We briefly describe models of personality based on questionnaires like the Big Five (a.k.a. OCEAN, Five Factor Model), HEXACO and Zuckerman-Kuhlman.
Take a personality questionnaire
Take the BFI-2 (60 items). You can ignore the About You section. Alternative link: https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/.
Where is the ennegram?
In the garbage. It is too vague to be of any use.
Psychology is not science
All psychological concepts are intrinsically vague. They can not be measured. They can be evaluated, which involves a specific conception of what that concept means. Any psychological concept is understood in slightly different ways by different people.
Implications:
There are no measurements, like in physics.
In the literature, it is common to assume there is a latent variable. However, such things do not exist in an objective sense. They are statstical fictions, like IQ (see https://ksenia.sexy/en/iq_fallacy).
For good or bad, psychology is mostly researched through questionnaires.
In the past, it was more common that researchers hypothesized “how the mind works” in a conceptual level, sometimes attempting and mostly failing to relating it with biology. For example: In a typical paper from the 1950s on schizophrenia, we can expect to find prose descriptions of several schizophrenics and a section with the author’s interpretation of how the observations relate to other things. In a typical paper from the 2010s on schizophrenia, we can expect to find questionnaires and statistical analyses showing correlates between scores in a scale of schizophrenia (E.g.: the PANAS) and other things.
Implications:
Recent research (1990-present) hardly helps to understand how the mind of a particular person works and to build an intuition for how people think.
Resent research is more useful in terms of predicting high-level parameters of life from scores in questionnaires. E.g.: Predicting personality as assessed in the IPIP-BFFM-50 based on career choice.
Overall, recent research is far less useful for individuals to develop mind reading skills.
There are lots of questionnaires to evaluate psychological things, mostly coming from research 2000-present.
The reader interested in learning about personality models must be very familiar with the most basic stastical concepts (means, variance, standard deviation, covariance, Pearson correlation, root mean squared error of approximation, linear regression, principal component analysis, etc.) and statistical concepts specific to questionnaires (Cronbach α, varimax rotation, etc.).
Bandwidth-fidelity tradeoff
For a questionnaire, the bandwidth is how much “area” in concept space it encompasses. The fidelity is to what extent all items reflect the same concept.
As far as is known to the author: apart from this web site, there is no list of personality questionnaires that attempts to be exhaustive.
Models vs questionnaires
There is no well-defined boundary between personality models when studied on their own (e.g.: The Lexical Big Five in a book about said model) and personality models implicitly defined by a single questionnaire. All models are implicity defined by the questionnaires used to evaluate them.
At the most elementary level, every different questionnaire defines one personality model. E.g.: “The Big Five as evaluated by the IPIP-FFM-50” is a different personality model from “The Big Five as evaluated by the BFI”.
However, in practice we introduce the fictitious concept of abstract personality models separate from a single questionnaire. Under this fiction, we say that the Big Five is a single model evaluated by several questionnaires, including the IPIP-FFM-50 and the BFI.
Lumping vs splitting personality models
For the most part, after reading the introductory paper of 2 questionnaires it is obvious whether they assess the same abstract questionnaire (i.e.: the choice of whether we will entertain such a fiction is obvious). There are exceptions. In particular, the Big Five Model and the Five Factor Model are sometimes considered different models and sometimes considered the same. Here we consider them separate as much as practicable.
Models of personality are included if they have received at least minimal coverage in scientific journals or e-prints (~20 papers).
Use POMP to report score in questionnaires
Always report the score of questionnaires in percent of maximum possible (POMP). This is a linear scale with the range [0, 100].
POMP = round(100 × (raw-score − min) / (max − min))
where
raw-score
is the score obtained in a parcel of the questionnaire.min
is the minimum possible score in that parcel.max
is the maximum possible score.round
is rounding to nearest integer and break ties by rounding to the nearest even integer.Ref: Cohen (2010) The Problem of Units and the Circumstance for POMP https://sci-hub.se/10.1207/S15327906MBR3403_2.
If appropriate –in addition to POMP– include the Z-score and centile with respect to reference population.
POMP can always be compared between different questionnaires that evaluate the same concept. The total score is meaningless as it depends on the number of elements and therefore typically it can not be compared with any other score. The average score per item can be compared only to other parcels with the same number and value of responses. Centile and Z-scores are useful but should not be the only scores included. They depend not only on the score obtained in the questionnaire but also the choice of reference population. Moreover, centile –in the general case– is not linear with respect to the raw score.
Ksenia Questionnaire Identifier (TO-DO)
We assign a stable Archival Resource Key (ARK) to every questionnaire to provide an unambiguous and stable way to reference it.
A.k.a. OCEAN personality model.
Originates with the lexical approach
Is the most used personality model in academia
Domains are loosely-defined
Every domain is better thought as a collection of related things than a single thing, especially B5-O.
There is no standard division beyond domains
Facets depend on the questionnaire.
This is an upside because it allow that several different facet-level divisions co-exist and one can chose the most suitable for one’s purposes.
For a reviews of the many ways domains have been split into facets see:
Schwaba (2020) A facet atlas: Visualizing networks that describe the blends, cores, and peripheries of personality structure https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236893.
Anchored to Goldberg 100 unipolar markers
De-facto, the Big Five is anchored to Goldberg 100 unipolar markers.
That means that the Big Five model is loosely defined by Goldberg 100 unipolar markers. However, it is not tied to it. Any other questionnaire based on the same concept can be used. Any questionnaire that purports to evaluate the Big Five must agree broadly with Goldberg 100 unipolar markers. This assures that the meaning of the Big Five does not drift without bound with the passage of time.
The last letter of abbreviations is de-facto standard. The “B5-” prefix to distinguish it as corresponding to the Big Five model is our own.
For each domain we list the adjectives from Saucier (1994) Mini-Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg’s Unipolar Big-Five Markers https://sci-hub.se/10.1207/S15327752JPA6303_8.
Other names: Surgency.
Adjectives:
Other names: Antagonism (R), Pleasantness.
The low pole is antagonism. Propensity to cooperate with others instead of antagonizing others.
Adjectives:
See also our page on psychopathy.
Scope
B5-A evaluates the inclination to cooperate with people instead of antagonizing them. At the low pole is psychoapths and antisocial people in general. At the high pole is “nice people”.
Name
The name “agreeableness” is de facto standard. However, it is inaccurate if interpreted literally (as the tendency to agree with others). Agreeing is not the same as cooperating.
Correlation with dark tetrad
For domain-level and facet-level correlations of BFI-2, BFAS and HEXACO-PI-R-60 with the SD3 see:
Kaufman (2019) The Light vs. Dark Triad of Personality: Contrasting Two Very Different Profiles of Human Nature https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00467
Several researchers have taken items of agreeableness from Big Five inventories and related subscales and analyzed them using Goldberg bass-ackward method. These studies have mostly agreed on the content of the factors. The factor names and example items are from Vize (2020).
Compassion vs Callousness
Being riddled by empathy and an altruistic concern for other’s welfare. Conceptually equivalent to PPI Coldheartedness (R).
Example items:
Morality vs Immorality
Following social norms of social interaction including the law and honesty.
Example items:
Trust vs Distrust
This factor also evaluates forgiveness vs vengativeness.
Example items:
Domineering vs Meekness
This corresponds to Factor 5.1 of Crowe (2018) Modesty vs Arrogance. It is grandiose narcissism (R).
Example items:
Affability vs Combativeness
Example items:
Bader (2021) Themes of the Dark Core of Personality. Supplementary information: https://osf.io/bc4et/.
Used a modified bass-ackward to examine the D-70 questionnaire.
Van Teffelen (2020) Uncovering the hierarchical structure of self-reported hostility.
Vize (2020) Examining the Conceptual and Empirical Distinctiveness of Agreeableness and “Dark” Journal of Personality. Supplementary information: https://osf.io/3ah7x/.
Crowe (2019) Chapter The structure of antagonism of book The Handbook of Antagonism.
Crowe (2018) Uncovering the structure of agreeableness from self-report measures.
This is the first paper to apply the bass-ackward approach to B5-A.
Other names: Dependability.
Propensity to be thorough in tasks one performs. Seeking and enforcing order. Being responsible
Adjectives:
Other names: Neuroticism, Emotional stability (R).
Propensity to negative emotions.
Adjectives:
Other name: Intellect, Culture, Openness to experience.
This domain is the most diverse in descriptions of it. Being open to new ideas instead of ideologically stubborn. It does not refer to being socially open.
Adjectives:
IPIP Big Five Factor Markers, 50 item version (IPIP-BFFM-50-GOL2001)
Items: 50.
Introductory paper: http://admin.umt.edu.pk/Media/Site/STD/FileManager/OsamaArticle/26august2015/A%20broad-bandwidth%20inventory.pdf.
List of items: https://ipip.ori.org/newBigFive5broadKey.htm, https://ipip.ori.org/new_ipip-50-item-scale.htm.
Take online: https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/IPIP-BFFM/, https://psytests.org/bigfive/bffm100en-run.html.
Factors:
Apparently this scale was introduced in the IPIP web site, not in an academic journal publication. There is no official name. It is usually referred to as
Goldberg, the author of this questionnaire, refers to it as “IPIP Big Five Factor Markers in Mlačic (2007) An Analysis of a Cross-Cultural Personality Inventory: The IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers in Croatia https://projects.ori.org/lrg/PDFs_papers/Mlacic&Goldberg_2007_JPA.pdf. See https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285203927 for a note about the difference between the Lexical Big Five and the Five Factor Model.
Reference this scale as Goldberg (2006) The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures.
Validation:
IPIP Big Five Factor Markers, 100 item version (IPIP-BFFM-100-GOL2001)
Items: 100.
List of items: https://ipip.ori.org/newBigFive5broadKey.htm, https://ipip.ori.org/new_ipip-50-item-scale.htm.
Take online: https://psytests.org/bigfive/bffm100en-run.html.
Extended version of IPIP-BFFM-50.
Abridged Big Five-Dimensional Circumplex (ABC5)
Items: 485.
Introduced in: Johnson (2003) Clarification of the Five-Factor Model With the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex https://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.497.1198.
List of items: In introductory paper.
Mini-IPIP
Items: 20.
Introduced in: Donnellan (2006) The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-yet-Effective Measures of the Big Five Factors of Personality https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7014171.
List of items: https://ipip.ori.org/MiniIPIPKey.htm.
Abbreviated version of IPIP-BFFM-50.
Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ)
Items: 10.
List of items: https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/0191-8869%2893%2990218-R.
Big Five Inventory (BFI)
Items: 44.
List of items: https://fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/Personality-BigFiveInventory.pdf.
Web page: https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/bfi.htm.
Take online: https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/, https://psytests.org/bigfive/bfien.html.
External links: https://psychologyroots.com/the-big-five-inventory-bfi/#The_Big_Five_Inventory_BFI
Big Five Inventory, 10-item version (BFI-10)
Items: 10.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.23.3.193, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.588.1086&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Big Five Inventory 2 (BFI-2-SOJ2017)
Items: 60.
Web site: https://www.colby.edu/psych/personality-lab/.
Introduced in: https://sci-hub.se/10.1037/pspp0000096.
List of items: Introductory paper, https://www.colby.edu/psych/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2013/08/bfi2-item-list.pdf.
Take online: http://www.personalitylab.org/tests/bfi2_self_pol.htm.
Domains and facets.
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Negative Emotionality
Open-Mindedness
Big Five Inventory 2—Short Form (BFI-2-S)
Items: 30.
Web site: https://www.colby.edu/psych/personality-lab/
Introduced in: Soto (2017) Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314015515.
List of items: in introductory paper.
Big Five Inventory 2—Extra Short Form (BFI-2-XS)
Items: 15.
Introduced in: Soto (2017) Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314015515.
List of items: in introductory paper.
Big Five Personality Trait Short Questionnaire (BFPTSQ-MOR2014)
Items: 50.
Introduced in: Morizot (2014) Construct Validity of Adolescents’ Self-Reported Big Five Personality Traits https://sci-hub.se/10.1177/1073191114524015.
List of items: In introductory paper.
Based on the BFI. Designed to have more conceptual breadth. Shares some items.
Judging from the introductory paper, special care has been placed into the face validity and concept breadth of this questionnaire.
Big Five Aspects Scale (BFAS-DQP2007)
Items: 100.
Introduced in: https://selfhacked.com/app/uploads/2017/11/10-Aspects-of-the-Big-Five.pdf.
List of items: https://ipip.ori.org/BFASKeys.htm.
Take online: https://bigfiveaspects.com/.
The BFAS is organized in a 2-level hierarchy that splits each domain in 2 aspects. The aspects are chosen to be as uncorrelated as possible within that domain.
Domains and aspects.
Neuroticism
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Openness/Intellect
Faceted Inventory of the Five Factor Model (FI-FFM)
Items: 207.
Introduced in: Watson (2017) Development and Validation of the Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM) https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1073191117711022.
List of items: In introductory paper.
Domains and facets:
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Neuroticism
Openness
HP5i
Items: 20.
List of items: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222249215.
Mini-IPIP6
List of items: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289588930.
Goldberg 100 unipolar markers (UNI-100-GOL1992)
Items: 100.
Introduced in: Goldberg (1992) The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure http://pdf.xuebalib.com:1262/2pp7LO9f6jWq.pdf.
List of items: in introductory paper.
Take online: https://psytests.org/bigfive/umen.html.
This is the de-facto anchor for the Big Five model.
Transparent Bipolar Inventory (TBI-GOL1992)
Items: 45.
Introduced in: Goldberg (1992) The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure http://pdf.xuebalib.com:1262/2pp7LO9f6jWq.pdf.
List of items: in introductory paper.
Take online: https://psytests.org/bigfive/tbien.html.
This is a list of opposite adjectives, e.g.: “timid” vs “bold”. The subject has to select which one applies better, in a scale with several divisions.
Saucier Mini-Markers (40MM-SAU1994)
Items: 40.
Introduced in: Saucier (1994) Mini-Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg’s Unipolar Big-Five Markers https://sci-hub.se/10.1207/S15327752JPA6303_8.
List of items: in introductory paper.
Abbreviated version of Goldberg 100 unipolar markers.
Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI)
Items: 10.
Introduced in: Gosling (2003) A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains http://gosling.psy.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/JRP-03-tipi.pdf.
List of items: in introductory paper.
Take online: https://psytests.org/bigfive/tipien.html.
The five factor model is a variant of the Big Five. It originated from the NEO-PI questionnaire. Each of 5 level-1 groups is called a domain. Each factor of the FFM includes 6 facets, for a total of 30 facets for the whole model.
We differentiate between the Big Five and the FFM.
Laypeole and some researchers conflate the FFM with the Big Five, more often without realizing they are different models, but sometimes on purpose, since they are very close.
The FFM is strongly tied to the proprietary NEO questionnaires.
However, there are free alternatives, most of them based on the IPIP.
The FFM has a dogmatic approach.
Whereas Big Five has many questionnaires which differ in which traits they evaluate, the FFM is fixed to 6 facets per domain. The facets are a matter of convention, not empiricism.
Neuroticism (N)
Extraversion (E)
Openness to Experience (O)
Agreeableness (A)
Conscientiosness (C)
IPIP-NEO-300
Items: 300.
List of items: https://ipip.ori.org/newNEOFacetsKey.htm.
Take online: https://psytests.org/bigfive/ipipneo300en.html.
This is the first free questionnaire for the Five Factor Model.
IPIP-FFM
Items: 50.
List of items: https://ipip.ori.org/newNEODomainsKey.htm.
IPIP-NEO-120, a.k.a. IPIP-J (Johnson (2014))
Items: 120
List of items: http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/5/j5j/papers/JRP2014.pdf.
Take online: https://psytests.org/bigfive/ipipneo120en.html.
Subset of IPIP-NEO-300 developed using classical methods.
IPIP-120 (Maples-Keller (2014))
Items: 120
Subset of IPIP-NEO-300 developed using IRT (Item Response theory). Can be considered a slighty better alternative to IPIP-NEO-120.
IPIP-NEO-60
Items: 60
Introduced in: Maples-Keller (2017) Using Item Response Theory to Develop a 60-Item Representation of the NEO PI–R Using the International Personality Item Pool: Development of the IPIP–NEO–60 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320745867.
List of items: In introductory paper.
Subset of IPIP-NEO-300 developed using IRT.
IPIP-BFM-20
Short Five (S5)
Items: 5.
List of items: https://sci-hub.se/10.1002%2Fper.813.
Other IPIP questionnaires
NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI)
NEO-FFI
NEO Personality Inventory, Revised (NEO-PI-R)
Five Factor Model Rating Form (FFMRF)
Adjectives only.
NEO Personality Inventory 3 (NEO-PI-3)
Items: 240.
Latest version of the NEO personality inventory.
NEO-FFM-3
Items: 60.
Shortened version of NEO-PI-3 that only provides a score for each domain.
Official web site: http://hexaco.org/. Online questionnaires and the full list of items for HEXACO-PI-R-60 and HEXACO-PI-R-100 in several languages including English are available in this page.
Factors:
Honesty–Humilty
Emotionality
Extraversion (X in HEXACO)
Agreeableness (vs Anger)
Conscientiousness
Openness
Altruism (not a factor)
Counterpart of agreeableness in Big Five
Big Five has a domain for Agreeableness (vs Antagonism), which bears that name. In HEXACO the same content is spread among:
Having Agreeableness vs Antagonism organized in a single domain is an advantage for Big Five when studying Agreeableness itself. If one wants a scale of how cooperative vs hostile a person is, HEXACO has no clear counterpart. Honesty–Humilty (vs manipulativeness and greediness) has erroneously been claimed to be a counterpart. However it is limited to a small part of interpersonal hostility.
“Rotation” of Emotionality and Agreeableness (vs Anger)
In the literature, this is referred to a “rotation”. It corresponds to drawing an Euler diagram with EHEXACO, AHEXACO, NBig Five, ABig Five. It does not refer to a rotation in the sense of principal component analysis.
More centralized development
The HEXACO model and its canonical questionnaires are developed mostly by Ashton and Lee. The Big Five model was initially developed by a loosely-defined group of researchers who discovered and formulated it independently.
There are many questionnaires for Big Five developed by disconnected groups of authors of which none is canonical. The canonical questionnaire for HEXACO is HEXACO-PI-R-100, published by Ashton and Lee.
When Ashton and Lee both die the situation may become like the current situation with Big Five.
Claims to capture personality in many languages
Ashton and Lee claim that HEXACO captures the structure of personality by the lexical approach in many languages whereas Big Five is based on the lexical approach in English, although it reflects to varying degrees the lexical approach in other languages.
Claims to capture an additional part of personality in Honesty–Humilty
The opposite claim is that Big Five captures said elements under Agreeableness. In reality, it depends on which questionnaire is used to evaluate Big Five. In principle, one could write a questionnaire specialized in Big Five’s Agreeableness with multiple facets that completely subsumes HEXACO’s Honesty–Humilty, Agreeableness and Altruism.
Papers:
HEXACO-PI-R-100
Items: 100.
List of items: http://www.hexaco.org/hexaco-inventory.
The canonical questionnaire for HEXACO by the authors of the model.
HEXACO-PI-R-60 Items: 60.
List of items: http://www.hexaco.org/hexaco-inventory.
Abbreviated version of HEXACO-PI-R-100. Omits the Altruism subscale.
HEX-ACO-18 (HEX-ACO-18-OLJ2021)
Items: 18.
List of items: Olaru (2021) The HEX-ACO-18: Developing an Age-Invariant HEXACO Short Scale Using Ant Colony Optimization https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00223891.2021.1934480
Abbreviated version of HEXACO-PI-R-100 that evaluates only the 6 domains.
IPIP-HEXACO
Ashton (2017) The IPIP–HEXACO scales: An alternative, public-domain measure of the personality constructs in the HEXACO model.
Brief HEXACO Inventory
List of items: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257430902.
Also called “alternative five”. Attempts to capture biologically basic personality traits.
ZK is the result of making a personality model according to these principles:
Factors
Names, abbreviations and order are from the ZKPQ.
Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionnaire (ZKPQ)
Items: 89.
List of items: http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=CD659E7EDD40F59F2662E50551AD852E, p. 62.
Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionnaire abbreviated (ZKPQ-CC-50)
Items: 50.
Take online: https://psytests.org/personal/zkpqccen.html.
Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA–PQ)
Items: 200.
List of Items: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45641397.
Factors and facets.
Aggresiveness (AG)
Activity (AC)
Extraversion (EX)
Neuroticism (NE)
Impulsive sensation seeking (SS)
Web site: https://www.sapa-project.org/research/SPI/.
Introduced in: Codon (2017) The SAPA Personality Inventory: An empirically-derived, hierarchically-organized self-report personality assessment model https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sc4p9.
The SPI is a 27-factor personality model developed from analyzing a very large data set including many questionnaires.
See https://www.sapa-project.org/research/SPI/ for the questionnaires for SPI developed along the SPI model itself, with full items. Questionnaires range from 27 items to 135 items and several of them re-use provide an assessment in the Big Five in addition to SPI.
A.k.a. PEN model (For “psychoticism”, “extraversion”, “neuroticism”).
Extraversion
Neuroticism
Midarism.
Originally referred to as “psychoticism”. This is an inaccurate and misleading name.
Big Six (a.k.a. Saucier Personality Model)
Lexically-derived.
Questionnaire Big Six (36QB6)
List of items: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264162275.
This has several variants depending on length. 36 item variant listed here.
Six-Factor Personality Questionnaire (6FPQ) Jackson & Paunonen
Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised
Cloninger Personality Model, 7 factors
Hogan Personality Inventory
The Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales
Eysenck Personality Model
Horney-Coolidge Tridimensional Inventory
Five-dimensional personality test (5DPT)
Carver and White
Need for Cognitive Structure
Items: 20.
List of items: The effect on mundane decision-making of the need and ability to achieve cognitive structury.
Ability to Achieve Cognitive Structure
Items: 24.
List of items: The effect on mundane decision-making of the need and ability to achieve cognitive structury.
Gray-Wilson Personality Questionnaire
List of items: https://www.pbarrett.net/publications/Factor_analysis_of_Gray-Wilson_questionnaire_Wilson_et_al_1990.pdf.
Cattell 16 Personality Factors (16PF)
Supernumerary Personality Inventory
Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire
Liverpol stoicism scale
Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS-MPK2002)
List of items: https://sci-hub.se/10.1348/014466602165108
Need for Closure Scale (NFCS)
Individual Differences in Need for Cognitive Closure http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/individual_differences_in_need_for_cognitive_closure.pdf.
What the need for closure scale measures and what it does not: Toward differentiating among related epistemic motives
We include the Honesty-Humility subscale as listed in Denissen (2022) Incorporating prosocial vs. antisocial trait content in Big Five measurement: Lessons from the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104147. Numbered 61-64 in the order they appear in running text. Item recommended for both BFI-2-XS and BFI-2-S first, then item recommended for the BFI-2-S only, then the 2 remaining items.
Short forms
We reordered the items so that the abbreviated forms can be obtained by truncating the list of items within each facet.
To obtain the BFI-2 without the Honesty-Humility additions, simply remove the corresponding 4 items of that subscale.
Responses
Prompt: I see myself as somebody who…
Extraversion (12 items)
Sociability (4 items)
Assertiveness (4 items)
Energy Level (4 items)
Agreeableness (16 items)
Compassion (4 items)
Respectfulness (4 items)
Trust (4 items)
Honesty–Humilty (4 items)
Conscientiousness (12 items)
Organization (4 items)
Productiveness (4 items)
Responsibility (4 items)
Negative Emotionality (12 items)
Anxiety (4 items)
Depression (4 items)
Emotional Volatility (4 items)
Open-Mindedness (12 items)
Intellectual Curiosity (4 items)
Aesthetic Sensitivity (4 items)
Creative Imagination (4 items)
Responses
Openness (10 items)
Extraversion (10 items)
Agreeableness (10 items)
Conscientiousness (10 items)
Emotional Stability (10 items)
Source: Goldberg (1992) The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure http://pdf.xuebalib.com:1262/2pp7LO9f6jWq.pdf.
We renamed each subscale to its standard name with the original one in parenthesis. We inverted the items in the Negative Emotionality subscale since in the source it appears as Emotional stability, which is inverse.
Extraversion (originally “Surgency”):
Agreeableness:
Conscientiousness:
Negative Emotionality (originally “Emotional Stability”, R):
Open-mindedness (originally “Intellect”):
Responses.
Items
Item numbers are those from HEXACO-PI-R-100.
Honesty–Humilty (H)
Emotionality (E)
Extraversion (X)
Agreeableness (A)
Conscientiousness (C)
Openness (O)
Honesty–Humilty (H)
Sincerity
Fairness
Greed-Avoidance
Modesty
Emotionality (E)
Fearfulness
Anxiety
Dependence
Sentimentality
Extraversion (X)
Social Self-Esteem
Social Boldness
Sociability
Liveliness
Agreeableness (A)
Forgiveness
Gentleness
Flexibility
Patience
Conscientiousness (C)
Organization
Diligence
Perfectionism
Prudence
Openness (O)
Aesthetic Appreciation
Inquisitiveness
Creativity
Unconventionality
Source: https://ipip.ori.org/newBigFive5broadKey.htm, https://ipip.ori.org/new_ipip-50-item-scale.htm.
There is a 100 item version and a 50 item version. The order is the same as the original except that within each factor all items that appear in the 10-item version have been rearranged to go first.
Extraversion:
Agreeableness:
Conscientiousness:
Negative Emotionality:
Intellect:
Items from: https://sci-hub.se/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1396, https://sci-hub.se/10.1177/0146167206294744.
Preference for order
Preference for predictability
Decisiveness
Discomfort with ambiguity
Closed-mindedness
Need for decisiveness
Introversion–Extroversion
Pleasantness or Agreeableness
Conscientiousness or Dependability
Emotional Stability
Intellect or Sophistication
Activity (Act) – 17 items
Aggression-Hostility (Agg-Host) – 17 items
Impulsive Sensation Seeking (ImpSS) – 19 items
Neuroticism-Anxiety (N-Anx) – 19 items
Sociability (Sy) – 17 items
Infrequency Items
The Personality Metablog http://www.personality-arp.org/metablog/.
Silly puzzles https://icar-project.com/projects/icar-project/files.