Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.

Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.

En los últimos años se han desarrollado medidas breves de los cinco factores de personalidad, sin embargo, la ganancia práctica de tiempo provista por las formas breves puede implicar propiedades psicométricas más débiles de los instrumentos. En la construcción de escalas breves, para mantener propiedades psicométricas adecuadas se debe emplear criterios teóricos y empíricos en la selección de los ítems y minimizar los sesgos de respuesta, como el de la aquiescencia (AC), que hace referencia a la tendencia de las personas a estar de acuerdo con afirmaciones positivas independientemente del contenido de la afirmación. Teniendo esto en cuenta, el objetivo principal del presente estudio fue desarrollar un instrumento breve (30 ítems), de domin... Ver más

Guardado en:

Acta Colombiana de Psicología

0123-9155

1909-9711

Azpilicueta, Ana Estefanía

Korzeniowski, Celina Graciela

Lorenzo-Seva, Urbano

Cupani, Marcos

UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE COLOMBIA

10.14718/ACP.2019.22.1.12

22

2019-01-30

248

260

Colombia

Inventário

Cinco grandes fatores da personalidade

Viés de resposta.

Aquiescência

Ipip

Cinco grandes factores de la personalidad

Sesgo de respuesta.

Aquiescencia

Ipip

Inventario

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Marcos Cupani - 2019

id 77bf62751efbae17c08eaf2bd2e802df
record_format ojs
spelling Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
Hofstee, W. K. B., ten Berge, J. M. F., & Hendriks, A.A.J. (1998). How to score questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 897-909.
McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer's perspective: data from 50 cultures. Journal of personality and social psychology, 88(3), 547.
McCrae, R. R., Costa Jr, P. T., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., HRebícková, M., Avia, M. D., ... & Saunders, P. R. (2000). Nature over nurture: Temperament, personality, and life span development. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(1), 173.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2013). Factor 9.2: A comprehensive program for fitting exploratory and semi-confirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(2), 497-498.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2009). Acquiescent responding in partially balanced multidimensional scales. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 62(2), 319-326.
Ledesma, R. D., Sánchez, R., & Díaz-Lázaro, C. M. (2011). Adjective checklist to assess the big five personality factors in the Argentine population. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(1), 46-55.
Langford, P. H. (2003). A one-minute measure of the Big Five? Evaluating and abridging Shafer’s (1999a) Big Five markers. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(5), 1127-1140.
Kruyen, P. M., Emons, W. H. M., & Sijtsma, K. (2013). On the shortcomings of shortened tests: A literature review. International Journal of Testing, 13, 223-2484.
Kumar, R. (2005). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.
Johnson, T., Kulesa, P., Cho, Y. I., & Shavitt, S. (2005). The relationship between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 264-277.
Javeline, D. (1999). Response effects in polite cultures: a test of acquiescence in Kazakhstan. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63(1), 1-28.
Grucza, R. A., & Goldberg, L R. (2007). The Comparative Validity of 11 Modern Personality Inventories: Predictions of Behavioral Acts, Informant Reports, and Clinical Indicators. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89(2), 167-18
Milojev, P., Osborne, D., Greaves, L.M., Barlow, F.K. & Sibley, C.G. (2013). The Mini-IPIP6: Tiny yet highly stable markers of Big Six personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 936-944. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.004
Gross, M.N., Zalazar Jaime, M.F., Piccolo, N.V., & Cupani, M. (2012). Nuevos estudios de validación del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-FFM. X Congreso Latinoamericano de Sociedades de Estadística, Córdoba, Argentina.
Guenole, N., & Chernyshenko, O. (2005). The suitability of Goldberg's Big-Five IPIP personality markers in New Zealand: A dimensionality, bias, and criterion validity evaluation. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 34, 86-96.
Gow, A.J., Whiteman, M.C., Pattie, A., & Deary, I.J.(2005). Goldberg's “IPIP” Big-Five factor markers: Internal consistency and concurrent validation in Scotland. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 317-329.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. Jr., (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528.
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., et al. (2005). The international personality item pool and the future of public domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality psychology in Europe, 7(1), 7-28.
Ferrando, P. J., Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Chico, E. (2009). A general factor-analytic procedure for assessing response bias in questionnaire measures. Structural Equation Modeling, 16(2), 364-381.
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2013). Unrestricted item factor analysis and some relations with item response theory. Recuperado de http://psico.fcep.urv.es/utilitats/factor/ [ Links].
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo Seva, U. (2000). Unrestricted versus restricted factor analysis of multidimensional test items: Some aspects of the problem and some suggestions. Psicológica, 21(2), 301-323.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149-1160.
Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R.E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the big five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192-203.
Meisenberg, G., & Williams, A. (2008). Are acquiescent and extreme response styles related to low intelligence and education Personality and Individual Differences, 44(7), 1539-1550.
Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1990). BILOG 3: Ítem analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models. Scientific Software International.
Cupani, M. & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2016). The development of an alternative IPIP inventory measuring the Big-Five factor markers in an Argentine sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 40-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.11.051
The Big Five and adolescent adjustment: An empirical test across six cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 234-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.049
Text
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Zheng, L., Goldberg, L.R., Zheng, Y., Zhao, Y., Tang, Y., & Liu, L. (2008). Reliability and concurrent validation of the IPIP Big-Five Factor markers in China: Consistencies in factor structure between internet-obtained heterosexual and homosexual samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(7), 649-654. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.009.
Vigil-Colet, A., Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Morales-Vives, F. (2015). The effects of ageing on self-reported aggression measures are partly explained by response bias. Psicothema, 27(3), 209-215.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education. Vazsonyi, A. T., Ksinan, A. Mikuška, J. & Jiskrova, G. (2015).
Mlacic´, B., & Goldberg, L.R. (2007). An analysis of a crosscultural personality inventory: The IPIP Big-Five factor markers in Croatia. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88, 168-177.
Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2003). Development of personality in early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(5), 1041.
Soto, C.J., John, O.P., Gosling, S.D., & Potter, J. (2008). The developmental psychometrics of Big Five self-reports: Acquiescence, factor structure, coherence, and differentiation from ages 10 to 20. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94,718-737.
Soto, C. J. & John. O.P. (2017). Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory’2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS. Journal of Research in Personality, 68, 69-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.02.004
Shrive, F. M., Stuart, H., Quan, H., & Ghali, W. A. (2006). Dealing with missing data in a multi-question depression scale: a comparison of imputation methods. BMC medical research methodology, 6(1), 57.
Sibley, C. G. (2012). The Mini-IPIP6: Item Response Theory analysis of a short measure of the big-six factors of personality in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 41(3), 21-31.
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (2002). Assessing the big five: Applications of 10 psychometric criteria to the development of marker scales. B. De Raad, M. Perugini (Eds.), Big five assessment, Hogrefe & Huber, Seattle, WA (2002), pp. 29-58.
Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (1984). Components of depressed mood in married men and women the center for epidemiologic studies' depression scale. American Journal of Epidemiology, 119(6), 997-1004.
Rammstedt, B., Kemper, C. J., & Borg, I. (2013).Correcting Big Five personality measurements for acquiescence: An 18-country cross-cultural study. European Journal of Personality, 27(1), 71-81.
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, 53-61.
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.
Montero, I., & León, O. G. (2002). Clasificación y descripción de las metodologías de investigación en Psicología. International journal of clinical and health psychology, 2(3), 503-508
Cupani, M., Pilatti, A., Urrizaga, A., Chincolla, A., & de Minzi, M. C. R. (2014). Inventario de Personalidad IPIP-NEO: estudios preliminares de adaptación al español en estudiantes argentinos. Revista Mexicana de Investigación en Psicología, 6(1), 55-73.
De Vries, R.E. (2013). The 24-item Brief HEXACO Inventory (BHI). Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 871-880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.003
Cronbach, L.J. (1942). Studies of acquiescence as a factor in the true/false test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 33, 401-415. Cupani, M. (2009). El Cuestionario de Personalidad IPIP-FFM: Resultados preliminares de una adaptación en una muestra de preadolescentes argentinos. Perspectivas en Psicología, 6, 51-58.
Inventário
Credé, M., Harms, P., Niehorster, S., & Gaye-Valentine, A. (2012). An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 874-888.
Núm. 1 , Año 2019 :ACTA COLOMBIANA DE PSICOLOGÏA
1
22
Cinco grandes fatores da personalidade
Viés de resposta.
Aquiescência
Ipip
Cinco grandes factores de la personalidad
text/html
Sesgo de respuesta.
Aquiescencia
Ipip
Inventario
Azpilicueta, Ana Estefanía
Korzeniowski, Celina Graciela
Lorenzo-Seva, Urbano
Cupani, Marcos
En los últimos años se han desarrollado medidas breves de los cinco factores de personalidad, sin embargo, la ganancia práctica de tiempo provista por las formas breves puede implicar propiedades psicométricas más débiles de los instrumentos. En la construcción de escalas breves, para mantener propiedades psicométricas adecuadas se debe emplear criterios teóricos y empíricos en la selección de los ítems y minimizar los sesgos de respuesta, como el de la aquiescencia (AC), que hace referencia a la tendencia de las personas a estar de acuerdo con afirmaciones positivas independientemente del contenido de la afirmación. Teniendo esto en cuenta, el objetivo principal del presente estudio fue desarrollar un instrumento breve (30 ítems), de dominio público, para medir los cinco factores de personalidad en población latina, controlando el sesgo de respuesta AC. La muestra estuvo compuesta por 910 participantes, 543 de sexo femenino (59.6 %) y 367 de sexo masculino (40.3 %), con edades comprendidas entre los 15 y los 80 años (M = 29.52; DT = 12.25), pertenecientes a la ciudad de Córdoba, Argentina. Para el proceso de validación se propuso realizar un estudio de convergencia con las cinco escalas del NEO-FFI, un análisis de diferencia de grupos según el sexo y la edad de los participantes, y un estudio de validez predictiva respecto a algunas actividades recreacionales (uso de drogas,irresponsabilidad, amistad, erudición/creatividad y comunicación). Los resultados indican que el IPIP-R-30 presenta una estructura factorial de cinco factores, índices de confiabilidad adecuados tanto de consistencia interna como de estabilidad temporal, evidencia de validez convergente con las escalas del NEO-FFI, evidencia de diferencia de grupos según sexo y edad, y validez predictiva de la frecuencia de diferentes categorías de actividades específicas. De esta manera, se puede concluir que el IPIP-R-30 constituye una herramienta válida de evaluación de los rasgos de personalidad en nuestro medio, con puntuaciones libres del sesgo de AC.  
application/pdf
Artículo de revista
application/pdf
Español
Costa, P., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). NEO PI-R manual profesional. Odessa, FL: Evaluación Psicológica Resources, Inc
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological bulletin, 112(1), 155-159
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Mainly Openness: The relationship between the Big Five personality traits and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 524-529.
Burisch, M. (1984). Approaches to personality inventory construction: A comparison of merits. American Psychologist, 39(3), 214.
Baldasaro, R. E., Shanahan, M. J., Bauer, D. J. (2013). Psychometric Properties of the Mini-IPIP in a Large, Nationally Representative Sample of Young Adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(1), 74-84. Doi: 10.1080/00223891.2012.700466
text/html
Marcos Cupani - 2019
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Aronson, Z. H., Reilly, R. R., & Lynn, G. S. (2006). The impact of leader personality on new product development teamwork and performance: The moderating role of uncertainty. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 23(3), 221-247.
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/2009
Acta Colombiana de Psicología
application/xml
Universidad Católica de Colombia
Publication
Ipip
In recent years, brief measures of the five personality factors have been developed; however, the practical gain of time provided by the brief versions may imply weaker psychometric properties of the instruments. To maintain adequate psychometric properties in the construction of brief scales, theoretical and empirical criteria should be used in the selection of items, and response biases such as acquiescence (AC) should be minimized. The term AC refers to people's tendency to agree with positive statements, regardless of their content. The main purpose of the present study is to develop a brief public domain instrument (30 items) to measure the five personality factors in the Latin American population, controlling the AC response bias. The sample consisted of 910 participants, 543 women (59.6 %) and 367 men (40.3 %), age range 15-80 years (M = 29.52; DT = 12.25) from the city of Córdoba, Argentina. For the validation process, a convergence study with the five NEO-FFI scales, an analysis of group differences according to the participants sex and age, and a predictive validity study regarding recreational activities (drug use, irresponsibility, friendship, erudition/creativity, and communication) were performed. The results indicate that the IPIP-R-30 presents a five-factor factorial structure, adequate reliability indices of both internal consistency and temporal stability, evidence of convergent validity with the NEO-FFI scales, evidence of group differences as regards sex and age, and frequency predictive validity of different categories of specific activities. Thus, it can be concluded that the IPP-R-30 is a valid tool for assessing personality factors in our environment, with scores free of AC bias.
Journal article
Big five personality factors
Response bias.
Development of a brief version of the personality inventory IPIP-Revised : control of the acquiescence response bias.
Inventory
Acquiescence
0123-9155
https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2019.22.1.12
2019-01-30
2019-01-30T10:21:14Z
2019-01-30T10:21:14Z
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/2472
248
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/2517
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/pdf1..11IN
10.14718/ACP.2019.22.1.12
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/pdf1.11
1909-9711
260
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/2516
institution UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE COLOMBIA
thumbnail https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADCATOLICADECOLOMBIA/logo.png
country_str Colombia
collection Acta Colombiana de Psicología
title Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
spellingShingle Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
Azpilicueta, Ana Estefanía
Korzeniowski, Celina Graciela
Lorenzo-Seva, Urbano
Cupani, Marcos
Inventário
Cinco grandes fatores da personalidade
Viés de resposta.
Aquiescência
Ipip
Cinco grandes factores de la personalidad
Sesgo de respuesta.
Aquiescencia
Ipip
Inventario
Ipip
Big five personality factors
Response bias.
Inventory
Acquiescence
title_short Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
title_full Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
title_fullStr Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
title_full_unstemmed Elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-Revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
title_sort elaboración de la versión breve del cuestionario de personalidad ipip-revisado : control del sesgo de aquiescencia.
title_eng Development of a brief version of the personality inventory IPIP-Revised : control of the acquiescence response bias.
description En los últimos años se han desarrollado medidas breves de los cinco factores de personalidad, sin embargo, la ganancia práctica de tiempo provista por las formas breves puede implicar propiedades psicométricas más débiles de los instrumentos. En la construcción de escalas breves, para mantener propiedades psicométricas adecuadas se debe emplear criterios teóricos y empíricos en la selección de los ítems y minimizar los sesgos de respuesta, como el de la aquiescencia (AC), que hace referencia a la tendencia de las personas a estar de acuerdo con afirmaciones positivas independientemente del contenido de la afirmación. Teniendo esto en cuenta, el objetivo principal del presente estudio fue desarrollar un instrumento breve (30 ítems), de dominio público, para medir los cinco factores de personalidad en población latina, controlando el sesgo de respuesta AC. La muestra estuvo compuesta por 910 participantes, 543 de sexo femenino (59.6 %) y 367 de sexo masculino (40.3 %), con edades comprendidas entre los 15 y los 80 años (M = 29.52; DT = 12.25), pertenecientes a la ciudad de Córdoba, Argentina. Para el proceso de validación se propuso realizar un estudio de convergencia con las cinco escalas del NEO-FFI, un análisis de diferencia de grupos según el sexo y la edad de los participantes, y un estudio de validez predictiva respecto a algunas actividades recreacionales (uso de drogas,irresponsabilidad, amistad, erudición/creatividad y comunicación). Los resultados indican que el IPIP-R-30 presenta una estructura factorial de cinco factores, índices de confiabilidad adecuados tanto de consistencia interna como de estabilidad temporal, evidencia de validez convergente con las escalas del NEO-FFI, evidencia de diferencia de grupos según sexo y edad, y validez predictiva de la frecuencia de diferentes categorías de actividades específicas. De esta manera, se puede concluir que el IPIP-R-30 constituye una herramienta válida de evaluación de los rasgos de personalidad en nuestro medio, con puntuaciones libres del sesgo de AC.  
description_eng In recent years, brief measures of the five personality factors have been developed; however, the practical gain of time provided by the brief versions may imply weaker psychometric properties of the instruments. To maintain adequate psychometric properties in the construction of brief scales, theoretical and empirical criteria should be used in the selection of items, and response biases such as acquiescence (AC) should be minimized. The term AC refers to people's tendency to agree with positive statements, regardless of their content. The main purpose of the present study is to develop a brief public domain instrument (30 items) to measure the five personality factors in the Latin American population, controlling the AC response bias. The sample consisted of 910 participants, 543 women (59.6 %) and 367 men (40.3 %), age range 15-80 years (M = 29.52; DT = 12.25) from the city of Córdoba, Argentina. For the validation process, a convergence study with the five NEO-FFI scales, an analysis of group differences according to the participants sex and age, and a predictive validity study regarding recreational activities (drug use, irresponsibility, friendship, erudition/creativity, and communication) were performed. The results indicate that the IPIP-R-30 presents a five-factor factorial structure, adequate reliability indices of both internal consistency and temporal stability, evidence of convergent validity with the NEO-FFI scales, evidence of group differences as regards sex and age, and frequency predictive validity of different categories of specific activities. Thus, it can be concluded that the IPP-R-30 is a valid tool for assessing personality factors in our environment, with scores free of AC bias.
author Azpilicueta, Ana Estefanía
Korzeniowski, Celina Graciela
Lorenzo-Seva, Urbano
Cupani, Marcos
author_facet Azpilicueta, Ana Estefanía
Korzeniowski, Celina Graciela
Lorenzo-Seva, Urbano
Cupani, Marcos
topicspa_str_mv Inventário
Cinco grandes fatores da personalidade
Viés de resposta.
Aquiescência
Ipip
Cinco grandes factores de la personalidad
Sesgo de respuesta.
Aquiescencia
Ipip
Inventario
topic Inventário
Cinco grandes fatores da personalidade
Viés de resposta.
Aquiescência
Ipip
Cinco grandes factores de la personalidad
Sesgo de respuesta.
Aquiescencia
Ipip
Inventario
Ipip
Big five personality factors
Response bias.
Inventory
Acquiescence
topic_facet Inventário
Cinco grandes fatores da personalidade
Viés de resposta.
Aquiescência
Ipip
Cinco grandes factores de la personalidad
Sesgo de respuesta.
Aquiescencia
Ipip
Inventario
Ipip
Big five personality factors
Response bias.
Inventory
Acquiescence
citationvolume 22
citationissue 1
citationedition Núm. 1 , Año 2019 :ACTA COLOMBIANA DE PSICOLOGÏA
publisher Universidad Católica de Colombia
ispartofjournal Acta Colombiana de Psicología
source https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/2009
language Español
format Article
rights http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Marcos Cupani - 2019
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
references Hofstee, W. K. B., ten Berge, J. M. F., & Hendriks, A.A.J. (1998). How to score questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 897-909.
McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer's perspective: data from 50 cultures. Journal of personality and social psychology, 88(3), 547.
McCrae, R. R., Costa Jr, P. T., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., HRebícková, M., Avia, M. D., ... & Saunders, P. R. (2000). Nature over nurture: Temperament, personality, and life span development. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(1), 173.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2013). Factor 9.2: A comprehensive program for fitting exploratory and semi-confirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(2), 497-498.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2009). Acquiescent responding in partially balanced multidimensional scales. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 62(2), 319-326.
Ledesma, R. D., Sánchez, R., & Díaz-Lázaro, C. M. (2011). Adjective checklist to assess the big five personality factors in the Argentine population. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(1), 46-55.
Langford, P. H. (2003). A one-minute measure of the Big Five? Evaluating and abridging Shafer’s (1999a) Big Five markers. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(5), 1127-1140.
Kruyen, P. M., Emons, W. H. M., & Sijtsma, K. (2013). On the shortcomings of shortened tests: A literature review. International Journal of Testing, 13, 223-2484.
Kumar, R. (2005). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.
Johnson, T., Kulesa, P., Cho, Y. I., & Shavitt, S. (2005). The relationship between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 264-277.
Javeline, D. (1999). Response effects in polite cultures: a test of acquiescence in Kazakhstan. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63(1), 1-28.
Grucza, R. A., & Goldberg, L R. (2007). The Comparative Validity of 11 Modern Personality Inventories: Predictions of Behavioral Acts, Informant Reports, and Clinical Indicators. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89(2), 167-18
Milojev, P., Osborne, D., Greaves, L.M., Barlow, F.K. & Sibley, C.G. (2013). The Mini-IPIP6: Tiny yet highly stable markers of Big Six personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 936-944. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.004
Gross, M.N., Zalazar Jaime, M.F., Piccolo, N.V., & Cupani, M. (2012). Nuevos estudios de validación del cuestionario de personalidad IPIP-FFM. X Congreso Latinoamericano de Sociedades de Estadística, Córdoba, Argentina.
Guenole, N., & Chernyshenko, O. (2005). The suitability of Goldberg's Big-Five IPIP personality markers in New Zealand: A dimensionality, bias, and criterion validity evaluation. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 34, 86-96.
Gow, A.J., Whiteman, M.C., Pattie, A., & Deary, I.J.(2005). Goldberg's “IPIP” Big-Five factor markers: Internal consistency and concurrent validation in Scotland. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 317-329.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. Jr., (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528.
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., et al. (2005). The international personality item pool and the future of public domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality psychology in Europe, 7(1), 7-28.
Ferrando, P. J., Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Chico, E. (2009). A general factor-analytic procedure for assessing response bias in questionnaire measures. Structural Equation Modeling, 16(2), 364-381.
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2013). Unrestricted item factor analysis and some relations with item response theory. Recuperado de http://psico.fcep.urv.es/utilitats/factor/ [ Links].
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo Seva, U. (2000). Unrestricted versus restricted factor analysis of multidimensional test items: Some aspects of the problem and some suggestions. Psicológica, 21(2), 301-323.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149-1160.
Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R.E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the big five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192-203.
Meisenberg, G., & Williams, A. (2008). Are acquiescent and extreme response styles related to low intelligence and education Personality and Individual Differences, 44(7), 1539-1550.
Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1990). BILOG 3: Ítem analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models. Scientific Software International.
Cupani, M. & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2016). The development of an alternative IPIP inventory measuring the Big-Five factor markers in an Argentine sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 40-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.11.051
The Big Five and adolescent adjustment: An empirical test across six cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 234-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.049
Zheng, L., Goldberg, L.R., Zheng, Y., Zhao, Y., Tang, Y., & Liu, L. (2008). Reliability and concurrent validation of the IPIP Big-Five Factor markers in China: Consistencies in factor structure between internet-obtained heterosexual and homosexual samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(7), 649-654. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.009.
Vigil-Colet, A., Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Morales-Vives, F. (2015). The effects of ageing on self-reported aggression measures are partly explained by response bias. Psicothema, 27(3), 209-215.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education. Vazsonyi, A. T., Ksinan, A. Mikuška, J. & Jiskrova, G. (2015).
Mlacic´, B., & Goldberg, L.R. (2007). An analysis of a crosscultural personality inventory: The IPIP Big-Five factor markers in Croatia. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88, 168-177.
Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2003). Development of personality in early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(5), 1041.
Soto, C.J., John, O.P., Gosling, S.D., & Potter, J. (2008). The developmental psychometrics of Big Five self-reports: Acquiescence, factor structure, coherence, and differentiation from ages 10 to 20. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94,718-737.
Soto, C. J. & John. O.P. (2017). Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory’2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS. Journal of Research in Personality, 68, 69-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.02.004
Shrive, F. M., Stuart, H., Quan, H., & Ghali, W. A. (2006). Dealing with missing data in a multi-question depression scale: a comparison of imputation methods. BMC medical research methodology, 6(1), 57.
Sibley, C. G. (2012). The Mini-IPIP6: Item Response Theory analysis of a short measure of the big-six factors of personality in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 41(3), 21-31.
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (2002). Assessing the big five: Applications of 10 psychometric criteria to the development of marker scales. B. De Raad, M. Perugini (Eds.), Big five assessment, Hogrefe & Huber, Seattle, WA (2002), pp. 29-58.
Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (1984). Components of depressed mood in married men and women the center for epidemiologic studies' depression scale. American Journal of Epidemiology, 119(6), 997-1004.
Rammstedt, B., Kemper, C. J., & Borg, I. (2013).Correcting Big Five personality measurements for acquiescence: An 18-country cross-cultural study. European Journal of Personality, 27(1), 71-81.
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, 53-61.
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.
Montero, I., & León, O. G. (2002). Clasificación y descripción de las metodologías de investigación en Psicología. International journal of clinical and health psychology, 2(3), 503-508
Cupani, M., Pilatti, A., Urrizaga, A., Chincolla, A., & de Minzi, M. C. R. (2014). Inventario de Personalidad IPIP-NEO: estudios preliminares de adaptación al español en estudiantes argentinos. Revista Mexicana de Investigación en Psicología, 6(1), 55-73.
De Vries, R.E. (2013). The 24-item Brief HEXACO Inventory (BHI). Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 871-880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.003
Cronbach, L.J. (1942). Studies of acquiescence as a factor in the true/false test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 33, 401-415. Cupani, M. (2009). El Cuestionario de Personalidad IPIP-FFM: Resultados preliminares de una adaptación en una muestra de preadolescentes argentinos. Perspectivas en Psicología, 6, 51-58.
Credé, M., Harms, P., Niehorster, S., & Gaye-Valentine, A. (2012). An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 874-888.
Costa, P., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). NEO PI-R manual profesional. Odessa, FL: Evaluación Psicológica Resources, Inc
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological bulletin, 112(1), 155-159
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Mainly Openness: The relationship between the Big Five personality traits and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 524-529.
Burisch, M. (1984). Approaches to personality inventory construction: A comparison of merits. American Psychologist, 39(3), 214.
Baldasaro, R. E., Shanahan, M. J., Bauer, D. J. (2013). Psychometric Properties of the Mini-IPIP in a Large, Nationally Representative Sample of Young Adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(1), 74-84. Doi: 10.1080/00223891.2012.700466
Aronson, Z. H., Reilly, R. R., & Lynn, G. S. (2006). The impact of leader personality on new product development teamwork and performance: The moderating role of uncertainty. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 23(3), 221-247.
type_driver info:eu-repo/semantics/article
type_coar http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
type_version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
type_coarversion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
type_content Text
publishDate 2019-01-30
date_accessioned 2019-01-30T10:21:14Z
date_available 2019-01-30T10:21:14Z
url https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/2009
url_doi https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2019.22.1.12
issn 0123-9155
eissn 1909-9711
doi 10.14718/ACP.2019.22.1.12
citationstartpage 248
citationendpage 260
url4_str_mv https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/2472
url3_str_mv https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/2517
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/2516
url2_str_mv https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/pdf1..11IN
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/2009/pdf1.11
_version_ 1797159033684099072

Código QR

Estadísticas y Métricas Alternativas

Títulos similares