16pf Personality

1

Sixteen Personality Factor

Evelyn Conner
Walden University
Course: 6315-2
Instructor: Dr. Craig Boswell
May 16, 2012

2

Abstract

The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire is comprehensive measure of normal-range personality equipped to be effective in a multiplicity of backgrounds where in depth assessment of the whole person is needed. The 16PF traits are results of years of factor-analysis research focused on discovering 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, the researchers identified the five broad dimensions---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 more powerful in predicting actual behavior.

3 Introduction Psychologists know that the best way to understand a subject is to find a practical and personally relevant application for it. So, as a way of teaching students about some of the most prevalent personality theories in a truly interactive way is to incorporate the 16PF instrument in our Psychology course. Bringing the subject alive for students, the use of the 16PF questionnaire can also be a highly relevant career planning tool, giving personality insights which can help students decide where their studies would lead them after college. Due to the 16PF scientific origin, the questionnaire has a long history of research and is a well-established theory of individual differences. The 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. er al, 1970 H.E.P. Cattell and Schuerger, 2003; Conn and Reike, 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 used internationally, and since its inception has been adapted into 35 languages worldwide.

4

History and Description The first edition of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) was published in 1949 with other editions following in 1956, 1962, 1967-69 with the most recent being the fifth edition, having 38 new items (McClellan, 2004). The 16PF is a 185 item multi-dimensional forced choice personality inventory (Carducci, 2009). The 16PF may be administered to person or groups ages 16 or older. The test is hand or computer scored being completed with paper and pencil or computer version. The test consists of 185 items with a three choice format including a question mark (?) with 15 reasoning ability items at the end of the test that have different choices. The average time to complete the test is 35 to 40 minutes when using pencil and paper and 25 to 35 minutes when the test is taken on the computer. The same score sheet is used despite of whether the protocol is to be computer or hand scored. The examiner encourages the examinee to respond to all questions and to choose the first answer that comes to mind (McClellan, 2004). Detailed information is provided in the administrator’s manual with careful description of the hand scoring process as well as information about the computer scoring material is available through IPAT. The scoring protocols of the 16-factor raw scores are counted directly on the scoring sheet from the hand scoring keys. Sten score are found on the General Population Norms sheet (McClellan, 2004, Para 3). The factor raw scores are then transferred to the individual record form where charting of the sten scores are completed along with the calculation of the five global factors. The test examiner can then interpret the profile of the examinee. According to the administrator’s manual, the profile interpretation involves three steps. First, the response style indices are to be reviewed and they include the Management Impression Scale and the Acquiescence Scale.

------------------------------------------------- 5
-------------------------------------------------
Table 1 illustrates the Response Style of the examinee. The Response Style indicates the manner which the individual answered the questions. The Impression Management expresses the degree the examinee responses are socially desirable and undesirable. Infrequency indicates the number of middle or noncommittal responses on the part of the examinee. Acquiescence in indicates the degree to which the test taker agree to items no matter how the question was asked.

Table 1
-------------------------------------------------
Three Response Style Indices (Cattell, 2003, p. 170)

Response Style High Score Low Score
IM Impression Management Socially Desirable Socially Undesirable
INF Infrequency Frequency Middle Infrequent Middle Responses Responses

ACQ Acquiescence True Response Repeated Balance of True/False
-------------------------------------------------
Responses
Note: From 16PF Factors by D. Straker, 2003. Copyright 2003 by Syque. Adapted with permission of the author.

The Likert (1932), as cited in Stark, Chernyshenko and Drasgow suggest that The Item Response Theory (IRT) bases the examinee’s response upon the mismatch between the item and the self- perception of the examinee according to Stark, Chernyshenko, Drasgow, and Williams (2006).

6

The next step is to interpret the Global Factor Scores and then the Primary Factor scores.

-------------------------------------------------
Table 2 illustrates Global Factor scores and Primary scores.
-------------------------------------------------

Table 2

-------------------------------------------------
Five Global Factors (Conn & Rieke, 1994) as cited in Cattell and Meade (2008).

High Global Factors Low
EX Extraverted Extraversion Introverted
AX High Anxiety Anxiety Neuroticism Low Anxiety
TM Tough-Minded Tough Mindedness Receptive
IN Independent Independence Accommodating
-------------------------------------------------
SC Controlled Self Control Unrestrained

Note: From “16PF Factors” by D. Straker, 2003. Copyright by Syque. Adapted with permission of the author.

------------------------------------------------- This approach is certainly the most accepted (McClellan, 2004,) because the Response style indices address the validity of the examinee’s responses. The Global scores are more reliable and valid than the Primary scores and would therefore be interpreted first once the validity of the responses has been established.
-------------------------------------------------
Table 3 gives an illustration of the 16 Primary factors.
Table 3
-------------------------------------------------
Sixteen Primary Factors (Straker, 2003)

Factor High Range Low Range
A Warmth Warmhearted Reserved
B Reasoning Abstract Concrete 7
C Emotional Stability Stable Reactive
E Dominance Dominant Deferential
F Liveliness Lively Serious
G Rule-Consciousness Rule-Conscious Expedient
H Social Boldness Socially Bold Shy
I Sensitivity Sensitive Utilitarian
L Vigilance Suspicious Trusting
M Abstractness Imaginative Practical
N Privateness Forthright Unpretentious O Apprehension Insecure Self-Confident
Q1 Openness to Change Experimenting Not Likely to Change Q2 Self-Reliance Self-Sufficient Group Dependent Q3 Perfectionism Compulsive Careless of Social Rules -------------------------------------------------
Q4 Tension Tense Relaxed

Note: From 16PF Factors by D. Straker. Copyright 2003 by Syque. Adapted with permission of author.

8

Uses

The 16PF is used in a wide range of settings including industrial/organizational, counseling and clinical, basic research, educational, and medical settings. The 16PF is used for high school seniors and adults prison inmates, patients with schizophrenia, culturally disadvantaged individuals, and physical rehabilitation clients. To be more specific, Tyler and Kelly (1962) used the personality factor for classification of juvenile offenders and for the prediction of outcomes in relation to rehabilitation programs. A number of researchers have established that rehabilitation training programs are more effective when based on precise knowledge of client characteristic: (Warren, 1968), (Moos, 1975), (Romig, 1978), and (Barkwell, 1980). Indiana Wesleyan University Students use the 16PF personality insights to enhance their studies and guide career decisions. Professor of Psychology, Dr. Keith Puffer (IWA) shares how they could help their students work through psychological concepts being taught by incorporating an interactive element in the classroom. By bringing theory and practice together, students would enhance their understanding of psychology. As a part of the process, students were given the opportunity to take the 16PF Questionnaire and receive feedback on their results. Dr. Puffer explains: “The key outcomes have been insight and career information. Integral to this personal knowledge is the ability the tools gives us to recognize our personal traits---both good and not-so-good ones---and to use this information to inform career choices. Students are amazed at which careers surface for them, and encouraged by how “spot on” they feel. The career information helps to confirm what they may already have vaguely identified as a vocation, giving them the confidence to pursue this direction.” 9
Critique of Test

Significant strengths of the 16PF fifth edition is that this well-known instrument had stood the test of time and is supported by a vast body of data as well as readability of the manual, the explainable scoring procedure, (McClellan, 2004), scientific approach, and quantitative measurement (Carduccci, 2009). The 16PF is most well-known for measuring personality characteristics of the normal population. A major shortcoming of the 16PF is that the 16 surveyed personality attributes are based upon as few as 10 to 13 items each (Gregory, 2011). Although the administrator’s manual adequately provides the fundamental information essential for test administration scoring, data critical for proper interpretation and psychometric evaluation of this measure are lacking (McClellan, 2004). Ethical issues concerning the use of the 16PF for formal diagnostic purposes as it is not designed to assess psychopathology (McClellan, 2004). Other ethical issues as outlined in the American Counseling Association (ACA) code of Ethics (2005) regarding the administration and use of assessment are applicable namely, E.1.a. Assessment Instruments, E.1.b. Client Welfare, E.2. Competence to Use and Interpret Assessment Instruments, E.3 informed Consent in Assessment, E.4 Release of Data to Qualified Professionals, E.6 Instrument Selection. Conditions of Assessment Administration, E.8 Multicultural Issues/Diversity in Assessment, E.9 Scoring and Interpretation of Assessments, and E.13 Forensic Evaluation: Evaluation for Legal Proceedings. 10 The 16PF meets the requirements (McClellan, 2004) given by The American Educational Association, American psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education (AERA, APA, NCME) (1999) applicable to employment testing are followed when the 16PF is used.

Personal Use of Test

Using the 16PF will be ideal for testing recently released inmates from prison to assist them with vocational insight to bring awareness and affirmation. While most inmates are unaware of their abilities because they sought after crimes to make ends meet, the 16PF can be a lead way for potential adaptation back into society. Whether it be continued education and/or career advancement. The 16PF can assist with personal development to make sound decisions.

Conclusion
The 16Pf Questionnaire has a long rich research history. Scores on the 16PF have been shown to underlie an individual’s psychological adjustment. Psychological adjustment has been described in ways, from life satisfaction, positive emotions and well-being to successful adaptation to life (Ryff, 1998). Emotional adjustment refers to predominately experiencing positive emotions, with few ups and downs in mood. Social adjustment refers to adapting to social demands in a proactive manner. These adjustments will help an individual with fewer swings in mood and emotional experiences and are generally more confident in their judgments and decisions.

11
References
AAERA, APA, & NCME. (2004) standards for educational and psychological testing (2nd ed). Washington, DC: AERA.
Aiken, L, (2002). Attitudes and related psychosocial constructs: Theories, assessment, and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Allport, G. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
American Counseling Association (2005). ACA Code of Ethics, Alexandria, VA: Author.
Aronson, E. and Mettee, D. R.”Dishonest behavior as a function of differential levels of induced self-esteem.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1961, 9, 2, 121-127.
Barkwell, L., “Differential Probation Treament of Delinquency.” In Treatment Toronto Butterworth, 1980.
Biles, D. Theory and Practice in Correctional Work-A Review of Past Decade”. Probation Officer, 15 (2) Dec 1978, p. 14-18.
Brikett-Cattell. H and Cattell H.E.P. (1997) 16PF Cattell Comprehensive Personality Interpretation Manual. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Carducci, B. (2009). The psychology of personality: Viewpoints, research, and application. Hoboken, NJ, Wiley-Blackwell, Inc., pp. 259-284.
Cattell, H.E.P. (1996). The original big five: A historical perspective. European Review of Applied Psychology. 46(1): 5-14. 12
Cattell, H.E.P. (2007) exploring your 16PF Profile, Oxford Psychologist Press.
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The description of personality. Basic traits resolved into clusters. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 38, 476-506.
Cattell, H., & Meade, A. (2008). The sixteen personality factor questionnaire. In The Sage Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment. (pp. 135+ 159). Thousand Oaks CA Sage Publications.
Cattell, H., Schuerger, J. (2003). Essentials of 16PF assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Cattell, R (2009). Personality structure and measurement II: The determination and utility of trait modality. British Journal of Psychology, 100 (Suppl), 233-248.
Clark, W., & Blackwell, T. (2007). Test review. Rehabilitation counseling Bulletin, 50 (4), 247- 250. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Dancer, L., & Woods, S. (2006). Higher-Order factor Structures and Intercorrelations of the 16PF5 and FIRO-B. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 14($), 385-391. doi: 19. 1111/j. 1468.2006.00360.x.
Jung-Shaaraway, R Derivation of female felon norms for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Psy. D. dissertation, Alliant International University, Los Angeles, United States---California. Retreived August, 2010, form Dissertations Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 3368128).

13
McClellen, M. (2004). Review of the test 16PF5]. In The twelfth mental measurements Yearbook Available from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/ehost/detail?sid=55b71d9d-9963-427c-ac50-7b7eac4717e8%40sessionmgr15&vid=1&hid=7&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=loh&AN=12121671 Moos, R. H. Evaluating Correctional Community Settings New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1975.
McGilloway, S, Research, August, 18, 2010.
Romig, D. A. Justice for our Children, Massachusetts, Lexington Books, 1978.
Tyler, V and Kelly R. Cattell’s HSPQ as a Predictor of the Behavior of Institutionalized Delinquents Psychology Research Report No. 2 Port Townsend, Washington, Port Warden Diagnostic and Treatment Center, 1962.

References: AAERA, APA, & NCME. (2004) standards for educational and psychological testing (2nd ed). Aiken, L, (2002). Attitudes and related psychosocial constructs: Theories, assessment, and research Allport, G. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press. American Counseling Association (2005). ACA Code of Ethics, Alexandria, VA: Author. Aronson, E. and Mettee, D. R.”Dishonest behavior as a function of differential levels of induced self-esteem.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1961, 9, 2, 121-127. Barkwell, L., “Differential Probation Treament of Delinquency.” In Treatment Toronto Butterworth, 1980. Brikett-Cattell. H and Cattell H.E.P. (1997) 16PF Cattell Comprehensive Personality Interpretation Manual Carducci, B. (2009). The psychology of personality: Viewpoints, research, and application. Cattell, H.E.P. (1996). The original big five: A historical perspective. European Review of Applied Psychology Cattell, R. B. (1943). The description of personality. Basic traits resolved into clusters. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology Cattell, H., & Meade, A. (2008). The sixteen personality factor questionnaire. In The Sage Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment Cattell, H., Schuerger, J. (2003). Essentials of 16PF assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Cattell, R (2009). Personality structure and measurement II: The determination and utility of trait modality Clark, W., & Blackwell, T. (2007). Test review. Rehabilitation counseling Bulletin, 50 (4), 247- 250 Dancer, L., & Woods, S. (2006). Higher-Order factor Structures and Intercorrelations of the 16PF5 and FIRO-B doi: 19. 1111/j. 1468.2006.00360.x. United States---California. Retreived August, 2010, form Dissertations Theses: Full Text Moos, R. H. Evaluating Correctional Community Settings New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1975. McGilloway, S, Research, August, 18, 2010. Romig, D. A. Justice for our Children, Massachusetts, Lexington Books, 1978. Warden Diagnostic and Treatment Center, 1962.