test bfq big

8/20/2019 Test Bfq Big

1/26

Ps.Pedro Jaramillo Arica MBA (D)

[ D i r e c c i ó n d e l a c o m p a ñ í a ]

!"#! %&' (&)"


2/26

BFQ BIG

(CUESTIONARIO BIG FIVE)

Autor: CAPRARA, G. - BARBARANELLI, C. - BORGOGNI, L.

Tema: TECNICAS PSICOMETRICAS INTELIGENCIA - SELECCION DE

PERSONAL

Descripción: Incorpora una escala tipo 'L' para medir la deseabilidad social.

Administración: Individual o Colectiva Baremos en centiles y puntuaciones T

para cada sexo, en muestras de la población general española y de procesos de

selección.

Niveles de aplicación: Adolescentes y adultos. Duración: Variable, de 20 a 30

minutos.Finalidad: Evaluación de 5 dimensiones y 10 subdimensiones de la personalidad

y una escala de Distorsión.

Evaluación de las 5 dimensiones del modelo de los "Cinco grandes" en la

estructura de la personalidad. Aplicación: Individual y colectiva. Tiempo: Variable,

unos 30 minutos. Edad: A partir de los 16 años. Cuestionario con 132 elementos

de respuesta múltiple (tipo Likert) para identificar las cinco dimensiones

fundamentales para describir y evaluar la personalidad humana: Energía,

inherente a una visión confiada y entusiasta de múltiples aspectos de la vida,

principalmente de tipo interpersonal. Amigabilidad, preocupación de tipo altruista

y de apoyo emocional a los demás. Consciencia, propia de un comportamiento de

tipo perseverante, escrupuloso y responsable. Estabilidad emocional, rasgo de

amplio espectro, con características tales como capacidad para afrontar los

efectos negativos de la ansiedad, de la depresión, de la irritabilidad o de la

frustración. Apertura, sobre todo de tipo intelectual ante nuevas ideas, valores,

sentimientos e intereses. Incorpora una escala tipo "L" para medir la deseabilidad

social.


3/26

DIMENSIONES:

• Afabilidad (A)

• Tesón (T)

• Estabilidad emocional (EE)

• Apertura mental (AM)

• Energía (E)

SUBESCALAS:

• Dinamismo

• Dominancia

• Cooperación/Empatía

• Cordialidad/Amabilidad

• Escrupulosidad

• Perseverancia

• Control de emociones

• Control de impulsos

• Apertura a la cultura

• Apertura a la experiencia

Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) de Caprara et al, versión española de

Bermúdez33 . El BFQ se postula más parsimonioso que otros cuestionarios del

modelo de 5 factores, más escrupuloso en su ajuste a los principios teóricos y

proporciona una medida adicional de la tendencia del sujeto a distorsionar los

datos y a ofrecer una imagen «falseada» de sí mismo. Además, este cuestionario

está validado para población española y ofrece la posibilidad de presentar los

resultados en puntuaciones T, según una distribución normal con media 50 y

desviación típica 10, y los valores entre 25 y 34 se consideran muy bajos, los

comprendidos entre 35 y 44 bajos, entre 46 y 54 promedio, entre 56 y 64 altos, y

entre 66 y 75 muy altos.

Jornades de Foment de la Investigación

ESTUDIO PSICOMÉTRICO DE LA VERSIÓN ESPAÑOLA DEL CUESTIONARIO

DE LOS CINCO GRANDES PARA NIÑOS (BFQ-N)

Autores

Silvia EDO.

Jorge MOYA.

Jordi LORES.


4/26

Vanessa LUELMO.

M. Ignacio IBÁÑEZ.

Generós ORTET

2

Descripción de la Investigación

Psicólogos de personalidad están interesados en la diferencia entre una persona yotra así como en responder porque nos comportamos de la manera en que lohacemos. Investigación en el área de la personalidad, como la ciencia, se basa eninformación concreta y cuantificable, la cual puede ser usada para examinar cómoson las personas. Aquí es donde Los Cinco Grandes juegan un rol muyimportante.

Los Cinco Grandes fueron originalmente derivados en los Setentas por dosequipos independientes de investigación: Paul Costa y Robert McCrae (en elNational Institutes of Health), y Warren Norman (en la Universidad deMichigan)/Lewis Goldberg (en la Universidad de Oregon), quien tomó una ruta unpoco diference al llegar a los mismos resultados. Esto es, la mayor parte de losrasgos de personalidad pueden ser abarcados por cinco grandes dimensiones depersonalidad, muy a pesar del lenguaje o la cultura. Estas cinco dimensioens hansido derivadas mediante haciendo preguntas a miles de personas y despuésanalizando la información con un proceso estadístico conocido como factor-análisis. Es importante darse cuenta que los investigadores no decidieronencontrar cinco dimensiones sino que las cinco dimensiones surgieron de susanálisis de datos. En círculos científicos, los Cinco Grandes son ahora los másaceptados y el modelo más usado de personalidad (claro está muchos otrossistemas han surgido en la Psicología Pop y en ambientes de trabajo e.g., elMBTI). Para tener una mejor perspectiva de los antecedentes históricos y lahistoria de los Cinco Grandes, revisat: http://www.centacs.com/quickstart.htm

Durante los últimos años, hemos usado los Cinco Grandes para estudiar lapersonalidad en términos de cómo cambia a través del tiempo(vea un artículo deinvestigación) y como se relaciona con otras variables (tales como auto-estima,preferencias musicales; vea trabajo de investigación). Durante este periodo detiempo, hemos recolectado datos de personalidad de literalmente millones depersonas de todo el mundo.

Análisis de la información, ha dado a conocer un gran número de resultadosinteresantes acerca de la personalidad. Por ejemplo, contrariamente a lo que sepensaba, nuestros resultados sugieren que la personalidad no es “estática” a laedad de 30, sino que continúa cambiando, con un patrón exacto de cambiodependiendo el rasgo de personalidad.


5/26

Queremos enfatizar que aquí estamos hablando de generalizaciones, y que estasgeneralizaciones no se aplican a todas las personas. Para ilustrarlo, considere lageneralización de que los hombres son generalmente más altos que las mujeres.Esto no significa que todos los hombres son más altos que las mujeres. En vez,significa que en promedio los hombres son más altos que las mujeres. Esta misma

lógica se aplica a la retroalimentación dada en este sitio. Aunque, en promedio, laspersonas tienden a ser más conscientes conforme avanza la edad, no todossiguen este patrón.

Preguntas Frecuentes Acerca del Sitio en Red de Los Cinco Grandes

1. ¿En qué está basada la retroalimentación?

Toda la retroalimentación que ve aquí esta basada en análisis estadísticos depersonalidad, recolectada en más de 10,000 personas. Nuestra retroalimentaciónno está basada en nuestras intuiciones o teorías acerca de la personalidad. En

pocas palabras, la retroalimentación es completamente derivada de los datosrecolectados.

2. ¿Por qué es la retroalimentación muy diferente de cómo me veo a mímismo?

La retroalimentación no tiene la intención de sugerir que todos los que tengan unpuntaje alto en Extraversión (o cualquier otro rasgo) será exactamente cómonosotros los describimos. Como lo mencionamos anteriormente, laretroalimentación está basada en generalizaciones derivadas de nuestrainvestigación y del trabajo que otros investigadores han hecho en la área. Esinevitable que algunas personas no encajen en estas generalizaciones. Estapuede ser una razón por la que usted siente que su retroalimentación no encajamuy bien con usted.

3. ¿De dónde vienen las preguntas de personalidad?

Las preguntas vienen de nuestra investigación, y la investigación de otros en elárea de la personalidad, estilos de vida, valores, y actitudes. Las preguntas de losCinco Grandes usadas en este sitio son de un instrumento conocido como elInventario de los Cinco Grandes (desarrollado por Oliver John en UC Berkeley). Lamayoría de las preguntas son escritas por investigadores académicos actuales,investigando varias hipótesis acerca de la personalidad.

4. ¿Por qué la retroalimentación da a veces información contradictoria?

Algunas veces la retroalimentación dada a los respondientes es aparentementecontradictoria. Esto es una consecuencia desafortunada de hacergeneralizaciones. Algunas veces, individuos no pueden ser encasillados en lastendecias generales aportadas por análisis de un gran número de personas. Claro,


6/26

mientras que nuestras generalizaciones pueden no ser acertadas, algunas vecestienden a ser más correctas que incorrectas.

5. ¿Por qué hubo preguntas acerca del lugar donde estoy?

Como parte de nuestra investigación estamos interesados en diferencias depersonalidad de acuerdo a la región. Algunos de nuestros análisis sugieren quelas personas viviendo en distintas regiones de los Estados Unidos, tienendiferentes personalidades. Para desarrollar un entendimiento de la naturaleza deestas diferencias, hemos examinado las relaciones entre la personaldiad de cadaregión y factores de ambiente. Por ejemplo, encontramos que la personalidad delestado está relacionada con la precipitación (lugares con más alta precipitación,tienen puntajes más altos en Neuroticismo), densidad de la población (la densidadde la población está asociada con un alto grado de Apertura y baja Afabilidad),diversidad étnica (diversidad étnica está asociado con una alta Apertura), y otroshallazgos que van desde comportamiento para votar, hasta salud y mortalidad.Una pregunta que surge de esto es si el ambiente moldea la personalidad, o siotras variables afectan tanto la personalidad y los otros factores. Puede ser quelas personas en con puntajes altos en Apertura, se mueven a lugares que sondensamente poblados y culturalmente diversos. Alternativamente, vivir en un lugardensamente poblado y culturalmente diverso puede ocacionar que las personas sevuelvan más abiertas. La razón por la que actualmente preguntamos por el lugarde nacimiento y de residencia, y cuánto tiempo tiempo las personas llevanviviendo en cada lugar, es para poder examinar la dirección causal entrepersonalidad y ambiente.

Le preguntamos a las personas que tanto les gusta o les gustó vivir en ciertoslugares porque estamos interesados en saber si las personas prefieren vivir enregiones donde sus personalidades “encajen&rdquo, la personalidad de la region.Si, por ejemplo, una persona es abierta y poco afables, ¿preferirá vivr en un lugardonde la persona promedio es también abierta y poco afable en un lugar donde lapersona promedio es de mente cerrada y amenos? Esta idea surge deinvestigación acerca de la relación entre persona-ambiente, la cual indica que laspersonas buscan y crean un ambiente que refleje y refuerce sus disposiciones yauto-evaluaciones. La relación entre persona y ambiente ha estado ligado con unagran variedad de consecuencias físicas y mentales.

6. ¿Dónde puedo aprender más de los Cinco Grandes?

http://pmc.psych.nwu.edu/personality.html: Este sitio parece ser el círculo máscentral en personalidad ACADÉMICA, y tiene muchos buenos enlaces con otraspáginas en el área. Sin embargo, mientras que puede ser de interés para unestudiante serio de Psicología, también puede parecer muy poco divertido para elusuario promedio.

http://www.personalitylab.org: This site has a number of Big Five-based studiesfrom Dr. Oliver John's group at UC Berkeley.


7/26

http://www.personalityresearch.org: Esto da una perspectiva accesible en el áreaacadémica de personalidad.

http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~funder/lab/index.html: La página de inicio dellaboratorio de un muy bien respetado investigador, ¡te dará una idea de lo que

hacen los investigadores de personalidad!http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/perscontents.html: Un texto en línea le dará allector antecedentes básicos en Psicología de la personalidad

http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/faculty/gosling/: Una página de iniciode un investigador de este sitio, que contiene más información y resultados deestudios usando los datos de este sitio

Finalmente, la siguiente cita puede ser usada por aquellos interesados enentender más acerca de los Cinco Grandes: John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999).

The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives.In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research(pp. 102-138). New York: Guilford Press.

Los resultados de esta investigación son gratuitos y no hay riesgos prevesibles porparticipar. Los posibles beneficios consisten en que recibirá retroalimentación desu personalidad, lo cual le puede dar un mayor conocimiento de usted mismo. Suparticipación en esta investigación es completamente voluntaria, y todas lasrespuestas son anónimas y serán confidenciales. Puede negarse a contestarcualquier pregunta, o puede retirar su consentimiento o puede discontinuar suparticipación, simplemente dejando el sitio.

Al momento que se evalúa a usted mismo, se le pide que evalúe a otrapersona. Al evaluar a alguien más podrá recibir una evalución más correcta de supropia personalidad. También se le dará un perfil de personlidad de la personaque evaluó, lo que le permitirá compararse a usted mismo con esta persona enlas cinco dimensiones básicas de personalidad. Trate de evaluar a alguien queconozca bien, tal como un amigo cercano, un colega de trabajo, su esposo(a) ootro miembro de la familia.


8/26

• Sus resultados serán presentados tan pronto como mande sus respuestas.• El test toma alrededor de 5 a 10 minutos.• Porciones de este test son copyright 2000 por el Psicólogo Oliver D. John,

Ph.D. de U.C. Berkeley; todos los derechos reservados.

Big Five personality traits

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia •Jump to: navigation, search

Psychology

Portal ! History Areas

RESEARCH


9/26

Abnormal Biological Cognitive Developmental Emotion

Experimental Evolutionary Mathematical Neuropsychology Personality Positive Psychophysics Social Transpersonal

APPLIED Clinical Educational Forensic Health Industrial Organizational School Sport

LISTS Publications Topics Therapies

view • talk

In psychology, the Big Five personality traits are five broad factors or dimensionsof personality discovered through empirical research.[1] The first public mention ofthe model was in 1933, by L. L. Thurstone in his presidential address to the

American Psychological Association. Thurstone's comments were published inPsychological Review the next year.[2]

The five factors are Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness,and Neuroticism (OCEAN, or CANOE if rearranged). They are also referred to asthe Five Factor Model (FFM). However, some discussion remains about how tointerpret the Openness factor, which is sometimes called "Intellect." [3] Each factorconsists of a cluster of more specific traits that correlate together. For example,extraversion includes such related qualities as sociability, excitement seeking,impulsiveness, and positive emotions.

The Five Factor Model is a purely descriptive model of personality, butpsychologists have developed a number of theories to account for the Big Five.


10/26

Contents

[hide]

• 1 Overview •

2 History o 2.1 Early trait research o 2.2 Hiatus in research o 2.3 Consensus on the Big Five

• 3 Agreeableness o 3.1 Sample Agreeableness items

• 4 Conscientiousness o 4.1 Sample Conscientiousness items

• 5 Extraversion o 5.1 Sample Extraversion items o 5.2 Biology of Extraversion

•

6 Neuroticism o 6.1 Sample Neuroticism items

• 7 Openness to Experience o 7.1 Sample Openness items o 7.2 Correlates of Openness o 7.3 Biology of Openness

• 8 Selected scientific findings o 8.1 Heritability studies o 8.2 Change and development o 8.3 Sex differences o 8.4 Birth order o

8.5 Cultural differences • 9 Criticisms o 9.1 Limited scope o 9.2 Methodological issues o 9.3 Theoretical status

• 10 Further research • 11 See also • 12 References • 13 External links

[edit] Overview

The Big Five factors and their constituent traits can be summarized as follows:

• Openness - appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas,imagination, curiosity, and variety of experience.


11/26

• Conscientiousness - a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, andaim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous behaviour.

• Extraversion - energy, positive emotions, surgency, and the tendency toseek stimulation and the company of others.

• Agreeableness - a tendency to be compassionate and cooperative ratherthan suspicious and antagonistic towards others.

• Neuroticism - a tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, suchas anger , anxiety, depression, or vulnerability; sometimes called emotionalinstability.

When scored for individual feedback, these traits are frequently presented aspercentile scores. For example, a Conscientiousness rating in the 80th percentileindicates a relatively strong sense of responsibility and orderliness, whereas an

Extraversion rating in the fifth percentile indicates an exceptional need for solitude and quiet.

Although these trait clusters are statistical aggregates, exceptions may exist onindividual personality profiles. On average, people who register high in Openness are intellectually curious, open to emotion, interested in art, and willing to try newthings. A particular individual, however, may have a high overall Openness scoreand be interested in learning and exploring new cultures. Yet he or she might haveno great interest in art or poetry. Situational influences also exist, as evenextraverts may occasionally need time away from people.

[edit] History

[edit] Early trait research

Sir Francis Galton was the first scientist to recognize what is now known as theLexical Hypothesis. This is the idea that the most salient and socially relevantpersonality differences in people’s lives will eventually become encoded into theirlanguage. The hypothesis further suggests that by sampling language, it ispossible to derive a comprehensive taxonomy of human personality traits.

Carl Jung explicated the concepts of extraversion and introversion in his book"Psychological Types" the 1920's.

In 1936, Gordon Allport and H. S. Odbert expanded on the hypothesis.[4] Theyworked through two of the most comprehensive dictionaries of the Englishlanguage available at the time and extracted 17,953 personality-describing words.They then reduced this gigantic list to 4500 adjectives which they considered todescribe observable and relatively permanent traits.


12/26

Raymond Cattell obtained the Allport-Odbert list and eliminated synonyms toreduce the total to 171.[5] He then asked subjects to rate people whom they knewby the adjectives on the list and analyzed their ratings. Cattell identified 35 majorclusters of personality traits, and then added ten more traits obtained from a reviewof the psychiatric literature. Cattell and his associates constructed personality tests

for these 45 traits, and the data they obtained from these tests was analyzed withthe emerging technology of computers combined with the statistical method offactor analysis. This resulted in sixteen major personality factors, which led to thedevelopment of the 16PF Personality Questionnaire.

In 1961, two Air Force researchers, Tupes and Christal analyzed personality datafrom eight large samples. Using Cattell's trait measures, they found five recurringfactors.[6] This work was replicated by Norman, who also found that five majorfactors were sufficient to account for a large set of personality data. Normannamed these factors Surgency, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, EmotionalStability, and Culture.[7]

[edit] Hiatus in research

For the next two decades, the changing zeitgeist made publication of personalityresearch difficult. In his 1968 book Psychological Assessment , Walter Mischel asserted that personality tests could not predict behavior with a correlation of morethan 0.3. Social psychologists like Mischel argued that attitudes and behavior werenot stable, but varied with context. Predicting behavior by personality tests wasconsidered to be impossible. Radical situationists in the 1970s went so far as toargue that personality is merely a perceived construct that people impose onothers in order to maintain an illusion of consistency in the world.

Emerging methodologies challenged this point of view during the 1980s. Instead oftrying to predict single instances of behavior, which was unreliable, researchersfound that they could predict patterns of behavior by aggregating large numbers ofobservations. As a result correlations between personality and behavior increasedsubstantially, and it was clear that “personality” did in fact exist. Personality andsocial psychologists now generally agree that both personal and situationalvariables are needed to account for human behavior. Trait theories became

justified, and there was a resurgence of interest in this area.

By 1980, the pioneering research by Tupes, Christal, and Norman had been largelyforgotten by psychologists. Goldberg started his own lexical project with a new setof adjectives from the dictionary and independently found the five factors onceagain.[8]

[edit] Consensus on the Big Five

In a 1981 symposium in Honolulu, four prominent researchers, Lewis Goldberg,Naomi Takemoto-Chock, Andrew Comrey, and John M. Digman, reviewed theavailable personality tests of the day. They concluded that the tests which held the


13/26

most promise measured a subset of five common factors, just as Norman haddiscovered in 1963. This event was followed by widespread acceptance of the fivefactor model among personality researchers during the 1980s, as well as thepublication of the NEO PI-R five-factor personality inventory by Costa and McCraein 1985.

One of the most significant advances of the five-factor model was theestablishment of a common taxonomy that demonstrates order in a previouslyscattered and disorganized field. What separates the five-factor model ofpersonality from all others is that it is not based on the theory of any one particularpsychologist, but rather on language, the natural system that people use tounderstand one another.

A number of meta-analyses have confirmed the predictive value of the Big Fiveacross a wide range of behaviors. Saulsman and Page examined the relationshipsbetween the Big Five personality dimensions and each of the 10 personalitydisorder categories in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). Across 15 independent samples, the researchers found that eachdisorder displayed a unique and predictable five-factor profile. The most prominentand consistent personality predictors underlying the disorders were positiveassociations with Neuroticism and negative associations with Agreeableness. [9]

In the area of job performance, Barrick and Mount reviewed 117 studies utilizing162 samples with 23,994 participants. They found that conscientiousness showedconsistent relations with all performance criteria for all occupational groups.Extraversion was a valid predictor for occupations involving social interaction (e.g.management and sales). Furthermore, extraversion and openness to experiencewere valid predictors of training proficiency criteria.[10] [11]

[edit] Agreeableness

Main article: Agreeableness

Agreeableness - a tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather thansuspicious and antagonistic towards others.

Agreeableness reflects individual differences in concern with cooperation andsocial harmony. Agreeable individuals value getting along with others. They aregenerally considerate, friendly, generous, helpful, and willing to compromise theirinterests with others. Agreeable people also have an optimistic view of humannature. They believe people are basically honest, decent, and trustworthy.

Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. Theyare generally unconcerned with others’ well-being, and are less likely to extendthemselves for other people. Sometimes their skepticism about others’ motivescauses them to be suspicious, unfriendly, and uncooperative.


14/26

[edit] Sample Agreeableness items

• I am interested in people.• I feel others’ emotions.• I have a soft heart.•

I make people feel at ease.• I sympathize with others’ feelings.• I take time out for others.• I am not interested in other people’s problems. (reversed )• I am not really interested in others. (reversed )• I feel little concern for others. (reversed )• I insult people. (reversed ) [12]

[edit] Conscientiousness

Main article: Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness - a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim forachievement; planned rather than spontaneous behaviour.

Conscientiousness concerns the way in which we control, regulate, and direct ourimpulses. Impulses are not inherently bad; occasionally time constraints require asnap decision, and acting on our first impulse can be an effective response. Also,in times of play rather than work, acting spontaneously and impulsively can be fun.Impulsive individuals can be seen by others as colorful, fun-to-be-with, and zany.Conscientiousness includes the factor known as Need for Achievement (NAch).

The benefits of high conscientiousness are obvious. Conscientious individualsavoid trouble and achieve high levels of success through purposeful planning andpersistence. They are also positively regarded by others as intelligent and reliable.On the negative side, they can be compulsive perfectionists and workaholics.Furthermore, extremely conscientious individuals might be regarded as stuffy andboring. Unconscientious people may be criticized for their unreliability, lack ofambition, and failure to stay within the lines, but they will experience many short-lived pleasures and they will never be called stuffy (i.e. dull, boring, unimaginative).

[edit] Sample Conscientiousness items

• I am always prepared.• I am exacting in my work.• I follow a schedule.• I get chores done right away.• I like order.• I pay attention to details.• I leave my belongings around. (reversed )• I make a mess of things. (reversed )• I often forget to put things back in their proper place. (reversed )


15/26

• I shirk my duties. (reversed ) [13]

[edit] Extraversion

Main article: Extraversion and introversion

Extraversion - energy, positive emotions, surgency, and the tendency to seekstimulation and the company of others.

Extraversion, also called "extroversion," is marked by pronounced engagementwith the external world. Extraverts enjoy being with people, are full of energy, andoften experience positive emotions. They tend to be enthusiastic, action-orientedindividuals who are likely to say "Yes!" or "Let's go!" to opportunities for excitement.In groups they like to talk, assert themselves, and draw attention to themselves.

Introverts lack the exuberance, energy, and activity levels of extraverts. They tendto be quiet, low-key, deliberate, and less dependent on the social world. Their lackof social involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression; theintrovert simply needs less stimulation than an extravert and more time alone.

A simple explanation is that an extravert gains energy by associating with othersand loses energy when alone for any period of time. An introvert is the opposite, asthey gain energy from doing individual activities such as watching movies orreading and lose energy, sometimes to the point of exhaustion, from socialactivities.

[edit] Sample Extraversion items

• I am the life of the party.• I don't mind being the center of attention.• I feel comfortable around people.• I start conversations.• I talk to a lot of different people at parties.• I am quiet around strangers. (reversed )• I don't like to draw attention to myself. (reversed )• I don't talk a lot. (reversed )• I have little to say. (reversed )[14]

[edit] Biology of Extraversion

Extraversion has been linked to higher sensitivity of the mesolimbic dopaminesystem to potentially rewarding stimuli.[15] This in part explains the high levels ofpositive affect found in Extraverts, since they will more intensely feel theexcitement of a potential reward. One consequence of this is that Extraverts can


16/26

more easily learn the contingencies for positive reinforcement, since the rewarditself is experienced as greater.

[edit] Neuroticism

Main article: Neuroticism Neuroticism - a tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger,anxiety, depression, or vulnerability; sometimes called emotional instability.

Neuroticism, also known inversely as Emotional Stability , refers to the tendency toexperience negative emotions. Those who score high on Neuroticism mayexperience primarily one specific negative feeling such as anxiety, anger, ordepression, but are likely to experience several of these emotions. People high inNeuroticism are emotionally reactive. They respond emotionally to events thatwould not affect most people, and their reactions tend to be more intense than

normal. They are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening, andminor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. Their negative emotional reactions tend topersist for unusually long periods of time, which means they are often in a badmood. These problems in emotional regulation can diminish a neurotic's ability tothink clearly, make decisions, and cope effectively with stress.

At the other end of the scale, individuals who score low in Neuroticism are lesseasily upset and are less emotionally reactive. They tend to be calm, emotionallystable, and free from persistent negative feelings. Freedom from negative feelingsdoes not mean that low scorers experience a lot of positive feelings; frequency ofpositive emotions is a component of the Extraversion domain.

[edit] Sample Neuroticism items

• I am easily disturbed.• I change my mood a lot.• I get irritated easily.• I get stressed out easily.• I get upset easily.• I have frequent mood swings.• I often feel blue.• I worry about things.• I am relaxed most of the time. (reversed )• I seldom feel blue. (reversed ) [16]

[edit] Openness to Experience

Main article: Openness to experience


17/26

Openness - appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, imagination,curiosity, and variety of experience.

Openness to Experience describes a dimension of personality that distinguishesimaginative, creative people from down-to-earth, conventional people. Open

people are intellectually curious, appreciative of art, and sensitive to beauty. Theytend to be, compared to closed people, more aware of their feelings. Theytherefore tend to hold unconventional and individualistic beliefs, although theiractions may be conforming (see agreeableness). People with low scores onopenness to experience tend to have narrow, common interests. They prefer theplain, straightforward, and obvious over the complex, ambiguous, and subtle. Theymay regard the arts and sciences with suspicion, regarding these endeavors asabstruse or of no practical use. Closed people prefer familiarity over novelty; theyare conservative and resistant to change.

[edit] Sample Openness items

• I am full of ideas.• I am quick to understand things.• I have a rich vocabulary.• I have a vivid imagination.• I have excellent ideas.• I spend time reflecting on things.• I use difficult words.• I am not interested in abstract ideas. (reversed )• I do not have a good imagination. (reversed )• I have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. (reversed ) [17]

[edit] Correlates of Openness

Openness is correlated weakly (!.3) with measures of creativity, and withintelligence test scores. Current analyses suggest that the correlation with IQ isdue to a subset of Openness measures acting as self-report IQ measures. It ispossible that openness is a mechanism facilitating access to novel thoughts — thiswould explain the correlation of openness (O) to responses on creativity measuressuch as imagining different uses for common objects.

Openness is also correlated with liberal as opposed to conservative politicalideology. [18] [19]

Openness is often presented as healthier or more mature by psychologists.However, open and closed styles of thinking are useful in different environments.The intellectual style of the open person may serve a professor well, but researchhas shown that closed thinking is related to superior job performance in policework, sales, and a number of service occupations.


18/26

Openness has also been demonstrated, by Sanchez-Bernardos and Avia (2004)[20], to correlate positively with Fantasy Proneness. That is, higher levels ofopenness relate (significantly) to higher levels of fantasy proneness, and viceversa,r = .11, p < .01.

[edit] Biology of Openness

Higher levels of Openness have been linked to activity in the ascendingdopaminergic system and the functions of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.Openness is the only personality trait that correlates with neuropsychological testsof dorsolateral prefrontal cortical function, supporting the link between Opennessand IQ.[21]

[edit] Selected scientific findings

Ever since the 1990s when the consensus of psychologists gradually came to

support the Big Five, there has been a growing body of research surrounding thesepersonality traits (see for instance, Robert Hogan's edited book "Handbook ofPersonality Psychology" (Academic Press, 1997).

[edit] Heritability studies

All five factors show an influence from both heredity and environment. Twin studiessuggest that these effects contribute in roughly equal proportion. [22] An analysis ofthe available studies found overall heritabilities for the Big Five traits as follows: [23]

Openness: 57%

Extraversion: 54%Conscientiousness: 49%Neuroticism: 48%

Agreeableness: 42%

[edit] Change and development

During young adulthood, a person's ratings on the five factors may change, withaverage levels of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness typically increasing, andwith Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Openness generally decreasing. However,after age 30, researchers have found that stability, not change is the general rule.Both longitudinal data, which correlate people's test scores over time, and cross-sectional data, which compare personality levels across different age groups, showremarkable stability in adulthood.[24] This is not to say that personality as measuredon the Big Five cannot change, given life altering circumstances or efforts to do so.It does indicate, however, that after age 30, people generally do not change theirpersonalities very much.

[edit] Sex differences


19/26

Cross cultural research from 26 nations (N = 23,031 subjects) and again in 55nations (N = 17,637 subjects) has shown a universal pattern of sex differences onresponses to the Big Five Inventory. Women consistently report higher levels ofNeuroticism and Agreeableness than men across nations; higher Extraversion andConscientiousness are also often reported in women. Surprisingly, sex differences

in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures inwhich women have more opportunities that are equal to those of men. [25][26]

[edit] Birth order

The suggestion has often been made that individuals differ by the order of theirbirths. Frank J. Sulloway argues that birth order is correlated with personality traits.He claims that firstborns are more conscientious, more socially dominant, lessagreeable, and less open to new ideas compared to laterborns.

However, Sulloway’s case has been discredited because his data confound family

size with birth order. Subsequent analyses have shown that birth order effects areonly found in studies where the subjects’ personality traits are rated by familymembers (such as siblings or parents) or by acquaintances familiar with thesubjects’ birth order. Large scale studies using random samples and self-reportpersonality tests like the NEO PI-R have found no significant effect of birth order onpersonality.[27] [28]

[edit] Cultural differences

Recent work has also found relationships between Geert Hofstede’s culturalfactors, Individualism, Power Distance, Masculinity, and Uncertainty Avoidance,with the average Big Five scores in a country. For instance, the degree to which acountry values individualism correlates with its average Extraversion, while peopleliving in cultures which are accepting of large inequalities in their power structurestend to score somewhat higher on Conscientiousness. The reasons for thesedifferences are as yet unknown; this is an active area of research.

[edit] Criticisms

Much research has been conducted on the Big Five. This has resulted in bothcriticism.[29] and support for the model.[30]

[edit] Limited scope

One common criticism is that the Big Five does not explain all of humanpersonality. Some psychologists have dissented from the model precisely becausethey feel it neglects other domains of personality, such as Religiosity,Manipulativeness/Machiavellianism, Honesty, Thriftiness, Conservativeness,Masculinity/Femininity, Snobbishness, Sense of humour , Identity, Self-concept,and Motivation. Correlations have been found between some of these variables


20/26

and the Big Five, such as the inverse relationship between political conservatismand Openness,[31] although variation in these traits is not well explained by the FiveFactors themselves. McAdams has called the Big Five a "psychology of thestranger," because they refer to traits that are relatively easy to observe in astranger; other aspects of personality that are more privately held or more context-

dependent are excluded from the Big Five.

[32]

In many studies, the five factors are not fully orthogonal to one another; that is, thefive factors are not independent. Negative correlations often appear betweenNeuroticism and Extraversion, for instance, indicating that those who are moreprone to experiencing negative emotions tend to be less talkative and outgoing.Orthogonality is viewed as desirable by some researchers because it minimizesredundancy between the dimensions. This is particularly important when the goalof a study is to provide a comprehensive description of personality with as fewvariables as possible.

[edit] Methodological issues

The methodology used to identify the dimensional structure of personality traits,factor analysis, is often challenged for not having a universally-recognized basis forchoosing among solutions with different numbers of factors. That is, a five factorsolution depends on some degree of interpretation by the analyst. A larger numberof factors may, in fact, underlie these five factors. This has led to disputes aboutthe "true" number of factors. Big Five proponents have responded that althoughother solutions may be viable in a single dataset, only the five factor structureconsistently replicates across different studies.

A methodological criticism often directed at the Big Five is that much of theevidence relies on self report questionnaires; self report bias and falsification ofresponses is impossible to deal with completely. This becomes especiallyimportant when considering why scores may differ between individuals or groups ofpeople - differences in scores may represent genuine underlying personalitydifferences, or they may simply be an artifact of the way the subjects answered thequestions. The five factor structure has been replicated in peer reports. [33] However, many of the substantive findings rely on self-reports.

[edit] Theoretical status

A frequent criticism is that the Big Five is not based on any underlying theory; it ismerely an empirical finding that certain descriptors cluster together under factoranalysis. While this does not mean that these five factors don't exist, the underlyingcauses behind them are unknown. Sensation seeking and cheerfulness are notlinked to Extraversion because of an underlying theory; this relationship is anempirical finding to be explained. Several overarching theoretical models havebeen proposed to cover all of the Big Five, such as Five-Factor Theory and SocialInvestment Theory. Temperament Theory may prove to provide a theoretical


21/26

foundation for the Big Five, and provide a longitudinal (life-span) model in whichthe Big Five could be grounded.

[edit] Further research

Current research concentrates on a number of areas. One important question is:are the five factors the right ones? Attempts to replicate the Big Five in othercountries with local dictionaries have succeeded in some countries but not inothers. Apparently, for instance, Hungarians don’t appear to have a single

Agreeableness factor.[34] Proponents state that the problem is that the languagedoes not provide enough variance of the related terms for proper statisticalanalysis (CITE). Other researchers find evidence for Agreeableness but not forother factors.[35]

In an attempt to explain variance in personality traits more fully, some have foundseven factors,[36] some eighteen,[37] and some only three.[38] What determines the

eventual number of factors is essentially the kind of information that is put into thefactor analysis in the first place (i.e. the "Garbage in, Garbage out" principle). Sincetheory often implicitly precedes empirical science (such as factor analysis), the BigFive and other proposed factor structures should always be judged according tothe items that went into the factor analytic algorithm. Recent studies show thatseven- or eighteen-factor models have their relative strengths and weaknesses inexplaining variance in DSM-based symptom counts in non-clinical samples [39] andin psychiatric patients.[40] and do not seem to be clearly outperformed by the BigFive.

A second question is, which factors predict what? Job outcomes for leaders andsalespeople have already been measured, and research is currently being done inexpanding the list of careers. There are also a variety of life outcomes whichpreliminary research indicates are affected by personality, such as smoking(predicted by high scores in Neuroticism and low scores in Agreeableness andConscientiousness) and interest in different kinds of music (largely mediated byOpenness).

A validation study, in 1992, conducted by Paul Sinclair and Steve Barrow, involved202 Branch Managers from the then TSB Bank. It found several significantcorrelations with job performance across 3 of the Big Five scales. The correlationsranged from .21 - .33 and were noted across 3 scales: High Extraversion, LowNeuroticism and High Openness to Experience.[41]

A third area of investigation is to make a model of personality. The Big Fivepersonality traits are empirical observations, not a theory; the observations ofpersonality research remain to be explained. Costa and McCrae have built whatthey call the Five Factor Theory of Personality as an attempt to explain personalityfrom the cradle to the grave. They don't follow the lexical hypothesis, though, butfavor a theory-driven approach inspired by the same sources as the sources of theBig Five.


22/26

A fourth area of investigation is the downward extension of Big Five theory, or theFive Factor Model, into childhood. Studies have found Big Five personality traits tocorrelate with children's social and emotional adjustment and academicachievement. More recently, the Five Factor Personality Inventory - Children[42] was published extending assessment between the ages of 9-0 to 18-11. Perhaps

the reason for this recent publication was the controversy over the application ofthe Five Factor Model to children. Studies by Oliver P. John et al with adolescentboys brought two new factors to the table: "Irritability" and "Activity." In studies ofDutch children, those same two new factors also became apparent. These newadditions "suggest that the structure of personality traits may be more differentiatedin childhood than in adulthood"[43] which would explain the recent research in thisparticular area.

[edit] See also

• NEO-PI • Personality psychology • Trait theory • Myers-Briggs Type Indicator • 16 Personality Factors

[edit] References

1. ^ Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist , 48 , 26-34.

2. ^ Thurstone, L. L. (1934). The vectors of the mind. Psychological Review ,41, 1-32.

3. ^ Personality Project 4. ^ Allport, G. W. & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait names: A psycholexical study.

Psychological Monographs, 47 , 211.5. ^ Cattell, R. B. (1957). Personality and motivation: Structure and

measurement . New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. Journal of PersonalityDisorders, 19(1), 53-67.

6. ^ Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. E. (1961). Recurrent personality factors basedon trait ratings. USAF ASD Tech. Rep. No. 61-97, Lackland Airforce Base,TX: U. S. Air Force.

7. ^ Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personalityattributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 66 , 574-583.

8. ^ Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The searchfor universals in personality lexicons. In Wheeler (Ed.), Review ofPersonality and social psychology , Vol. 1, 141-165. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

9. ^ Saulsman, L. M. & Page, A. C. (2004). The five-factor model andpersonality disorder empirical literature: A meta-analytic review. ClinicalPsychology Review , 23, 1055-1085.


23/26

10.^ Barrick, M. R., & Mount M. K. (1991). The Big Five PersonalityDimensions and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology ,44, 1-26.

11.^ Mount, M. K. & Barrick, M. R. (1998). Five reasons why the "Big Five"article has been frequently cited. Personnel Psychology , 51, 849-857.

12.^ International Personality Item Pool 13.^ International Personality Item Pool 14.^ International Personality Item Pool 15.^ Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999). Neurobiology of the structure of

personality: Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion.Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22 , 491-517.

16.^ International Personality Item Pool 17.^ International Personality Item Pool 18.^ McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness.

Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323-337.19.^ Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist ,

61, 651-670.20.^ Sanhez-Bernardos, M.L., & Avia., M.D. (2004). Personality correlates of

fantasy proneness among adolescents. Personality and IndividualDifferences, 37, 1069–1079

21.^ DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Sources ofopenness/intellect: cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifthfactor of personality. Journal of Personality , 73, 825-858.

22.^ Jang, K., Livesley, W. J., Vemon, P. A. (1996). Heritability of the Big FivePersonality Dimensions and Their Facets: A Twin Study. Journal ofPersonality , 64, 577-591.

23.^ Bouchard & McGue, 2003. "Genetic and environmental influences onhuman psychological differences." Journal of Neurobiology , 54, 4-45.

24.^ McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York:The Guildford Press.

25.^ Costa, P.T. Jr., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R.R. (2001). "GenderDifferences in Personality Traits Across Cultures: Robust and SurprisingFindings" Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(2), 322-331

26.^ Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008). Why can't a manbe more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across55 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 94, 168-182.

27.^ Harris, J. R. (2006). No two alike: Human nature and human individuality .WW Norton & Company.

28.^ Jefferson, T., Herbst, J. H., & McCrae, R. R. (1998). Associations betweenbirth order and personality traits: Evidence from self-reports and observerratings. Journal of Research in Personality , 32 , 498-509.

29.^ A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description 30.^ Solid ground in the wetlands of personality: A reply to Block 31.^ McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness.

Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323-337.32.^ McAdams, D. P. (1995). What do we know when we know a person?

Journal of Personality , 63, 365-396.


24/26

33.^ Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 59, 1216-1229.

34.^ Szirmak, Z., & De Raad, B. (1994). Taxonomy and structure of Hungarianpersonality traits. European Journal of Personality , 8 , 95-117.

35.^ De Fruyt, F., McCrae, R. R., Szirmák, Z., & Nagy, J. (2004). The Five-Factor personality inventory as a measure of the Five-Factor Model:Belgian, American, and Hungarian comparisons with the NEO-PI-R.

Assessment , 11, 207-215.36.^ Cloninger, C. R., Svrakic, D. M., Przybeck, T. R. (1993). A

psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of GeneralPsychiatry , 50(12), 975-990.

37.^ Livesley, W. J., Jackson, D. N. (1986). The internal consistency andfactorial structure of behaviors judged to be associated with DSM-IIIpersonality disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry , 143(11), 1473-4.

38.^ Eysenck, H. J. (1991). Criteria for a taxonomic paradigm. Personality andIndividual Differences, 12 , 773-790.

39.^ Bagby, R. M., Marshall, M. B., Georgiades, S. (2005), Dimensionalpersonality traits and the prediction of DSM-IV personality disorder symptomcounts in a nonclinical sample. Journal of Personal Disorders, 19(1)', 53-67.

40.^ De Fruyt, F., De Clercq, B. J., van de Wiele, L., Van Heeringen, K. (2006).The validity of Cloninger's psychobiological model versus the five-factormodel to predict DSM-IV personality disorders in a heterogeneouspsychiatric sample: domain facet and residualized facet descriptions.Journal of Personality , 74(2), 479-510.

41.^ Sinclair, P. & Barrow, S. (1992)Identifying Personality Traits predictive ofPerformance. The BPS’s journal on Occupational Testing – Selection &Development Review, SDR - October 1992 Volume 8 (5)

42.^ McGhee, R.M., Ehrler, D.J., & Buckhalt, J. (2007). Five Factor PersonalityInventory - Children (FFPI-C). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

43.^ John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five trait taxonomy: History,measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John(Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–138).New York: Guilford Press.


25/26

Big Five

Me han preguntado por el significado de cada uno de los cinco rasgos de los BigFive. Aquí os dejo otros nombres aportados por diferentes autores que trabajaronen la teoría:

1. Extraversión: Adaptabilidad social, emocionalidad, asertividad (Hablador,callado, franco, abierto, cerrado, aventurado, precavido, sociable,retraido...)

2. Afabilidad: Conformidad, agradabilidad, simpatía, condescendenciaamistosa (Buen caracter, irritable, celoso, obstinado, dulce, cooperativo...)

3. Tesón: Voluntad de éxito, escrupulosidad, responsabilidad (Exigente,pulcro, descuidado, informal, riguroso, laxo, perseverante, inconstante...)

4. Estabilidad Emocional: Control emociona, emocionalidad, neuroticismo,afecto (Equilibrado, nervioso, tenso, tranquilo, ansioso, sosegado, excitable,hipocondríaco)

5. Apertura mental: Intelecto inquisitivo, cultura, inteligencia, apertura a laexperiencia (Sensibilidad artística, intelectual, estrecho de mente,imaginativo, rudo...)

BFQ, CUESTIONARIO “BIG FIVE” (b) Cuestionario con 132 elementos de respuesta múltiple (tipoLikert) para identificar las cinco dimensiones fundamentales dela personalidad humana: - Energía, inherente a una visiónconfiada y entusiasta de múltiples aspectos de la vida,principalmente de tipo interpersonal. - Afabilidad, preocupaciónde tipo altruista y de apoyo emocional a los demás. - Tesón,propia de un comportamiento de tipo perseverante,escrupuloso y responsable. - Estabilidad emocional, rasgo deamplio espectro, con características tales como capacidad paraafrontar los efectos negativos de la ansiedad, de la depresión,

de la irritabilidad o de la frustración. - Apertura mental, sobretodo de tipo intelectual ante nuevas ideas, valores, sentimientos e intereses.Incorpora una escala tipo 'L' para medir la deseabilidad social. La corrección serealiza mediante un pin en www.e-perfil.com. Consume 1 uso por sujeto evaluado


26/26

Tema: TECNICAS PSICOMETRICAS INTELIGENCIA - SELECCION DEPERSONAL

Evaluación de las 5 dimensiones del modelo de los "Cinco grandes" en laestructura de la personalidad. Aplicación: Individual y colectiva. Tiempo: Variable,unos 30 minutos. Edad: A partir de los 16 años. Cuestionario con 132 elementosde respuesta múltiple (tipo Likert) para identificar las cinco dimensionesfundamentales para describir y evaluar la personalidad humana: Energía,inherente a una visión confiada y entusiasta de múltiples aspectos de la vida,principalmente de tipo interpersonal. Amigabilidad, preocupación de tipo altruistay de apoyo emocional a los demás. Consciencia, propia de un comportamiento detipo perseverante, escrupuloso y responsable. Estabilidad emocional, rasgo deamplio espectro, con características tales como capacidad para afrontar losefectos negativos de la ansiedad, de la depresión, de la irritabilidad o de lafrustración. Apertura, sobre todo de tipo intelectual ante nuevas ideas, valores,sentimientos e intereses. Incorpora una escala tipo "L" para medir la deseabilidadsocial.

test bfq big

Documents