Academic literature on the topic 'Basic Personality Inventory'

The relation between psychopathology measured by Jackson's 1989 Basic Personality Inventory and personality dimensions measured by Costa and McCrae's 1985 NEO-Personality Inventory was investigated in a nonpatient sample of 457 female subjects. The results contribute to the validation of both instruments and agree with the relevant findings reported in the literature. They also provide support for the cross-cultural invariance of these instruments.

The major purpose of this exploratory study was to examine the relation between perfectionism and Millon's basic personality patterns. The subjects were 91 clients (60 women and 31 men) at two midwestern university counseling services ( ns = 38 and 24) and a private-practice office ( n = 29). The subjects completed the Millon inventory and two perfectionism scales in one session. Scores on perfectionism were most strongly related to the passive-aggressive, avoidant, schizoid, and dependent scores. Also, there was a significant negative relation between perfectionism and the compulsive pattern. It was suggested that the present study be replicated with the Millon-II and that the differences between perfectionism and compulsiveness be explored further.

This study investigates the validity of the Basic Personality Inventory (BPI) with a sample of 101 adult male offenders in a medium security institution. The criterion measures consisted of self-ratings (i.e., bipolar dimensional and adjective ratings), correctional officer ratings, and institutional adjustment (i.e., contact with medical staff, verbal warnings, institutional charges, days segregated, and cell maintenance). The majority of the scales corresponded well to the self-ratings. The Denial, Persecutory Ideation, Anxiety, and Thinking Disorder scales had poor convergent and discriminant validity with the correctional officer ratings. Interpersonal Problems, Alienation, and Impulse Expression scales predicted behavioral adjustment indexes. The results are summarized in relation to the higher order factors of emotional adjustment, antisocial orientation, cognitive functioning, and social or self-perception. Overall, the BPI scales adequately measure psychopathology and adjustment within a correctional setting.

This study investigated the effects of personality characteristics on emergent leadership in small group settings. Two instruments were used to assess personality factors: The BASIS-A and the California Personality Inventory (CPI). A sociometric tool was developed to elicit leader ranking of female group members. The BASIS-A, was used to test for Taking Charge and Wanting Recognition lifestyles in women who emerged as leaders. The CPI was used to assess female emergent leaders for Dominance and Leadership Potential. The two instruments and a sociometric form were distributed to 115 female graduate counselor-in-training students the last week of their group counseling experience. This survey resulted in 55 respondents (N=55) from eleven discussion groups. It was expected that women who had the highest averaged leader rank would demonstrate higher test scores in Dominance, Leadership Potential, Taking Charge, and Wanting Recognition than women who received a lower averaged leader rank. It was also thought that these four test factors would be highly related. If so, a case would be made to use the BASIS-A as an emergent leader assessment tool because it is consistently based in one psychological theory. No significant effect was found between the highest leader rank and three of the test measures: Dominance, Leadership Potential, and Taking Charge. Using four one-way ANOVAs, a significant effect was found between highest leader rank and Wanting Recognition. This demonstrated that individuals high in interpersonal caution, empathy, and with a need to succeed emerged as leaders. Possible explanations for this finding were discussed. Significant relationships were found using the Pearson-r correlation statistic between three of the four test variables. From the CPI, the Dominance and Leadership Potential scales were highly correlated to the BASIS-A Taking Charge life-style. The BASIS-A Wanting Recognition lifestyle was not related to either Dominance or Leadership Potential. Unexpectedly, a significant relationship was found in this population between Wanting Recognition and Taking Charge. Perhaps due to the limited inter-correlational analysis and small sample, these research results did not support using the BASIS-A as a sole emergent leader assessment. More research is needed before such a case can be made.

M.Com. (Industrial Psychology)
This study was conducted to examine the dimensionality of the Neuroticism scale of the Basic Traits Inventory in order to contribute to the larger project of developing computer adaptive testing for the five scales of the Basic Traits Inventory. The Neuroticism scale comprises the general factor of Neuroticism and four group factors or facets, namely, Affective Instability, Depression, Self-Consciousness, and Anxiety (Taylor & De Bruin, 2006; Taylor & De Bruin, 2013). Personality constructs and scales are complex as they typically comprise heterogeneous items for reliability and validity purposes (Reise, Morizot, & Hays, 2007). It is therefore to be expected that some studies present evidence of a scale that measures an overarching single dimension – unidimensionality – whilst other studies find evidence of multiple dimensions – multidimensionality (Gibbons et al., 2007; Immekus & Imbrie, 2008; Reise, Moore, & Haviland, 2010). Consequently, specification of a strictly unidimensional model is often not realistic for complex personality constructs and scales. However, test-developers and researchers aspire to unidimensionality (Zinbarg, Yovel, Revelle, & McDonald, 2006) as unidimensionality allows for the unambiguous interpretation of scale scores (Reise et al., 2010), is considered a precondition to reliability and validity, encourages the use of a total score (Netemeyer, Bearden, & Sharma, 2003), meets the unidimensional assumption of item response theory models, and is the prerequisite for the development of computer adaptive testing (Thomas, 1990; Weiss & Gibbons, 2007). Against this background, the key question that was posed in this study was not whether the Neuroticism scale was strictly unidimensional or not, but rather if the scale was unidimensional enough to allow for the meaningful interpretation of a total score (Morizot, Ainsworth, & Reise, 2009). This study focussed on attaining evidence of the presence of a strong general factor which would justify the interpretation of a total score and for applying unidimensional item response theory models to the scale (Reise, 2012). The Basic Traits Inventory was completed by 1 966 participants from various industries and organisations within South Africa. Statistical analyses were performed on the responses to the Neuroticism scale. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate the unidimensionality and strength of the general factor of the scale, while evaluating the influence of multidimensionality on the interpretation of the general factor or the total score. This dimensionality investigation of the scale was achieved by comparing three confirmatory factor models using the goodness-of-fit indices and the standardised factor loadings of the models. The competing structural models were: a one-factor or unidimensional model which represented the general factor and interpretation of a total score for the scale; a four-factor or multidimensional model which represented the multiple factors of the scale and therefore the interpretation of the group factors or facets; and a bifactor model which allowed for the examination of the strength of the general factor in comparison to that of the group factors of the scale. The results of this study confirmed that the Neuroticism scale is multidimensional as the scale comprises multiple group factors or facets. However, the findings of the study revealed the strong presence of a general factor that runs through all the items of the scale, and consequently suggest that efforts to make use of and interpret separate subscale scores lack the needed empirical evidence to do so. In essence, the findings of the study demonstrated that the presence of unidimensionality in the scale is prominent despite the multidimensionality of the scale, which confirmed that the interpretation of the total score for the scale is justified and preferred irrespective of the multidimensionality of the scale. Overall, the findings and evidence of this study proposed that the Neuroticism scale is unidimensional enough to meet the unidimensional assumption of item response theory models. Accordingly, these results support the advancement of adapting the Neuroticism scale of the Basic Traits Inventory for computer adaptive testing (Reise, 2012; Thomas, 1990; Weiss & Gibbons, 2007). This study further confirmed that when developing a multifaceted scale, it is essential to analyse the dimensionality of the scale in order to determine what the scale is actually measuring. The bifactor model can be employed in the development, exploration and confirmation of the dimensionality of the scale to examine the strength of the general factor relative to the multiple group factors of the scale.

Personality psychology became an identifiable discipline in the social sciences in the 1930s when Allport (1937) published an article on the psychological interpretation of personality. The field of personality traditionally emphasised the study of the whole person, the dynamics of human motivation and the identification and measurement of individual differences (McAdams, 1997). Since the publication of Allport’s article, personality has been extensively researched and several theories exist that attempt to organise and explain the differences in human behaviour. Personality instruments are based on personality theories and aim to assist psychologists with the prediction of human behaviour. Psychologists use personality instruments as part of a selection battery to assist organisations with the screening and selection of individuals who have the potential to be successful within a specific work environment. The Basic Traits Inventory (BTI), a personality instrument that is based on the Five-Factor model, was developed in South Africa by Taylor and De Bruin (2006). The BTI is a valid and reliable personality instrument as indicated by results from research by Taylor (2004), Taylor and De Bruin (2006) and Taylor (2008) on its utility within the multicultural and multilingual environment of South Africa. Taylor (2008) nevertheless identified some problematic items when she analysed the construct, item, and response bias of the BTI across cultures for three language groups – Afrikaans, English and indigenous African languages – and consequently indicated the need for further research in this regard. The current study therefore explores the possible bias of the items of the BTI, and uses a sample large enough to analyse each of the eleven of the official languages of South Africa separately. The study focuses on the impact of the eleven official languages of South Africa on assessment of the Big Five personality factors with the BTI. The actual sample consisted of 105 342 respondents, resulting in the sub-samples per official language group being larger than 1 000. Each of the eleven official South African language groups could therefore be analysed separately, which has not been possible in previous studies. Analysis of the responses of the total sample to the BTI items generally yielded high reliability in terms of Cronbach alpha coefficients (α) and the Person Separation Index (PSI). The results were reported as follows: Extraversion (α=.86; PSI=.85); Neuroticism (α=.89; PSI=.86); Conscientiousness (α=.93; PSI=.88); Openness to experience (α=.90; PSI=.84); Agreeableness (α=.94; PSI=.86); and Social desirability (α=.72; PSI=.70). MANOVA results indicated statistically significant differences between the mean values of each of the BTI factors for the different language groups. Rasch analysis methods were used to further analyse the differences in terms of item responses for each of the eleven official language groups in South Africa. Respondents generally interpret and endorse the items of a personality instrument according to their intrinsic personality characteristics and their interpretation of the words used in the items of the personality instrument. In order to assess the respondents’ understanding of the administration language, English, two English proficiency tests were administered together with the BTI. The combined English proficiency scores were used to differentiate between respondents who understood English very well (top 25% – high English proficiency group) and those who struggled to understand English terminology (bottom 25% – low English proficiency group). Rasch analysis techniques were used to analyse the data for the whole sample as well as for the high and low English proficiency groups. Some items showed statistically significant differences for the language groups, indicating item bias in the BTI. Contrary to expectation, a larger number of biased items were indicated for the higher English proficiency group than for the total group or for the low English proficiency group. Due to the number of biased items for the high English proficiency group, it was concluded that the differences between the eleven official language groups may be a result of the differences in the intrinsic personality characteristics of the respondents, rather than measurement errors or item bias of the BTI instrument. Further research in this regard was recommended. The current study confirms that home language and English proficiency, as indicators of the level of understanding of the language in which the personality instrument was administered, undeniably influence the individual’s response pattern. Far fewer items indicated bias than those identified in Taylor’s (2008) study, where a smaller sample was used and language groups were combined. Despite some BTI items showing bias, the conclusion was reached that this personality instrument can be used with confidence to assess personality traits in persons speaking any of the eleven official South African languages.
Industrial & Organisational Psychology
D. Comm. (Industrial and Organisational Psychology)

The Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality is one of the prominent models in contemporary psychology and defines personality in terms of five broad factors, namely, Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Recent research, however, questions the applicability of the FFM in non-Western cultures, suggesting that it is not exhaustive enough and that it does not account for some other personality factors, most notably Individualism/Collectivism. Therefore, this study investigated whether the FFM of personality is related to Individualism/Collectivism in a sample of South African students. A total of 176 questionnaires were completed by students from the University of the Witwatersrand. The questionnaire contained the individualism/collectivism (INDCOL) scales and the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) which is a South African instrument based on the FFM. Results indicate that there were no significant relationships between the five factors and Individualism/Collectivism. In addition no significant difference was found between race and the five factors and Individualism/Collectivism. There were also no significant differences between home language and the five factors and Individualism/Collectivism.

The general aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between personality traits and team culture, establish whether this relationship changed over time and determine if there were significant differences between the research groups in their personalities and team cultures from a before to an after assessment. The study was conducted on a sample from the South African Police Services and assessments utilising the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) and the Team Emotional and Social Intelligence survey (TESI) were analysed at the onset and completion of the participants' training. The results indicated a slight relationship between personality and team culture and significant differences were detected from the before to after phases of the study. The findings of the study contribute to an understanding of personality as amenable to a specific occupational setting and of team culture as a more stable variable, which is established early in the team‟s development.
Industrial and Organisational Psychology
M.A. (Industrial and Organisational Psychology)

The general aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between personality traits and team culture, establish whether this relationship changed over time and determine if there were significant differences between the research groups in their personalities and team cultures from a before to an after assessment. The study was conducted on a sample from the South African Police Services and assessments utilising the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) and the Team Emotional and Social Intelligence survey (TESI) were analysed at the onset and completion of the participants' training. The results indicated a slight relationship between personality and team culture and significant differences were detected from the before to after phases of the study. The findings of the study contribute to an understanding of personality as amenable to a specific occupational setting and of team culture as a more stable variable, which is established early in the team‟s development.
Industrial and Organisational Psychology
M.A. (Industrial and Organisational Psychology)

For adaptation and personalization of game play sophisticated player models and learner models are used in game-based learning environments. Thus, the game flow can be optimized to increase efficiency and effectiveness of gaming and learning in parallel. In the field of gaming still the Bartle model is commonly used due to its simplicity and good mapping to game scenarios, for learning the Learning Style Inventory from Kolb or Index of Learning Styles by Felder and Silverman are well known. For personality traits the NEO-FFI (Big5) model is widely accepted. When designing games, it is always a challenge to assess one player's profile characteristics properly in all three models (player/learner/personality). To reduce the effort and amount of dimensions and questionnaires a player might have to fill out, we proved the hypothesis that both, Learning Style Inventory and Bartle Player Types could be predicted by knowing the personality traits based on NEO-FFI. Thus we investigated the statistical correlations among the models by collecting answers to the questionnaires of Bartle Test, Kolb LSI 3.1 and BFI-K (short version of NEO-FFI). A study was conducted in spring 2012 with six school classes of grade 9 (12-14 year old students) in two different secondary schools in Germany. 74 students participated in the study which was offered optionally after the use of a game-based learning tool for peer learning. We present the results statistics and correlations among the models as well as the interdependencies with the student's level of proficiency and their social connectedness. In conclusion, the evaluation (correlation and regression analyses) proved the independency of the models and the validity of the dimensions. Still, especially for all of the playing style preferences of Bartle's model significant correlations with some of the analyzed other questionnaire items could be found. As no predictions of learning style preferences is possible on the basis of this studies data, the final recommendation for the development of game-based learning application concludes that separate modeling for the adaptation game flow (playing) and learn flow (learning) is still necessary.