University College London, London, UK.
Assessment. 2013 Feb;20(1):14-23. doi: 10.1177/1073191112448213. Epub 2012 Jul 26.
This study presents new analyses of NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) responses collected from a large British sample in a high-stakes setting. The authors show the appropriateness of the five-factor model underpinning these responses in a variety of new ways. Using the recently developed exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) technique, the authors show that model fits improve markedly over conventional confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) of the same data set, but that (a) factor interpretations do not change under ESEM analyses, (b) ESEM factor scores, just like CFA factors scores, correlate at near unity with sums of observed scores, (c) NEO-PI-R facets under ESEM analyses are invariant across gender, and (d) ESEM highlights the inappropriateness of alpha and beta as a higher order representation of NEO-PI-R facets, whereas a CFA approach might lead researchers to believe in the appropriateness of these higher order factors. These results, coupled with the existing validity evidence for the NEO-PI-R, suggest that the five-factor structure is the most parsimonious structure for summarizing NEO-PI-R responses from high-stakes settings in the United Kingdom.
本研究对在高风险环境中从英国大样本中收集到的 NEO 人格量表修订版(NEO-PI-R)反应进行了新的分析。作者以各种新的方式展示了这些反应所基于的五因素模型的适当性。使用最近开发的探索性结构方程建模(ESEM)技术,作者表明,与相同数据集的传统验证性因子分析(CFA)相比,模型拟合明显改善,但 (a) ESEM 分析中的因子解释并没有改变,(b) ESEM 因子分数与观察分数的总和高度相关,与 CFA 因子分数一样,(c) 在 ESEM 分析中,NEO-PI-R 方面在性别之间是不变的,(d) ESEM 突出了 alpha 和 beta 作为 NEO-PI-R 方面的高阶表示的不适当性,而 CFA 方法可能会导致研究人员相信这些高阶因素的适当性。这些结果,加上 NEO-PI-R 的现有有效性证据,表明五因素结构是总结英国高风险环境中 NEO-PI-R 反应的最简约结构。