Titulo:
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem
.
Sumario:
Aunque se han elaborado numerosas versiones abreviadas del Big Five Inventory (BFI) las propiedades psicométricas obtenidas a nivel mundial presentan inconsistencias insoslayables. En este trabajo se propone reducir este inventario usando Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem como soporte metodológico. Participaron 987 adultos (55.3% mujeres; Media edad = 38; DE edad = 13.9) residentes en el área metropolitana de Buenos Aires, Argentina. La reducción de ítems se realizó de manera progresiva considerando la aplicación del Modelo Respuesta Graduada (supuestos de unidimensionalidad de cada escala por separado, independencia local de los ítems y ajuste al modelo). Se alcanzó una versión de 20 ítems libres de funcionamiento diferencial según el género. La... Ver más
Guardado en:
0123-9155
1909-9711
27
2024-07-30
57
74
Acta Colombiana de Psicología - 2024
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
| id |
metarevistapublica_ucatolica_actacolombianadepsicologia_84_article_4659 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| institution |
UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE COLOMBIA |
| thumbnail |
https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADCATOLICADECOLOMBIA/logo.png |
| country_str |
Colombia |
| collection |
Acta Colombiana de Psicología |
| title |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem |
| spellingShingle |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem Abal, Facundo Juan Pablo Sanchez Gonzalez, Juan Franco Attorresi, Horacio Félix modelo de los cinco factores modelo de los cinco grandes teoría de respuesta al ítem evaluación de la personalidad five factor model big five model item response theory personality assessment |
| title_short |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem |
| title_full |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem |
| title_fullStr |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem |
| title_sort |
big five inventory abreviado desde la teoría de respuesta al ítem |
| title_eng |
Big Five Inventory abbreviated from the Item Response Theory |
| description |
Aunque se han elaborado numerosas versiones abreviadas del Big Five Inventory (BFI) las propiedades psicométricas obtenidas a nivel mundial presentan inconsistencias insoslayables. En este trabajo se propone reducir este inventario usando Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem como soporte metodológico. Participaron 987 adultos (55.3% mujeres; Media edad = 38; DE edad = 13.9) residentes en el área metropolitana de Buenos Aires, Argentina. La reducción de ítems se realizó de manera progresiva considerando la aplicación del Modelo Respuesta Graduada (supuestos de unidimensionalidad de cada escala por separado, independencia local de los ítems y ajuste al modelo). Se alcanzó una versión de 20 ítems libres de funcionamiento diferencial según el género. Las correlaciones entre las escalas originales y las reducidas fueron superiores a .73. Se replicó la estructura del modelo pentafactorial con un análisis factorial confirmatorio y se aportaron evidencias de validez basadas en la relación con tests que miden sintomatología y facetas de neuroticismo. Los índices de consistencia interna globales mostraron valores aceptables pero las funciones de información revelaron que las escalas disminuyen su precisión en los niveles altos de los rasgos.
|
| description_eng |
Although numerous abbreviated versions of the Big Five Inventory (BFI) have been developed, the psychometric properties obtained worldwide present unavoidable inconsistencies. This paper proposes to reduce this inventory using Item Response Theory as methodological support. Participants were 987 adults (55.3% women; Mean age = 38; SD age = 13.9) residing in the metropolitan area of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Items were reduced progressively considering the application of the Graduated Response Model (assumptions of unidimensionality of each scale separately, local independence of the items, and fit to the model). A version of 20 free elements of differential functioning according to gender was obtained. Correlations between the original and reduced scales were greater than .73. The structure of the five-factor model was replicated with a confirmatory factor analysis and validity evidence was provided based on the relationship with tests that measure symptomatology and facets of neuroticism. The global internal consistency indices showed acceptable values, but the information functions revealed that the scales decreased in accuracy at high trait levels.
|
| author |
Abal, Facundo Juan Pablo Sanchez Gonzalez, Juan Franco Attorresi, Horacio Félix |
| author_facet |
Abal, Facundo Juan Pablo Sanchez Gonzalez, Juan Franco Attorresi, Horacio Félix |
| topicspa_str_mv |
modelo de los cinco factores modelo de los cinco grandes teoría de respuesta al ítem evaluación de la personalidad |
| topic |
modelo de los cinco factores modelo de los cinco grandes teoría de respuesta al ítem evaluación de la personalidad five factor model big five model item response theory personality assessment |
| topic_facet |
modelo de los cinco factores modelo de los cinco grandes teoría de respuesta al ítem evaluación de la personalidad five factor model big five model item response theory personality assessment |
| citationvolume |
27 |
| citationissue |
2 |
| citationedition |
Núm. 2 , Año 2024 :Acta Colombiana de Psicología |
| publisher |
Universidad Católica de Colombia |
| ispartofjournal |
Acta Colombiana de Psicología |
| source |
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/4659 |
| language |
spa |
| format |
Article |
| rights |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 Acta Colombiana de Psicología - 2024 Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0. info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| references |
Abal, F. J. P., Auné, S. E., & Attorresi, H. F. (2019). Construcción de un banco de ítems de facetas de neuroticismo para el desarrollo de un test adaptativo. Revista psicodebate: psicología, cultura y sociedad, 19(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.18682/pd.v19i1.854 Alansari, B. (2016). The Big Five Inventory (BFI): Reliability and validity of its Arabic translation in non clinical sample. European Psychiatry, 33(S1), S209-S210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.500 Allen, T. A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Personality neuroscience and the five factor model. En T. A. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 319-352). Oxford Library of Psychology. https://doi. org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199352487.013.26 Ato, M., López, J., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología, 29(3), 1038-1059. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511 Attorresi, H. F., Lozzia, G. S., Abal, F. J., Galibert, M. S., & Aguerri, M. E. (2009). Teoría de Respuesta al Item. Conceptos básicos y aplicaciones parala medición de constructos psicológicos. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica, 18(2), 179-188. https://www.cienciared.com.ar/ra/usr/35/825/racp_xviii_2_pp179_188.pdf 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. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/00223891.2012.700466 Balgiu, B. A. (2018). The psychometric properties of the Big Five inventory-10 (BFI-10) including correlations with subjective and psychological well-being. Global Journal of Psychology Research: New Trends and Issues, 8(2), 61-69. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjpr.v8i2.3434 Benet-Martínez, 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729 Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: a meta-analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130(6), 887-919. https://doi. org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.887 Brown, G. T. L., & Sotardi, V. A. (2019, 7-9 de marzo). Evaluation of the BFI-10 personality inventory with New Zealand University students: Failing psychometric tests [Póster, 7-9 de marzo, 2019]. International Congress of Psychological Science (ICPS), Paris, Francia. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/conventions/archive/2019-icps Byrne, B. M. (2012). A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8885-2 Cai, L., Thissen, D., & du Toit, S. (2017). IRTPRO 3 for Windows [Computer Software]. Skokie, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc. Carciofo, R., Yang, J., Song, N., Du, F., & Zhang, K. (2016). Psychometric Evaluation of Chinese-Language 44-Item and 10-Item Big Five Personality Inventories, Including Correlations with Chronotype, Mindfulness and Mind Wandering. Plos One, 11(2), e0149963. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149963 Castellanos-Ryan, N., Brière, F. N., O'Leary-Barrett, M., Banaschewski, T., Bokde, A., Bromberg, U., Büchel, C., Flor, H., Frouin, V., Gallinat, J., Garavan, H., Martinot, J.-L., Nees, F., Paus, T., Pausova, Z., Rietschel, M., Smolka, M. N., Robbins, T. W., Whelan, R., … The IMAGEN Consortium. (2016). The structure of psychopathology in adolescence and its common personality and cognitive correlates. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(8), 1039-1052. http://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000193 Castro Solano, A. (2002). Técnicas de evaluación psicológica en los ámbitos militares. Paidós. Chapman, B. P., & Elliot, A. J. (2019). Brief report: How short is too short? An ultra-brief measure of the big-five personality domains implicates “agreeableness” as a risk for all-cause mortality. Journal of health psychology, 24(11), 1568-1573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105317720819 Chiesi, F., Morsanyi, K., Donati, M. A., & Primi, C. (2018). Applying Item Response Theory to Develop a Shortened Version of the Need for Cognition Scale. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 14(3), 75-86. https://doi. org/10.5709/acp-0240-z Chio, F. H., Lai, M. H., & Mak, W. W. (2018). Development of the Nonattachment Scale-Short Form (NAS-SF) using item response theory. Mindfulness, 9(4), 1299-1308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0874-z Colledani, D., Robusto, E., & Anselmi, P. (2018). Development of a new abbreviated form of the Junior Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised. Personality and Individual Differences, 120, 159-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.037 Colom, R. (2018). Manual de psicología diferencial. Pirámide. Courtois, R., Petot, J. M., Plaisant, O., Allibe, B., Lignier, B., Réveillère, C., Lecocq, G., & John, O. (2020). Validation of the French version of the 10-item Big Five Inventory. L'encephale, 46(6), 455-462. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.encep.2020.02.006 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027403 Derogatis, L. R. (1994). SCL-90-R: Administration, scoring and procedures manual. National Computer Systems. DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4.ª ed.). SAGE. Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo. Psicothema, 18(3), 565-571. https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/PST/article/view/8473 Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 417-440. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221 Dominguez-Lara, S., & Merino-Soto, C. (2018). Dos versiones breves del Big Five Inventory en universitarios peruanos: BFI-15p y BFI-10p. Liberabit, 24(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2018.v24n1.06 Dominguez-Lara, S., Merino-Soto, C., Zamudio, B., & Guevara-Cordero, C. (2018). Big Five Inventory en Universitarios Peruanos: Resultados Preliminares de su Validación. Psykhe (Santiago), 27(2), 1-12. https://doi. org/10.7764/psykhe.27.2.1052 Federación de Psicólogos de la República Argentina [FePRA]. (2013). Código de Ética de la Federación de Psicólogos de la República Argentina. FePRA. https://fepra.org.ar/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Codigo-de-E%CC%81tica-de-la-FePRA.pdf Ferrando, P. J., & Anguiano-Carrasco, C. (2010). El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología. Papeles del psicólogo, 31(1), 18-33. https://www.papelesdelpsicologo.es/resumen?pii=1793 Gerlitz, J. Y., & Schupp, J. (2005). Zur Erhebung der Big-Five-basierten persoenlichkeitsmerkmale im SOEP. DIW Research Notes, 4, 1-36. https://www.diw.de/documents/publicationen/73/43490/rn4.pdf Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48(1), 26-34. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.26 Gouveia, V., Vasconcelos de Oliveira, I. C., Moura Grangeiro, A. S. D., Pereira Monteiro, R., & Lins de Holanda Coelho, G. (2021). The bright side of the human personality: evidence of a measure of prosocial traits. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(3), 1459-1480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00280-2 Guido, G., Peluso, A. M., Capestro, M., & Miglietta, M. (2015). An Italian version of the 10-item Big Five Inventory: An application to hedonic and utilitarian shopping values. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 135- 140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.053 Hahn, E., Gottschling, J., & Spinath, F. M. (2012). Short measurements of personality-Validity and reliability of the GSOEP Big Five Inventory (BFI-S). Journal of Research in Personality, 46(3), 355-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.03.008 International Test Commission [ITC]. (2014). ITC Statement On the Use of Tests and Other Assessment Instruments for Research Purposes. ITC. http://www.intestcom.org/page/22 Jeronimus, B. F., Kotov, R., Riese, H., & Ormel, J. (2016). Neuroticism's prospective association with mental disorders halves after adjustment for baseline symptoms and psychiatric history, but the adjusted association hardly decays with time: a meta-analysis on 59 longitudinal/prospective studies with 443 313 participants. Psychological Medicine, 46(14), 2883-2906. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716001653 John, O. P. (2021). History, Measurement, and Conceptual Elaboration of the Big Five Trait Taxonomy: The Paradigm Matures. En O. P. John & R. W. Robins (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (4.ª ed., pp. 35-82). The Guilford Press. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). Big Five Inventory (BFI) [Database record]. University of California, APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t07550-000 Kang, T., & Chen, T. T. (2011). Performance of the generalized S-X2 item fit index for the graded response model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 89-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9082-4 Levy, P. (1967). The correction for spurious correlation in the evaluation of short-form tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 84-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(196701)23:13.0.CO;2-2 Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., & Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1151-1169. https:// doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361 Ludeke, S. G., & Larsen, E. G. (2017). Problems with the Big Five assessment in the world values survey. Personality and Individual Differences, 112, 103-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.042 Makransky, G., Mortensen, E. L., & Glas, C. A. (2013). Improving personality facet scores with multidimensional computer adaptive testing: An illustration with the NEO PI-R. Assessment, 20(1), 3-13. https://doi. org/10.1177/1073191112437756 Maples-Keller, J. L., Williamson, R. L., Sleep, C. E., Carter, N. T., Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (2019). Using item response theory to develop a 60-item representation of the NEO PI-R using the International Personality Item Pool: Development of the IPIP-NEO-60. Journal of Personality Assessment, 101(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/00223891.2017.1381968 McCrae, R. R. (2017). The Five-Factor Model across cultures. En A. T. Church (Ed.), The Praeger Handbook of Personality Across Cultures: Trait Psychology Across Cultures (pp. 47-71). Praeger/ABC-CLIO. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in Adulthood, Second Edition: A Five-Factor Theory Perspective. Guilford Press. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2010). NEO Inventories professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources. Menéndez, J. A., Attorresi, H. F., & Abal, F. J. (2019). Aportes de la medición del Neuroticismo en los ámbitos clínico y de la salud. Anuario de Investigaciones, 26, 385-394. https://www.psi.uba.ar/investigaciones/revistas/ anuario/trabajos_completos/26/menendez.pdf 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(6), 936-944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jrp.2013.09.004 Minkov, M., van de Vijver, F. J., &Schachner, M. (2019). A test of a new short Big-Five tool in large probabilistic samples from 19 countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. paid.2019.109519 Morizot, J. (2014). Construct validity of adolescents’ self-reported big five personality traits: Importance of conceptual breadth and initial validation of a short measure. Assessment, 21(5), 580-606. https://doi. org/10.1177/1073191114524015 Muñiz, J. (2018). Introducción a la Psicometría: teoría clásica y TRI. Pirámide. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplususer’s guide (Versión 6) [Computer software]. Muthén & Muthén. Penfield, R. D. (2014). An NCME instructional module on polytomous item response theory models. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(1), 36-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12023 Peters, G. J. Y. (2014). The alpha and the omega of scale reliability and validity: Why and how to abandon Cronbach’s alpha and the route towards more comprehensive assessment of scale quality. European Health Psychologist, 16(2), 56-69. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/h47fv Rammstedt, B. (2007). The 10-item big five inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 193-201. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.23.3.193 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. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001 Rammstedt, B., Kemper, C. J., Klein, M. C., Beierlein, C., & Kovaleva, A. (2013). A short scale for assessing the big five dimensions of personality: 10 item big five inventory (BFI-10). Methods, Data, Analyses, 7(2), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2013.013 Rammstedt, B., Lechner, C. M., & Danner, D. (2020). Short Forms Do Not Fall Short. A Comparison of Three (Extra-) Short Forms of the Big Five. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 37(1), 23-32. https://doi. org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000574 Rammstedt, O. (1997). Das Durkheim-SimmelscheProjekteiner „rein wissenschaftlichenSoziologie“ im Schatten der Dreyfus-Affäre. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 26(6), 444-457. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-1997-0605 Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. Springer Reise, S. P., & Revicki, D. A. (2015). Handbook of Item Response Theory Modeling Applications to Typical Performance Assessment. Routledge. Reise, S. P., & Rodriguez, A. (2016). Item response theory and the measurement of psychiatric constructs: some empirical and conceptual issues and challenges. Psychological Medicine, 46(10), 2025-2039. https://doi. org/10.1017/s0033291716000520 Reyes Zamorano, E. R., Carrillo, C. Á., Silva, A. P., Sandoval, A. M., & Pastrana, I. M. R. (2014). Psychometric properties of the big five inventory in a Mexican sample. Salud mental, 37(6), 491-497. https://doi.org/10.17711/ SM.0185-3325.2014.059 Salgado, E., Vargas-Trujillo, E., Schmutzler, J., & Wills-Herrera, E. (2016). Uso del Inventario de los Cinco Grandes en una muestra colombiana. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 34(2), 365-382. https://doi. org/10.12804/apl34.2.2016.10 Sanchez, R. O., & Ledesma, R. D. (2009). Análisis psicométrico del Inventario de Síntomas Revisado (SCL-90-R) en población clínica. Revista argentina de clínica psicológica, 18(3), 265-274. https://www.cienciared.com.ar/ ra/usr/35/856/racp_xviii_3_pp265_274.pdf Sekely, A., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2018). Developing a short version of the Toronto Structured Interview for Alexithymia using item response theory. Psychiatry Research, 266, 218-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. psychres.2018.03.002 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), 20-30. https://www.psychology.org. nz/journal-archive/Sibley-IPIP61.pdf Sleep, C. E., Lynam, D. R., & Miller, J. D. (2021). A comparison of the validity of very brief measures of the Big Five/Five-Factor Model of personality. Assessment, 28(3), 739-758. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120939160 Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117-143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096 Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2019). Optimizing the length, width, and balance of a personality scale: How do internal characteristics affect external validity? Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 444-459. https://doi.org/10.1037/ pas0000586 Stein, I., Asher, M., Erez, S., Shechner, T., Marom, S., Hermesh, H., &Aderka, I. M. (2019). Developing a brief version of the social thoughts and beliefs scale (STABS) using item response theory. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 43(4), 792-801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-019-10000-7 Suárez-Álvarez, J., Pedrosa, I., Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., Cuesta Izquierdo, M., & Muñiz-Fernández, J. (2018). Using reversed items in Likert scales: A questionable practice. Psicothema, 30(2), 149-158. https:// doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.33 Sueiro, M. J., & Abad, F. J. (2009). Bondad de ajuste en ítems politómicos: tasas de error de tipo I y potencia de tres índices de ajuste. Psicothema, 21(4), 639-645. https://www.psicothema.com/pdf/3684.pdf Sutin, A. R., Stephan, Y., & Terracciano, A. (2018). Facets of conscientiousness and objective markers of health status. Psychology & Health, 33(9), 1100-1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2018.1464165 Thomas, M. L. (2019). Advances in applications of item response theory to clinical assessment. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1442-1455. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000597 Ubbiali, A., Chiorri, C., Hampton, P., & Donati, D. (2013). Italian Big Five Inventory. Psychometric properties of the Italian adaptation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Applied Psychology Bulletin, 59(266), 37-48. https:// psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-22456-005 Weiss, A., & Costa Jr, P. T. (2014). Re:“Personality and all-cause mortality: individual-participant meta-analysis of 3,947 deaths in 76,150 adults”. American Journal of Epidemiology, 179(6), 791-792. https://doi.org/10.1093/ aje/kwt300 Widiger, T. A., Gore, W. L., Crego, C., Rojas, S. L., & Oltmanns, J. R. (2015). Five Factor Model and Personality Disorder. En T. A. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 449-478). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199352487.013.4 Ziegler, M., Kemper, C. J., & Kruyen, P. (2014). Short scales – Five misunderstandings and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 185-189. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000148 |
| type_driver |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| type_coar |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 |
| type_version |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| type_coarversion |
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
| type_content |
Text |
| publishDate |
2024-07-30 |
| date_accessioned |
2024-07-30T17:50:23Z |
| date_available |
2024-07-30T17:50:23Z |
| url |
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/4659 |
| url_doi |
https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2024.27.2.4 |
| issn |
0123-9155 |
| eissn |
1909-9711 |
| doi |
10.14718/ACP.2024.27.2.4 |
| citationstartpage |
57 |
| citationendpage |
74 |
| url2_str_mv |
https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/4659/5335 |
| _version_ |
1811200725209841664 |
| spelling |
Big Five Inventory abreviado desde la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem Big Five Inventory abbreviated from the Item Response Theory Aunque se han elaborado numerosas versiones abreviadas del Big Five Inventory (BFI) las propiedades psicométricas obtenidas a nivel mundial presentan inconsistencias insoslayables. En este trabajo se propone reducir este inventario usando Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem como soporte metodológico. Participaron 987 adultos (55.3% mujeres; Media edad = 38; DE edad = 13.9) residentes en el área metropolitana de Buenos Aires, Argentina. La reducción de ítems se realizó de manera progresiva considerando la aplicación del Modelo Respuesta Graduada (supuestos de unidimensionalidad de cada escala por separado, independencia local de los ítems y ajuste al modelo). Se alcanzó una versión de 20 ítems libres de funcionamiento diferencial según el género. Las correlaciones entre las escalas originales y las reducidas fueron superiores a .73. Se replicó la estructura del modelo pentafactorial con un análisis factorial confirmatorio y se aportaron evidencias de validez basadas en la relación con tests que miden sintomatología y facetas de neuroticismo. Los índices de consistencia interna globales mostraron valores aceptables pero las funciones de información revelaron que las escalas disminuyen su precisión en los niveles altos de los rasgos. Although numerous abbreviated versions of the Big Five Inventory (BFI) have been developed, the psychometric properties obtained worldwide present unavoidable inconsistencies. This paper proposes to reduce this inventory using Item Response Theory as methodological support. Participants were 987 adults (55.3% women; Mean age = 38; SD age = 13.9) residing in the metropolitan area of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Items were reduced progressively considering the application of the Graduated Response Model (assumptions of unidimensionality of each scale separately, local independence of the items, and fit to the model). A version of 20 free elements of differential functioning according to gender was obtained. Correlations between the original and reduced scales were greater than .73. The structure of the five-factor model was replicated with a confirmatory factor analysis and validity evidence was provided based on the relationship with tests that measure symptomatology and facets of neuroticism. The global internal consistency indices showed acceptable values, but the information functions revealed that the scales decreased in accuracy at high trait levels. Abal, Facundo Juan Pablo Sanchez Gonzalez, Juan Franco Attorresi, Horacio Félix modelo de los cinco factores modelo de los cinco grandes teoría de respuesta al ítem evaluación de la personalidad five factor model big five model item response theory personality assessment 27 2 Núm. 2 , Año 2024 :Acta Colombiana de Psicología Artículo de revista Journal article 2024-07-30T17:50:23Z 2024-07-30T17:50:23Z 2024-07-30 application/pdf Universidad Católica de Colombia Acta Colombiana de Psicología 0123-9155 1909-9711 https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/view/4659 10.14718/ACP.2024.27.2.4 https://doi.org/10.14718/ACP.2024.27.2.4 spa http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 Acta Colombiana de Psicología - 2024 Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0. 57 74 Abal, F. J. P., Auné, S. E., & Attorresi, H. F. (2019). Construcción de un banco de ítems de facetas de neuroticismo para el desarrollo de un test adaptativo. Revista psicodebate: psicología, cultura y sociedad, 19(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.18682/pd.v19i1.854 Alansari, B. (2016). The Big Five Inventory (BFI): Reliability and validity of its Arabic translation in non clinical sample. European Psychiatry, 33(S1), S209-S210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.500 Allen, T. A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Personality neuroscience and the five factor model. En T. A. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 319-352). Oxford Library of Psychology. https://doi. org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199352487.013.26 Ato, M., López, J., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología, 29(3), 1038-1059. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511 Attorresi, H. F., Lozzia, G. S., Abal, F. J., Galibert, M. S., & Aguerri, M. E. (2009). Teoría de Respuesta al Item. Conceptos básicos y aplicaciones parala medición de constructos psicológicos. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica, 18(2), 179-188. https://www.cienciared.com.ar/ra/usr/35/825/racp_xviii_2_pp179_188.pdf 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. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/00223891.2012.700466 Balgiu, B. A. (2018). The psychometric properties of the Big Five inventory-10 (BFI-10) including correlations with subjective and psychological well-being. Global Journal of Psychology Research: New Trends and Issues, 8(2), 61-69. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjpr.v8i2.3434 Benet-Martínez, 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729 Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: a meta-analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130(6), 887-919. https://doi. org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.887 Brown, G. T. L., & Sotardi, V. A. (2019, 7-9 de marzo). Evaluation of the BFI-10 personality inventory with New Zealand University students: Failing psychometric tests [Póster, 7-9 de marzo, 2019]. International Congress of Psychological Science (ICPS), Paris, Francia. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/conventions/archive/2019-icps Byrne, B. M. (2012). A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8885-2 Cai, L., Thissen, D., & du Toit, S. (2017). IRTPRO 3 for Windows [Computer Software]. Skokie, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc. Carciofo, R., Yang, J., Song, N., Du, F., & Zhang, K. (2016). Psychometric Evaluation of Chinese-Language 44-Item and 10-Item Big Five Personality Inventories, Including Correlations with Chronotype, Mindfulness and Mind Wandering. Plos One, 11(2), e0149963. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149963 Castellanos-Ryan, N., Brière, F. N., O'Leary-Barrett, M., Banaschewski, T., Bokde, A., Bromberg, U., Büchel, C., Flor, H., Frouin, V., Gallinat, J., Garavan, H., Martinot, J.-L., Nees, F., Paus, T., Pausova, Z., Rietschel, M., Smolka, M. N., Robbins, T. W., Whelan, R., … The IMAGEN Consortium. (2016). The structure of psychopathology in adolescence and its common personality and cognitive correlates. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(8), 1039-1052. http://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000193 Castro Solano, A. (2002). Técnicas de evaluación psicológica en los ámbitos militares. Paidós. Chapman, B. P., & Elliot, A. J. (2019). Brief report: How short is too short? An ultra-brief measure of the big-five personality domains implicates “agreeableness” as a risk for all-cause mortality. Journal of health psychology, 24(11), 1568-1573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105317720819 Chiesi, F., Morsanyi, K., Donati, M. A., & Primi, C. (2018). Applying Item Response Theory to Develop a Shortened Version of the Need for Cognition Scale. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 14(3), 75-86. https://doi. org/10.5709/acp-0240-z Chio, F. H., Lai, M. H., & Mak, W. W. (2018). Development of the Nonattachment Scale-Short Form (NAS-SF) using item response theory. Mindfulness, 9(4), 1299-1308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0874-z Colledani, D., Robusto, E., & Anselmi, P. (2018). Development of a new abbreviated form of the Junior Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised. Personality and Individual Differences, 120, 159-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.037 Colom, R. (2018). Manual de psicología diferencial. Pirámide. Courtois, R., Petot, J. M., Plaisant, O., Allibe, B., Lignier, B., Réveillère, C., Lecocq, G., & John, O. (2020). Validation of the French version of the 10-item Big Five Inventory. L'encephale, 46(6), 455-462. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.encep.2020.02.006 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027403 Derogatis, L. R. (1994). SCL-90-R: Administration, scoring and procedures manual. National Computer Systems. DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4.ª ed.). SAGE. Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo. Psicothema, 18(3), 565-571. https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/PST/article/view/8473 Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 417-440. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221 Dominguez-Lara, S., & Merino-Soto, C. (2018). Dos versiones breves del Big Five Inventory en universitarios peruanos: BFI-15p y BFI-10p. Liberabit, 24(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2018.v24n1.06 Dominguez-Lara, S., Merino-Soto, C., Zamudio, B., & Guevara-Cordero, C. (2018). Big Five Inventory en Universitarios Peruanos: Resultados Preliminares de su Validación. Psykhe (Santiago), 27(2), 1-12. https://doi. org/10.7764/psykhe.27.2.1052 Federación de Psicólogos de la República Argentina [FePRA]. (2013). Código de Ética de la Federación de Psicólogos de la República Argentina. FePRA. https://fepra.org.ar/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Codigo-de-E%CC%81tica-de-la-FePRA.pdf Ferrando, P. J., & Anguiano-Carrasco, C. (2010). El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología. Papeles del psicólogo, 31(1), 18-33. https://www.papelesdelpsicologo.es/resumen?pii=1793 Gerlitz, J. Y., & Schupp, J. (2005). Zur Erhebung der Big-Five-basierten persoenlichkeitsmerkmale im SOEP. DIW Research Notes, 4, 1-36. https://www.diw.de/documents/publicationen/73/43490/rn4.pdf Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48(1), 26-34. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.26 Gouveia, V., Vasconcelos de Oliveira, I. C., Moura Grangeiro, A. S. D., Pereira Monteiro, R., & Lins de Holanda Coelho, G. (2021). The bright side of the human personality: evidence of a measure of prosocial traits. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(3), 1459-1480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00280-2 Guido, G., Peluso, A. M., Capestro, M., & Miglietta, M. (2015). An Italian version of the 10-item Big Five Inventory: An application to hedonic and utilitarian shopping values. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 135- 140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.053 Hahn, E., Gottschling, J., & Spinath, F. M. (2012). Short measurements of personality-Validity and reliability of the GSOEP Big Five Inventory (BFI-S). Journal of Research in Personality, 46(3), 355-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.03.008 International Test Commission [ITC]. (2014). ITC Statement On the Use of Tests and Other Assessment Instruments for Research Purposes. ITC. http://www.intestcom.org/page/22 Jeronimus, B. F., Kotov, R., Riese, H., & Ormel, J. (2016). Neuroticism's prospective association with mental disorders halves after adjustment for baseline symptoms and psychiatric history, but the adjusted association hardly decays with time: a meta-analysis on 59 longitudinal/prospective studies with 443 313 participants. Psychological Medicine, 46(14), 2883-2906. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716001653 John, O. P. (2021). History, Measurement, and Conceptual Elaboration of the Big Five Trait Taxonomy: The Paradigm Matures. En O. P. John & R. W. Robins (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (4.ª ed., pp. 35-82). The Guilford Press. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). Big Five Inventory (BFI) [Database record]. University of California, APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t07550-000 Kang, T., & Chen, T. T. (2011). Performance of the generalized S-X2 item fit index for the graded response model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 89-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9082-4 Levy, P. (1967). The correction for spurious correlation in the evaluation of short-form tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 84-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(196701)23:13.0.CO;2-2 Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., & Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1151-1169. https:// doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361 Ludeke, S. G., & Larsen, E. G. (2017). Problems with the Big Five assessment in the world values survey. Personality and Individual Differences, 112, 103-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.042 Makransky, G., Mortensen, E. L., & Glas, C. A. (2013). Improving personality facet scores with multidimensional computer adaptive testing: An illustration with the NEO PI-R. Assessment, 20(1), 3-13. https://doi. org/10.1177/1073191112437756 Maples-Keller, J. L., Williamson, R. L., Sleep, C. E., Carter, N. T., Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (2019). Using item response theory to develop a 60-item representation of the NEO PI-R using the International Personality Item Pool: Development of the IPIP-NEO-60. Journal of Personality Assessment, 101(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/00223891.2017.1381968 McCrae, R. R. (2017). The Five-Factor Model across cultures. En A. T. Church (Ed.), The Praeger Handbook of Personality Across Cultures: Trait Psychology Across Cultures (pp. 47-71). Praeger/ABC-CLIO. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in Adulthood, Second Edition: A Five-Factor Theory Perspective. Guilford Press. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2010). NEO Inventories professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources. Menéndez, J. A., Attorresi, H. F., & Abal, F. J. (2019). Aportes de la medición del Neuroticismo en los ámbitos clínico y de la salud. Anuario de Investigaciones, 26, 385-394. https://www.psi.uba.ar/investigaciones/revistas/ anuario/trabajos_completos/26/menendez.pdf 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(6), 936-944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jrp.2013.09.004 Minkov, M., van de Vijver, F. J., &Schachner, M. (2019). A test of a new short Big-Five tool in large probabilistic samples from 19 countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. paid.2019.109519 Morizot, J. (2014). Construct validity of adolescents’ self-reported big five personality traits: Importance of conceptual breadth and initial validation of a short measure. Assessment, 21(5), 580-606. https://doi. org/10.1177/1073191114524015 Muñiz, J. (2018). Introducción a la Psicometría: teoría clásica y TRI. Pirámide. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplususer’s guide (Versión 6) [Computer software]. Muthén & Muthén. Penfield, R. D. (2014). An NCME instructional module on polytomous item response theory models. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(1), 36-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12023 Peters, G. J. Y. (2014). The alpha and the omega of scale reliability and validity: Why and how to abandon Cronbach’s alpha and the route towards more comprehensive assessment of scale quality. European Health Psychologist, 16(2), 56-69. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/h47fv Rammstedt, B. (2007). The 10-item big five inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 193-201. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.23.3.193 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. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001 Rammstedt, B., Kemper, C. J., Klein, M. C., Beierlein, C., & Kovaleva, A. (2013). A short scale for assessing the big five dimensions of personality: 10 item big five inventory (BFI-10). Methods, Data, Analyses, 7(2), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2013.013 Rammstedt, B., Lechner, C. M., & Danner, D. (2020). Short Forms Do Not Fall Short. A Comparison of Three (Extra-) Short Forms of the Big Five. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 37(1), 23-32. https://doi. org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000574 Rammstedt, O. (1997). Das Durkheim-SimmelscheProjekteiner „rein wissenschaftlichenSoziologie“ im Schatten der Dreyfus-Affäre. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 26(6), 444-457. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-1997-0605 Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. Springer Reise, S. P., & Revicki, D. A. (2015). Handbook of Item Response Theory Modeling Applications to Typical Performance Assessment. Routledge. Reise, S. P., & Rodriguez, A. (2016). Item response theory and the measurement of psychiatric constructs: some empirical and conceptual issues and challenges. Psychological Medicine, 46(10), 2025-2039. https://doi. org/10.1017/s0033291716000520 Reyes Zamorano, E. R., Carrillo, C. Á., Silva, A. P., Sandoval, A. M., & Pastrana, I. M. R. (2014). Psychometric properties of the big five inventory in a Mexican sample. Salud mental, 37(6), 491-497. https://doi.org/10.17711/ SM.0185-3325.2014.059 Salgado, E., Vargas-Trujillo, E., Schmutzler, J., & Wills-Herrera, E. (2016). Uso del Inventario de los Cinco Grandes en una muestra colombiana. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 34(2), 365-382. https://doi. org/10.12804/apl34.2.2016.10 Sanchez, R. O., & Ledesma, R. D. (2009). Análisis psicométrico del Inventario de Síntomas Revisado (SCL-90-R) en población clínica. Revista argentina de clínica psicológica, 18(3), 265-274. https://www.cienciared.com.ar/ ra/usr/35/856/racp_xviii_3_pp265_274.pdf Sekely, A., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2018). Developing a short version of the Toronto Structured Interview for Alexithymia using item response theory. Psychiatry Research, 266, 218-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. psychres.2018.03.002 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), 20-30. https://www.psychology.org. nz/journal-archive/Sibley-IPIP61.pdf Sleep, C. E., Lynam, D. R., & Miller, J. D. (2021). A comparison of the validity of very brief measures of the Big Five/Five-Factor Model of personality. Assessment, 28(3), 739-758. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120939160 Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117-143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096 Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2019). Optimizing the length, width, and balance of a personality scale: How do internal characteristics affect external validity? Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 444-459. https://doi.org/10.1037/ pas0000586 Stein, I., Asher, M., Erez, S., Shechner, T., Marom, S., Hermesh, H., &Aderka, I. M. (2019). Developing a brief version of the social thoughts and beliefs scale (STABS) using item response theory. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 43(4), 792-801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-019-10000-7 Suárez-Álvarez, J., Pedrosa, I., Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., Cuesta Izquierdo, M., & Muñiz-Fernández, J. (2018). Using reversed items in Likert scales: A questionable practice. Psicothema, 30(2), 149-158. https:// doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.33 Sueiro, M. J., & Abad, F. J. (2009). Bondad de ajuste en ítems politómicos: tasas de error de tipo I y potencia de tres índices de ajuste. Psicothema, 21(4), 639-645. https://www.psicothema.com/pdf/3684.pdf Sutin, A. R., Stephan, Y., & Terracciano, A. (2018). Facets of conscientiousness and objective markers of health status. Psychology & Health, 33(9), 1100-1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2018.1464165 Thomas, M. L. (2019). Advances in applications of item response theory to clinical assessment. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1442-1455. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000597 Ubbiali, A., Chiorri, C., Hampton, P., & Donati, D. (2013). Italian Big Five Inventory. Psychometric properties of the Italian adaptation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Applied Psychology Bulletin, 59(266), 37-48. https:// psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-22456-005 Weiss, A., & Costa Jr, P. T. (2014). Re:“Personality and all-cause mortality: individual-participant meta-analysis of 3,947 deaths in 76,150 adults”. American Journal of Epidemiology, 179(6), 791-792. https://doi.org/10.1093/ aje/kwt300 Widiger, T. A., Gore, W. L., Crego, C., Rojas, S. L., & Oltmanns, J. R. (2015). Five Factor Model and Personality Disorder. En T. A. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 449-478). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199352487.013.4 Ziegler, M., Kemper, C. J., & Kruyen, P. (2014). Short scales – Five misunderstandings and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 185-189. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000148 https://actacolombianapsicologia.ucatolica.edu.co/article/download/4659/5335 info:eu-repo/semantics/article http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1 http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 Text Publication |