16PF Questionnaire - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

16PF Questionnaire

The Experts below are selected from a list of 192 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

16PF Questionnaire – Free Register to Access Experts & Abstracts

Heather E P Cattell – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • the sixteen personality factor Questionnaire 16PF
    , 2008
    Co-Authors: Heather E P Cattell, Alan D Mead
    Abstract:

    The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) is a comprehensive measure of normalrange personality found to be effective in a variety of settings where an in-depth assessment of the whole person is needed. The 16PF traits, presented in Table 7.1, are the result of years of factor-analytic research focused on discovering the basic structural elements of personality (Cattell, R.B., 1957, 1973). In addition to discovering the sixteen normal-range personality traits for which the instrument is named, these researchers identified the five broad dimensions – a variant of the ‘Big Five’ factors (Cattell, R.B., 1957, 1970). From the beginning, Cattell proposed a multi-level, hierarchical structure of personality: the second-order global measures describe personality at a broader, conceptual level, while the more precise primary factors reveal the fine details and nuances that make each person unique, and are more powerful in predicting actual behavior. In addition, this factor-analytic structure includes a set of thirdorder factors, also discussed in this chapter. Due to its scientific origins, the 16PF Questionnaire has a long history of empirical research and is embedded in a well-established theory of individual differences. This Questionnaire’s extensive body of research stretches back over half a century, providing evidence of its utility in clinical, counseling, industrial-organizational, educational, and research settings (Cattell, R.B. et al., 1970; H.E.P. Cattell and Schuerger, 2003; Conn and Rieke, 1994; Krug and Johns, 1990; Russell and Karol, 2002). A conservative estimate of 16PF research since 1974 includes more than 2,000 publications (Hofer and Eber, 2002). Most studies have found the 16PF to be among the top five most commonly used normal-range instruments in both research and practice (Butcher and Rouse, 1996; Piotrowski and Zalewski, 1993; Watkins et al., 1995). The measure is also widely used internationally, and since its inception has been adapted into over 35 languages worldwide.

  • The Sixteen Personality Factor (16PF) Questionnaire
    Understanding Psychological Assessment, 2001
    Co-Authors: Heather E P Cattell
    Abstract:

    The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire is a comprehensive measure of normal range personality. Although it was not developed to identify psychopathology, it has been used extensively and productively in clinical settings due to its ability to give a deep, integrated picture of the whole person, including both personal strengths and weaknesses. The 16PF Questionnaire can be used to identify patterns of behavior in a wide variety of real-life circumstances. For example, it can be used to understand a person’s self-esteem, coping patterns, capacity for empathy, interpersonal needs, likely attitude toward power and authority, cognitive processing style, internalization of societal rules or standards, and likely occupational preferences. Because of this comprehensive scope, 16PF results are useful in a wide variety of settings, including clinical, counseling, industrial, career development, and research.

Alan D Mead – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • the sixteen personality factor Questionnaire 16PF
    , 2008
    Co-Authors: Heather E P Cattell, Alan D Mead
    Abstract:

    The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) is a comprehensive measure of normalrange personality found to be effective in a variety of settings where an in-depth assessment of the whole person is needed. The 16PF traits, presented in Table 7.1, are the result of years of factor-analytic research focused on discovering the basic structural elements of personality (Cattell, R.B., 1957, 1973). In addition to discovering the sixteen normal-range personality traits for which the instrument is named, these researchers identified the five broad dimensions – a variant of the ‘Big Five’ factors (Cattell, R.B., 1957, 1970). From the beginning, Cattell proposed a multi-level, hierarchical structure of personality: the second-order global measures describe personality at a broader, conceptual level, while the more precise primary factors reveal the fine details and nuances that make each person unique, and are more powerful in predicting actual behavior. In addition, this factor-analytic structure includes a set of thirdorder factors, also discussed in this chapter. Due to its scientific origins, the 16PF Questionnaire has a long history of empirical research and is embedded in a well-established theory of individual differences. This Questionnaire’s extensive body of research stretches back over half a century, providing evidence of its utility in clinical, counseling, industrial-organizational, educational, and research settings (Cattell, R.B. et al., 1970; H.E.P. Cattell and Schuerger, 2003; Conn and Rieke, 1994; Krug and Johns, 1990; Russell and Karol, 2002). A conservative estimate of 16PF research since 1974 includes more than 2,000 publications (Hofer and Eber, 2002). Most studies have found the 16PF to be among the top five most commonly used normal-range instruments in both research and practice (Butcher and Rouse, 1996; Piotrowski and Zalewski, 1993; Watkins et al., 1995). The measure is also widely used internationally, and since its inception has been adapted into over 35 languages worldwide.

  • Assessment of the Measurement Equivalence of a Spanish Translation of the 16PF Questionnaire
    Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2000
    Co-Authors: Barbara B. Ellis, Alan D Mead
    Abstract:

    The differential functioning of items and tests (DFIT) framework was used to examine the measurement equivalence of a Spanish translation of the Sixteen Personality Factor (16PF) Questionnaire. The Questionnaire was administered in English to English-speaking Anglo-Americans and English-dominant Hispanic Americans and in Spanish to Spanish-dominant Hispanic Americans and Spanish-speaking Mexican nationals. As expected, the compensatory differential item functioning/differential test functioning (CDIF/DTF) procedure, which accounts for CDIF at the scale level, flagged fewer items as differential functioning than did the noncompensatory differential item functioning (NCDIF) procedure. Results did not support the hypothesis that DIF would be greatest in the Anglo versus Spanish-speaker comparison followed by the Hispanic versus Spanish-speaker comparison and least in the Anglo versus Hispanic comparison. Advantages of using the DFIT framework in assessing test translations, especially for test developers, ar…

Paul Irwing – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Distance Between Mars and Venus: Measuring Global Sex Differences in Personality
    PloS one, 2012
    Co-Authors: Marco Del Giudice, Tom Booth, Paul Irwing
    Abstract:

    Background Sex differences in personality are believed to be comparatively small. However, research in this area has suffered from significant methodological limitations. We advance a set of guidelines for overcoming those limitations: (a) measure personality with a higher resolution than that afforded by the Big Five; (b) estimate sex differences on latent factors; and (c) assess global sex differences with multivariate effect sizes. We then apply these guidelines to a large, representative adult sample, and obtain what is presently the best estimate of global sex differences in personality. Methodology/Principal Findings Personality measures were obtained from a large US sample (N = 10,261) with the 16PF Questionnaire. Multigroup latent variable modeling was used to estimate sex differences on individual personality dimensions, which were then aggregated to yield a multivariate effect size (Mahalanobis D). We found a global effect size D = 2.71, corresponding to an overlap of only 10% between the male and female distributions. Even excluding the factor showing the largest univariate ES, the global effect size was D = 1.71 (24% overlap). These are extremely large differences by psychological standards. Significance The idea that there are only minor differences between the personality profiles of males and females should be rejected as based on inadequate methodology.

Debrah Davis – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Using the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire to Predict Teacher Success
    , 2011
    Co-Authors: Rebecca S. Watts, Bob N. Cage, Valerie S. Batley, Debrah Davis
    Abstract:

    Faculty involved in pre-service teacteacher education often debate whether individual characteristics can predict effective teachers. Research is inconclusive with respect to the factors being capable of predicting effective teaching. This paper reports the results of a longitudinal study that identified self-reported characteristics of pre-service teachers during their semester of student teaching and their teacher effectiveness, as rated by their building principals after becoming employed as a teacher. Teacher scores on each of the 16 primary factors measured on the 16PF (personal factor) personality scale were regressed on their principals’ effectiveness ratings. Stepwise multiple regression analysis generated a model that explained 17.0% of the variance in principal ratings of effectiveness and the model included four factors from the 16PF Questionnaire as significant predictors of principals’ success ratings. Those factors were: (1) Factor Q3, Perfectionism; (2) Factor Q4, Tension; (3) Factor N, Privateness; and (4) Factor G, Rule-consciousness.

Jacques H. Abraini – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • AN ANXIETY, PERSONALITY AND ALTITUDE SYMPTOMATOLOGY STUDY DURING A 31-DAY PERIOD OF HYPOXIA IN A HYPOBARIC CHAMBER (EXPERIMENT ‘EVEREST-COMEX 1997’)
    Journal of environmental psychology, 1999
    Co-Authors: M. Nicolas, F. Thullier-lestienne, Cédric A. Bouquet, Bernard Gardette, Claude Gortan, F. Joulia, M. Bonnon, Jean-paul Richalet, P. Therme, Jacques H. Abraini
    Abstract:

    Extreme environmental situations are useful tools for the investigation of the general processes of adaptation. Among such situations, high altitude of more than 3000 m produces a set of pathological disorders that includes both cerebral (cAS) and respiratory (RAS) altitude symptoms. High altitude exposure further induces anxiety responses and behavioural disturbances. The authors report an investigation on anxiety responses, personality traits, and altitude symptoms (AS) in climbers participating in a 31-day period of confinement and gradual decompression in a hypobaric chamber equivalent to a climb from sea-level to Mount Everest (8848 m altitude). Personality traits, state-trait anxiety, and AS were assessed, using the Cattell 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), the Spielberger’s State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and the Lake Louise concensus Questionnaire. Results show significant group effect for state-anxiety and AS; state-anxiety and AS increased as altitude increased. They also show that state-type anxiety shows a similar time-course to cAS, but not RAS. Alternatively, our results demonstrate a significant negative correlation between Factor M of the 16PF Questionnaire, which is a personality trait that ranges from praxernia to autia. In contrast, no significant correlation was found between personality traits and AS. This suggests that AS could not be predicted using personality traits and further support that personality traits, such as praxernia (happening sensitivity), could play a major role in the occurrence of state-type anxiety responses in extreme environments. In addition, the general processes of coping and adaptation in individuals participating in extreme environmental experiments are discussed.