply to you. Please write a number next to each statement to indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with that statement. You should rate the extent to which the pair of traits applies to you, even if one characteristic applies more strongly than the other. 1 = Disagree strongly 2 = Disagree moderately 3 = Disagree a little 4 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Agree a little 6 = Agree moderately 7 = Agree strongly I see myself as: 1. _____ Extraverted, enthusiastic. 2. _____ Critical, quarrelsome. 3. _____ Dependable, self-disciplined. 4. _____ Anxious, easily upset. 5. _____ Open to new experiences, complex. 6. _____ Reserved, quiet. 7. _____ Sympathetic, warm. 8. _____ Disorganized, careless. 9. _____ Calm, emotionally stable. 10. _____ Conventional, uncreative.

  5. TIPI • It’s short (hooray for brevity) • Psychometrically “acceptable” • Widely used

  6. Room for improvement • Response labels (numbers instead of words) • Agree-disagree format (see Saris et al. 2010) • All on one page (satisficing) • Vocabulary: (extraversion!?) • Double barreled (critical, quarrelsome)

  7. TIPI, Revised • We • Changed the response labels • Replaced the agree-disagree format • Asked one question at a time • Did not (yet) • Fix the vocabulary • Fix the double-barreled questions

  8. TIPI, Revised We’re interested in how you see yourself. Please mark how well the following pair of words describes you, even if one word describes you better than the other. Extraverted, enthusiastic describes me…

  9. Survey experiment • Random assignment to standard or revised TIPI • ANES EGSS-4 (February 2012) Online, KnowledgePanel n = 1,253 Details at ANES website: electionstudies.org

  10. Results • Completion time • Item nonresponse • Paired item reliability • Construct validity (expected correlations)

  11. Completion time • Identical: 87 seconds each

  12. Item nonresponse rates • Original: 1.7 percent (12 cases) • Revised: 0.3 percent (2 cases)

  13. Paired item reliability (Pearson’s r)

  14. Paired item reliability (Pearson’s r)

  15. Paired item reliability (Pearson’s r)

  16. Paired item reliability (Pearson’s r)

  17. Paired item reliability (Pearson’s r)

  18. Agreeableness • Original: I see myself as Critical, quarrelsome Sympathetic, warm • Revised: Critical, quarrelsome describes me… Sympathetic, warm describes me…

  19. Construct validity

  20. Construct validity

  21. Construct validity

  22. Construct validity

  23. Construct validity

  24. Construct validity

  25. Construct validity

  26. Final score

  27. Final score

  28. Final score

  29. Final score

  30. Final score

  31. Conclusions • (Agreeableness and extraversion not tested) • Costless improvements to questionnaire design improved item response rates, reliability, and validity • Valid measurement of Big Five is available from 10 questions • Room for more improvement by fixing vocabulary and double-barreled questions

  32. Thank youImproving the Measurement of the “Big Five” Personality Traits in a Brief Survey Instrument Matthew DeBell Ted Brader Catherine Wilson Simon Jackman Stanford University University of Michigan Stanford University Stanford University

More Related