Adaptarea românească a Setului Internaţional de Itemi de Personalitate: IPIP-Ro
Keywords:
IPIP, personality assessment, testsAbstract
This article documents the Romanian translation of the item bank for the assessment of personality, IPIP. The IPIP-Ro item bank contains 2504 items which are usable for personality assessment, and which describe a number of 371 personality scales, organised in 19 categories. The 2504 items were administered to a convenience sample of 282 participants, and the article documents the translation process, as well as the psychometric characteristics of the 371 scales, out of which 250 can be readily used in research, having a reliability of .70 or higher. Implications of the project for personality research in Romania are discussed, as well as limitations for research purposes and for use in psychological practice.
Downloads
References
Allport, G. W. (1960). Becoming: Basic Considerations for a Psychology of Personality. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., De Vries, R. E., Di Blas, L., Boies, K., & De Raad, B. (2004). A Six-factor Structure of Personality-descriptive Adjectives: Solutions from Psycholexical Studies in Seven Languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 356-366.
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, 74-84.
Barrick, M. R, & Mount, M.K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A metaanalysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187-215.
Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1980). The frequency concept of disposition: Dominance and prototypically dominant acts. Journal of Personality, 48, 379-392.
Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1986). The act frequency approach and the construction of personality. In A. Angleitner, A. Furnham, & G. van Heck (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe: Vol. 2. Current trends and controversies (pp. 141-156). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Conn, S.R., & Rieke, M. L. (1994). The 16PF fifth edition technical manual. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five- Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas (2006). The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five Factors of Personality. Psychological Assessment 18, 192-203.
Ehrhart, K. H., Roesch, S. C., Ehrhart, M. G., & Kilian, B. (2008). A test of the factor structure equivalence of the 50-item IPIP Five-factor model measure across gender and ethnic groups. Journal of Personality Assessment 90, 507-516.
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences: a natural science approach. Plenum: New York.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe, Vol. 7 (pp. 7-28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96.
Gough, H. G., & Bradley, P. (1996). The California Psychological Inventory Manual (Third Edition). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
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.
Guion, R. M., & Gottier, R.F. (1965). Validity of Personality Measures in Personnel Selection. Personnel Psychology, 18, 135-164.
Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, Designs, and Technical Guidelines for Adapting Tests into Multiple Languages and Cultures. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (eds.) Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross- Cultural Assessment (pp. 3-38). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hough, L. M. (1998). Personality at work: Issues and evidence. In M. D. Hakel (Ed.), Beyond multiple choice: Evaluating alternatives to traditional testing for selection (pp. 131-166). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hough, L., & Dilchert, S. (2010). Personality: Its Measurement and Validity for Employee Selection. In J. L. Farr & N. T. Tippins (Eds.), Handbook of Employee Selection (pp. 299-319). New York: Routledge.
Hough, L.M., & Furnham, A. (2003). Use of personality variables in work settings. In W.C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.). Handbook of psychology. Vol. 12: Industrial and organizational psychology. (pp. 131-169). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
International Personality Item Pool: A Scientific Collaboratory for the Development of Advanced Measures of Personality Traits and Other Individual Differences (http://ipip.ori.org/). Internet Web Site.
International Test Commission (2008). International Test Commission Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests. [http://www.intestcom.org].
Maples, J. L., Guan, L., Carter, N. T., & Miller, J. D. (2014). A Test of the International Personality Item Pool representation of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory and development of a 120-item IPIP-based measure of the five-factor model. Psychological Assessment, 26, 1070-1084.
Markey, P. M., & Markey C. N. (2009). A brief assessment of the interpersonal circumplex: The IPIP-IPC. Assessment 16, 352-361.
Markey, P., Anderson, J. M., & Markey, C. (2013). Using Behavioral Mapping to Examine the Validity of the IPIP-IPC. Assessment 20, 165-174.
McAbee, S. T., & Oswald, F. L. (2013). The criterion related validity of personality measures for predicting GPA: a meta-analytic validity competition. Psychological Assessment 25, 532-544.
Megargee, E. I., Bogart, P., & Anderson, B. J. (1966). Prediction of leadership in a simulated industrial task. Journal of Applied Psychology, 50, 292-295.
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Personality at work: Raising awareness and correcting misconceptions. Human Performance, 18, 389-404.
Pitariu, H. & Iliescu, D. (2004). Inventarul Psihologic California – CPI260-Ro [Romanian adaptation of the California Psychological Inventory], Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 2, 40-49.
Rusu, S., Maricuțoiu, L. P., Macsinga, I., Vîrgă, D., & Sava, F. A. (2012). Evaluarea personalității din perspectiva modelului Big Five. Date privind adaptarea chestionarului IPIP-50 pe un eșantion de studenți romani. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 10, 39 -56.
Schneider, R. J., Hough, L. M., & Dunnette, M. D. (1996). Broadsided by broad traits: How to sink science in five dimensions or less. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 639-655.
Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., & Camac, C. (1988). What lies beyond E and N? Factor analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 96-107.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
