Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito


N. 3 (2022)

Psychometric properties of the Slovak translation of the NEO-PI-R questionnaire

4 October 2022


The study aimed to verify the psychometric properties of the NEO-PI-R Slovak translation. The self-report sample consisted of 1.062, a retested sample of 122, and an observer rater of 371 persons. In self-assessments, Cronbachʼs alfa of domains ranged from .88 (Openness) to .92 (Neuroticism). In observer ratings, the reliability ranged from .89 (Extraversion) to .95 (Conscientiousness). The stability of the test-retest showed an average correlation of r = .81 after three months. Exploratory factor analysis revealed five factors that explained the variance of 60.45%. The agreement between the observers and the self-assessments was at a mean level of .58. The Slovak translation of NEO-PI-R follows the psychometric standards for reliability and construct validity. The study did not follow the educational level and mental health of the research participants.

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. Aluja, A., García, O., García, L.F., & Seisdedos, N. (2005). Invariance of the “NEO-PI-R” factor structure across exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1879-1889.
  2. Benešová, A. (2012). Zhoda pri posudzovaní osobnosti partnerských dvojíc. [Consistency in the rating and self-assessment of personality in partners/spouses]. Bachelor thesis, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava.
  3. Branco e Silva, L., & Laher, S. (2012). Exploring the Utility of the NEO-PI-R in a Sample of South African University Students. IFE Psychologia, 20(1), 19-48.
  4. Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C., Hahn, R., & Comrey, A.L. (2001). Factor analyses of the NEO-PI-R Inventory and the Comrey Personality Scales in Italy and the United States. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 217-228.
  5. Cheek, J.M. (1982). Aggregation, moderator variables, and the validity of personality tests: Apeer-rating study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(6), 1254-1269.
  6. Church, A. T., & Burke, P. J. (1994). Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the Big Five and Tellegenʼs three- and four-dimensional models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 93-114.
  7. Coaley, K. (2010). An Introduction to Psychological Assessment and Psychometrics. London: Sage.
  8. Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEOPI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  9. Costa, P.T., Terracciano, A., Uda, M., Vacca, L., Mameli, C., Pilia, G., Zonderman, A.B., Lakatta, E., Schlessinger, D., & McCrae, R.R. (2006). Personality Traits in Sardinia: Testing Founder Population Effects on Trait Me ans and Va ri ance s . Behavior Genetics, 37, 376-387. DOI: 10.1007/s10519-006-9103-6.
  10. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9. DOI: 10.7275/jyj1-4868.
  11. Coulacoglou, C. & Saklofske, D.H. (2017). Recent Advances in Psychological Assessment and Test Construction. In: Psychometrics and Psychological Assessment (3-25). Academic Press. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-802219-1.00001-8.
  12. Evers, A., Muñiz, J., Bartram, D., Boben, D., Egeland, J., Fernández-Hermida, J. R., Frans, Ö., Gintiliené, G., Hagemeister, C., Halama, P., Iliescu, D., Jaworowska, A., Jiménez, P., Manthouli, M., Matesic, K., Schittekatte, M., Sümer, H. C., & Urbánek, T. (2012). Testing practices in the 21st century: Developments and European psychologistsʼopinions. European Psychologist, 17(4), 300-319.
  13. Funder, D.C, Kolar D.C., & Blackman, M.C. (1995). Agreement Among Judges of Personality: Interpersonal Relations, Similarity, and Acquaintanceship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 656-672.
  14. Funder, D.C., & Dobroth, K.M. (1987). Differences between traits: Properties associated with interjudge agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(2), 409-418.
  15. Furnham, A., Guenole, N., Levine, S.Z., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2012). The NEO Personality Inventory Revised: Factor Structure and Gender Invariance From Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Analyses in a High-Stakes Setting. Assessment, 20, 14-23. DOI: 10.1177/1073191112448213.
  16. Gignac, G.E. (2009). Partial confirmatory factor analysis: Described and illustrated on the NEO-PI-R. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 40-47. DOI: 10.1080/00223890802484126.
  17. Hesselmark, E., Eriksson, J.M., Westerlund, J., & Bejerot, S. (2015). Autism Spectrum Disorders and Self-reports: Testing Validity and Reliability Using the NEO-PI-R. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 1156-1166. DOI: 10.1007/s10803-014-2275-7.
  18. Hoffman, P.D., Buteau, E., & Fruzzetti, A.E (2007). Borderline Personality Disorder: NeoPersonality Inventory Ratings of Patients and Their Family Members. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 53(3), 204-215.
  19. Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How should the internal structure of personality inventories be evaluated? Personality and social psychology review: an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 14(3), 332-346. DOI: 10.1177/1088868310361240.
  20. Hřebíčková, M. (2002). Vnitřní konzistence čeké verze NEO osobnostního inventáře (NEO-PI-R). [Internal consistency of the Czech version of the NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R)]. Československá psychologie, 46(6), 521-535.
  21. Hřebíčková, M. (2004). NEO osobnostní inventář. [NEO personality inventory]. Praha: Testcentrum.
  22. Hřebíčková, M., & Urbánek, T. (2002). Shoda při posuzování osobnosti. Consistency in personality assessment]. In F. Baumgartner, M., Frankovský, M., Kentoš (Eds.): Sociálne procesy a osobnosť 2002. Zborník príspevkov. Košice: Ústav experimentálnej psychológie SAV, 129 -133.
  23. Hřebíčková, M., Urbánek, T., Čermák, I. (2002). Psychometrické charakteristiky NEO osobnostního inventáře (NEO-PI-R) pro sebeposouzení a posouzení druhého. [Psychometric characteristics of NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) for self-assessment and assessment of the other]. Brno: Psychologický ústav Akademie věd ČR.
  24. Ispas, D., Iliescu, D., Ilie, A., & Johnson, R.E. (2014). Exploring the Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the Five-Factor Model of Personality: The Romanian NEO PI-R. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1-15. DOI: 10.1177/0022022114534769.
  25. John, O.P., & Robins, R.W. (1993). Determinants of Interjudge Agreement on Personality Traits: The Big Five Domains, Observability, Evaluativeness, and Unique Perspective of the Self. Journal of Personality, 61(4), 521-551. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00781.x.
  26. Källmen, H., Wennberg, P., & Bergman. H. (2010). Psychometric properties and norm data of the Swedish version of the NEO-PI-R. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 65(5), 311-314. DOI: 10.3109/08039488.2010.545433.
  27. Kline, P. (2000). Handbook of psychological testing. London: Routledge.
  28. Lednárová, M. (2012). Zhoda pri posudzovaní osobnosti súrodeneckých dvojíc. [Consistency in the rating and self-assessment of personality in siblings]. Bachelor thesis, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava.
  29. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the big-five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471-491.
  30. Marshall, M.B., De Fruyt, F., Rolland, J.P., & Bagby, R.M. (2005). Socially Desirable Responding and the Factorial Stability of the NEO PI-R.
  31. Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 379-384. DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.379.
  32. Martin, T.A., Costa, P.T., Oryol, V.E., Rukavishnikov, A.A., & Senin, I.G. (2002). Application of The Russian NEO-PI-R. In: R.R. McCrae et al. (Eds.), The Five-Factor Model of Personality Across Cultures, (261-277). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  33. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A fivefactor theory perspective (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. DOI: 10.4324/9780203428412.
  34. McCrae, R. R., & Sutin, A. R. (2009). Openness to experience. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 257-273). The Guilford Press.
  35. McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T., Jr., Bond, M. H., & Paunonen, S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the revised NEO personality inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552-566.
  36. McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T., Martin, T.A., Oryol, V.E., Senin, I.G., et al. (2004). Consensual validation of personality traits across cultures. Journal of Research in Personality, 38(2), 179-201.
  37. Mikulíková, S. (2012). Zhoda pri posudzovaní osobnosti. [Consistency in the rating and self-assessment of personality]. Bachelor thesis, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava.
  38. Pajtinková, T. (2011). Zhoda pri posudzovaní a sebaposudzovaní osobnosti u súrodencov. [Consistency in the rating and self-assessment of personality in siblings] Diplomová práca. Bratislava: Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava.
  39. Pažítková, N. (2011). Zhoda medzi sebaposúdením a objektívnym posúdením osobnosti kamarátmi a rodičmi. [Consistency in the rating and selfassessment of personality in friends and parents]. Bachelor thesis, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava.
  40. Rolland, J.P., Parker, W.D., & Stumpf, H. (1998) A Psychometric Examination of the French Translations of NEO-PI-R and NEO-FFI, Journal of Personality Assessment, 71(2), 269-291. DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa7102_13.
  41. Strelau, J. (2001). The concept and status of trait in research on temperament. European Journal of Personality, 15(4), 311-325. DOI: 10.1002/per.412.
  42. Terracciano, A. (2003). The Italian version of the NEO PI-R: conceptual and empirical support for the use of targeted rotation. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(8), 1859-1872. DOI: 10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00035-7.
  43. Urbina, S. (2004). Essential of Psychological Testing. Hoboken: John Wiley.
  44. Vassend, O. & Skrondal, A. (2011). The NEO personality inventory revised (NEO-PI-R): Exploring the measurement structure and variants of the fivefactor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 1300-1304. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.002.


Caricamento metriche ...