Research Validity Scales for the NEO--PI--R: Development and Initial Validation

The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of research validity scales for use with the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992b). In study 1 we used the existing NEO-PI-R item pool to select items for three validity scales: positive presentation management,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of personality assessment 1997-02, Vol.68 (1), p.127-138
Hauptverfasser: Schinka, John A., Kinder, Bill N., Kremer, Thomas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 138
container_issue 1
container_start_page 127
container_title Journal of personality assessment
container_volume 68
creator Schinka, John A.
Kinder, Bill N.
Kremer, Thomas
description The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of research validity scales for use with the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992b). In study 1 we used the existing NEO-PI-R item pool to select items for three validity scales: positive presentation management, negative presentation management, and inconsistency. Several iterative item and scale analyses were conducted, using multiple criteria for item selection. These analyses resulted in 10-item scales. In Study 2, the internal consistency, interscale relationships, and normative characteristics were examined in a separate sample of working adults. In Study 3, the validity of the scales was examined by contrasting five sets of NEO-PI-R protocols: from a separate sample of working adults, from a sample of 100 NEO-PI-R protocols with randomly produced responses, and from three samples of undergraduates completing the NEO-PI-R under different instructional sets. Analyses revealed that both the research validity scales and the NEO-PI-R domain scales were sensitive to group differences. issues relating to the appropriate use of the scales are discussed.
doi_str_mv 10.1207/s15327752jpa6801_10
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pasca</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_2553494</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>57773351</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c482t-97a6f1c1c2ab188cdaa4f3a1fa5d988c7c6f28a9345a75e2af816f7496f4a9803</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEtLAzEQx4Motj4-gSB7EG_RPDabXQ-C1FdBrPi6LtNsQlOyuzXZKv32prTqRfQ0zPD7zww_hA4oOaGMyNNABWdSCjadQZYTWlKygfrLIV5ON1GfEMYwzwvaQzshTAkhlKZsG_VoxiWRkvfR6FEHDV5NkldwtrLdInlS4HRITOuTbqKT-6sRxg9DjB_Pkkv9rl07q3XTJdBUybCxnQW3ykJn22YPbRlwQe-v6y56ub56Htziu9HNcHBxh1Wasw4XEjJDFVUMxjTPVQWQGg7UgKiK2EuVGZZDwVMBUmgGJqeZkWmRmRSKnPBddLzaO_Pt21yHrqxtUNo5aHQ7D6UssniIpP-CQkYPXNAI8hWofBuC16aceVuDX0Sv5VJ4-YvwmDpcr5-Pa139ZNaGI3C0BiBEscZDo2z45pgQPC2Wb56vMNtE8TV8tN5VZQcL1_qvDP_rkU8Kzpww</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>57773351</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Research Validity Scales for the NEO--PI--R: Development and Initial Validation</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Schinka, John A. ; Kinder, Bill N. ; Kremer, Thomas</creator><creatorcontrib>Schinka, John A. ; Kinder, Bill N. ; Kremer, Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of research validity scales for use with the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa &amp; McCrae, 1992b). In study 1 we used the existing NEO-PI-R item pool to select items for three validity scales: positive presentation management, negative presentation management, and inconsistency. Several iterative item and scale analyses were conducted, using multiple criteria for item selection. These analyses resulted in 10-item scales. In Study 2, the internal consistency, interscale relationships, and normative characteristics were examined in a separate sample of working adults. In Study 3, the validity of the scales was examined by contrasting five sets of NEO-PI-R protocols: from a separate sample of working adults, from a sample of 100 NEO-PI-R protocols with randomly produced responses, and from three samples of undergraduates completing the NEO-PI-R under different instructional sets. Analyses revealed that both the research validity scales and the NEO-PI-R domain scales were sensitive to group differences. issues relating to the appropriate use of the scales are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-3891</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-7752</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6801_10</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16370773</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JNPABU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia, PA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Development ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; NEO Personality Inventory-Revised ; Personality. Affectivity ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Psychometrics ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Journal of personality assessment, 1997-02, Vol.68 (1), p.127-138</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 1997</rights><rights>1997 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c482t-97a6f1c1c2ab188cdaa4f3a1fa5d988c7c6f28a9345a75e2af816f7496f4a9803</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,30977</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=2553494$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16370773$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schinka, John A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kinder, Bill N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kremer, Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>Research Validity Scales for the NEO--PI--R: Development and Initial Validation</title><title>Journal of personality assessment</title><addtitle>J Pers Assess</addtitle><description>The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of research validity scales for use with the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa &amp; McCrae, 1992b). In study 1 we used the existing NEO-PI-R item pool to select items for three validity scales: positive presentation management, negative presentation management, and inconsistency. Several iterative item and scale analyses were conducted, using multiple criteria for item selection. These analyses resulted in 10-item scales. In Study 2, the internal consistency, interscale relationships, and normative characteristics were examined in a separate sample of working adults. In Study 3, the validity of the scales was examined by contrasting five sets of NEO-PI-R protocols: from a separate sample of working adults, from a sample of 100 NEO-PI-R protocols with randomly produced responses, and from three samples of undergraduates completing the NEO-PI-R under different instructional sets. Analyses revealed that both the research validity scales and the NEO-PI-R domain scales were sensitive to group differences. issues relating to the appropriate use of the scales are discussed.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Development</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>NEO Personality Inventory-Revised</subject><subject>Personality. Affectivity</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0022-3891</issn><issn>1532-7752</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEtLAzEQx4Motj4-gSB7EG_RPDabXQ-C1FdBrPi6LtNsQlOyuzXZKv32prTqRfQ0zPD7zww_hA4oOaGMyNNABWdSCjadQZYTWlKygfrLIV5ON1GfEMYwzwvaQzshTAkhlKZsG_VoxiWRkvfR6FEHDV5NkldwtrLdInlS4HRITOuTbqKT-6sRxg9DjB_Pkkv9rl07q3XTJdBUybCxnQW3ykJn22YPbRlwQe-v6y56ub56Htziu9HNcHBxh1Wasw4XEjJDFVUMxjTPVQWQGg7UgKiK2EuVGZZDwVMBUmgGJqeZkWmRmRSKnPBddLzaO_Pt21yHrqxtUNo5aHQ7D6UssniIpP-CQkYPXNAI8hWofBuC16aceVuDX0Sv5VJ4-YvwmDpcr5-Pa139ZNaGI3C0BiBEscZDo2z45pgQPC2Wb56vMNtE8TV8tN5VZQcL1_qvDP_rkU8Kzpww</recordid><startdate>19970201</startdate><enddate>19970201</enddate><creator>Schinka, John A.</creator><creator>Kinder, Bill N.</creator><creator>Kremer, Thomas</creator><general>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19970201</creationdate><title>Research Validity Scales for the NEO--PI--R: Development and Initial Validation</title><author>Schinka, John A. ; Kinder, Bill N. ; Kremer, Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c482t-97a6f1c1c2ab188cdaa4f3a1fa5d988c7c6f28a9345a75e2af816f7496f4a9803</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Development</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>NEO Personality Inventory-Revised</topic><topic>Personality. Affectivity</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schinka, John A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kinder, Bill N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kremer, Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of personality assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schinka, John A.</au><au>Kinder, Bill N.</au><au>Kremer, Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Research Validity Scales for the NEO--PI--R: Development and Initial Validation</atitle><jtitle>Journal of personality assessment</jtitle><addtitle>J Pers Assess</addtitle><date>1997-02-01</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>68</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>127</spage><epage>138</epage><pages>127-138</pages><issn>0022-3891</issn><eissn>1532-7752</eissn><coden>JNPABU</coden><abstract>The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of research validity scales for use with the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa &amp; McCrae, 1992b). In study 1 we used the existing NEO-PI-R item pool to select items for three validity scales: positive presentation management, negative presentation management, and inconsistency. Several iterative item and scale analyses were conducted, using multiple criteria for item selection. These analyses resulted in 10-item scales. In Study 2, the internal consistency, interscale relationships, and normative characteristics were examined in a separate sample of working adults. In Study 3, the validity of the scales was examined by contrasting five sets of NEO-PI-R protocols: from a separate sample of working adults, from a sample of 100 NEO-PI-R protocols with randomly produced responses, and from three samples of undergraduates completing the NEO-PI-R under different instructional sets. Analyses revealed that both the research validity scales and the NEO-PI-R domain scales were sensitive to group differences. issues relating to the appropriate use of the scales are discussed.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia, PA</cop><pub>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</pub><pmid>16370773</pmid><doi>10.1207/s15327752jpa6801_10</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-3891
ispartof Journal of personality assessment, 1997-02, Vol.68 (1), p.127-138
issn 0022-3891
1532-7752
language eng
recordid cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_2553494
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); EBSCOhost Business Source Complete
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Development
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
NEO Personality Inventory-Revised
Personality. Affectivity
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Psychometrics
Validity
title Research Validity Scales for the NEO--PI--R: Development and Initial Validation
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T10%3A48%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pasca&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Research%20Validity%20Scales%20for%20the%20NEO--PI--R:%20Development%20and%20Initial%20Validation&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20personality%20assessment&rft.au=Schinka,%20John%20A.&rft.date=1997-02-01&rft.volume=68&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=127&rft.epage=138&rft.pages=127-138&rft.issn=0022-3891&rft.eissn=1532-7752&rft.coden=JNPABU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1207/s15327752jpa6801_10&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pasca%3E57773351%3C/proquest_pasca%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=57773351&rft_id=info:pmid/16370773&rfr_iscdi=true