National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Baltimore, MD.
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2011 Feb;15(1):28-50. doi: 10.1177/1088868310366253. Epub 2010 Apr 30.
The authors examined data (N = 34,108) on the differential reliability and validity of facet scales from the NEO Inventories. They evaluated the extent to which (a) psychometric properties of facet scales are generalizable across ages, cultures, and methods of measurement, and, (b) validity criteria are associated with different forms of reliability. Composite estimates of facet scale stability, heritability, and cross-observer validity were broadly generalizable. Two estimates of retest reliability were independent predictors of the three validity criteria; none of three estimates of internal consistency was. Available evidence suggests the same pattern of results for other personality inventories. Internal consistency of scales can be useful as a check on data quality but appears to be of limited utility for evaluating the potential validity of developed scales, and it should not be used as a substitute for retest reliability. Further research on the nature and determinants of retest reliability is needed.
作者研究了 NEO 量表的方面量表的差异可靠性和有效性数据（N=34108）。他们评估了以下两个方面的程度：（a）方面量表的心理测量特性在年龄、文化和测量方法上是否具有普遍性，以及（b）有效性标准与不同形式的可靠性相关。方面量表稳定性、遗传性和跨观察者有效性的综合估计值具有广泛的普遍性。两个重测信度估计值是三个有效性标准的独立预测因子；内部一致性的三个估计值都不是。其他人格量表的研究结果也表明了相同的模式。量表的内部一致性可以作为数据质量的检查，但对于评估已开发量表的潜在有效性似乎没有多大用处，也不应该作为重测信度的替代品。需要进一步研究重测信度的性质和决定因素。
