Internal structure of BFI-10P and BFI-15P: a complementary study with CFA and ESEM approach

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español (España)) Versión anónima del manuscrito (Español (España)) Carta de presentación (Español (España))
Published: Jan 16, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v10.n3.21037
Keywords:
ESEM, confirmatory factor analysis, internal structure, big five model

Main Article Content

Sergio Alexis Dominguez-Lara
Universidad de San Martín de Porres. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Turismo, y Psicología
César Merino Soto
Universidad de San Martín de Porres. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Turismo, y Psicología

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to analyze the internal structure of two brief measures of personality, Big Five Inventory-15P and Big Five Inventory-10P, through SEM-CFA and ESEM, in 534 college students (77.5% females; Mage = 20.75 years) and 238 adults from general population (53.8% females; Mage = 31.75 years). The five factor model was evaluated with CFA and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM); non-substantive competitive models were also estimated. In addition, the empirical differentiation between factors was evaluated by comparing the squared root of the average variance extracted and the interfactorial correlation. The reliability was estimated by coefficients ? and H, and we analyzed the difference between ? and ?. The results showed that the five factors structure were better represented by the ESEM, with empirically differentiated factors. The coefficients ? and H reached acceptable magnitudes and, in some cases, they differ from ?.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Dominguez-Lara, S. A., & Merino Soto, C. (2019). Internal structure of BFI-10P and BFI-15P: a complementary study with CFA and ESEM approach. Argentinean Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 10(3), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v10.n3.21037
Issue
Vol. 10 No. 3 (2018): REVISTA ARGENTINA DE CIENCIAS DEL COMPORTAMIENTO
Section
Original Articles

La RACC aplicará la licencia internacional de atribuciones comunes creativas (Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Bajo esta licencia, se permite cualquier explotación de la obra, incluyendo la explotación con fines comerciales y la creación de obras derivadas, la distribución de las cuales también está permitida sin ninguna restricción. Esta licencia es una licencia libre según la Freedom Defined. La única condición es que siempre y en todos los casos se cite a los autores y a la fuente original de publicación (i.e., RACC). Esta licencia fue desarrollada para facilitar el acceso abierto, gratuito y libre a trabajos originales científicos y artísticos.

Author Biography

Sergio Alexis Dominguez-Lara, Universidad de San Martín de Porres. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Turismo, y Psicología

Instituto de Investigación de Psicología

References

Arias, V. B., Jenaro, C., & Ponce, F. P. (2018). Testing the generality of the general factor of personality: An exploratory bifactor approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 17–23. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.02.042

Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16(3), 397-438. doi:

1080/10705510903008204

Benet-Martinez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 729 – 750. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729

Bernstein, I. H., & Teng, G. (1989). Factoring items and factoring scales are different: Spurious evidence for multidimensionality due to item categorization. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 467-477. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.467

Booth, T., & Hughes, D. J. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling of personality data. Assessment, 21(3), 260-271. doi:

1177/1073191114528029

Carvalho, L., Nunes, M., Primi, R., & Nunes, C. (2012). Unfavorable evidence for personality assessment with a 10-item instrument. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 22(51), 63-71. doi: 10.1590/S0103-863X2012000100008

Chiorri, C., Marsh, H. W., Ubbiali, A., & Donati, D. (2016). Testing the factor structure and measurement invariance across gender of the Big Five Inventory through exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(1), 88 – 99. doi:

1080/00223891.2015.1035381.

Colegio de Psicólogos del Perú (2017). Código de Ética Profesional del Psicólogo Peruano. Recuperado de: http://www.cpsp.pe/aadmin/contenidos/marcolegal/codigo_de_etica_del_cpsp.pdf

Dominguez-Lara, S. (2018). Propuesta de puntos de corte para cargas factoriales: una perspectiva de fiabilidad de constructo. Enfermería Clínica, 28(6), 401-402. doi: 10.1016/j.enfcli.2018.06.002

Dominguez-Lara, S., & Merino-Soto, C. (2018a). Dos versiones breves del Big Five Inventory en universitarios peruanos: BFI-15p y BFI-10p. Liberabit, 24(1), 81-96. doi: 10.24265/liberabit.2018.v24n1.06

Dominguez-Lara, S., & Merino-Soto, C. (2018b). Evaluación de las malas especificaciones en modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento, 10(2), 19-24. doi: 10.30882/1852.4206.v10.n2.19595.

Dominguez-Lara, S., Merino-Soto, C., Zamudio, B., & Guevara-Cordero, C. (2018). Big Five Inventory en Universitarios Peruanos:

Resultados Preliminares de su Validación. Psykhe, 27(2), 1 – 12. doi: 10.7764/psykhe.27.2.1052

Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399 – 412. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12046

Fleming, J., & Merino, C. (2005). Medidas de simplicidad y ajuste factorial: Un enfoque para la construcción y revisión de escalas derivadas factorialmente. Revista de Psicología, 23(2), 252-266.

Gignac, G. E., Bates, T. C., & Jang, K. (2007). Implications relevant to CFA model misfit, reliability, and the Five Factor Model as measured by the NEO-FFI. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5), 1051–1062. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.024

Ginns, P., Martin, A. J., Liem, G. A. D., & Papworth, B. (2014). Structural and concurrent validity of the International English MiniMarkers in an adolescent sample: Exploring analytic approaches and implications for personality assessment. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 182–192. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.10.001

Gosling, S., Rentfrow, P., & Swann, W. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504-528. doi: 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1

Gunnarsson, M., Gustavsson, P., Holmberg, S., & Weibull, L. (2015). Statistical evaluation of six short Five Factor Model personality measures aiming for potential inclusion in the SOM Institute’s national surveys. Recuperado desde: https://som.gu.se/digitalAssets/1557/1557730_statistical-evaluation-of-six-short-five-factormodel-personality-measures.pdf

Hunsley, J., & Marsh, E. J. (2008). Developing criteria for evidence-based assessment: An introduction to assessment that work. En J.

Hunsley & E. J. Marsh (Eds.) A guide to assessments that work (pp. 3-14). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.

Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the big five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22(3), 471-491. doi:10.1037/a0019227

Marsh, H. W., Morin, A. J., Parker, P. D., & Kaur, G. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85-110. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153700

Marsh, H. W., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Morin, A. J. S., & Trautwein, U. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Application to students' evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling, 16(3), 439-476. doi: 10.1080/10705510903008220

McCrae, R., Zonderman, A., Costa, P., Bond, M., & Paunonen, S. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 552-566.

McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64–82. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64

Merino, C., Manrique, G., Angulo, M., & Isla, N. (2007). Indicador de Estrategias de Afrontamiento al Estrés: Exploración normativa y de su estructura factorial. Ansiedad y Estrés, 13(1), 25-40.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2015). Mplus User’s guide (7th ed.). Los Ángeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

Perera, H. N., McIlveen, P., Burton, L. J., & Corser, D. M. (2015). Beyond congruence measures for the evaluation of personality factor structure replicability: An exploratory structural equation modeling approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 84, 23-29. doi:

1016/j.paid.2015.01.004

Rammstedt, B. (2007). The 10-Item Big Five Inventory (BFI-10): Norm values and investigation of socio-demographic effects based on a German population representative sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 193-201. doi: 10.1027/1015- 5759.23.3.193

Rammstedt, B., Goldberg, L. R., & Borg, I. (2010). The measurement equivalence of Big-Five factor markers for persons with different levels of education. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.10.005

Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(1), 203 – 212. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001

Saris, W. E., Satorra, A., & van der Veld, W. M. (2009). Testing structural equation modeling or detection of misspecifications? Structural Equation Modeling, 16(4), 561 – 582. doi: 10.1080/10705510903203433

Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008). Why can't a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(1), 168 - 182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.168

West, S. G., Taylor, A. B., & Wu, W. (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. En R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling (pp. 209–231). New York, NY: Guilford.

Wolf, E., Harrington, K., Clark, S., & Miller, M. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equations modeling: an evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76(6), 913-934. doi: 10.1177/0013164413495237

Yoon, M., & Millsap, R. E. (2007). Detecting violations of factorial invariance using data-based specification searches: A Monte Carlo study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 435–463. doi: 10.1080/10705510701301677