Evaluating a Brief Big Five Personality Test in a Diverse Chinese Sample: The Role of Midpoint Designs and Reversely-Worded Items

References

• Adelson, J. L., & McCoach, D. B. (2010). Measuring the mathematical attitudes of elementary students: The effects of a 4-point or 5-point Likert-type scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(5), 796–807. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410366694
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anglim, J., Dunlop, P. D., Wee, S., Horwood, S., Wood, J. K., & Marty, A. (2022). Personality and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 148(5-6), 301–336. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäckström, M., & Björklund, F. (2013). Social desirability in personality inventories: Symptoms, diagnosis and prescribed cure. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 54(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, X., Yu, H., & Yu, F. (2015). What is the optimal number of response alternatives for rating scales? From an information processing perspective. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 3(2), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1057/jma.2015.4
   Google Scholar
• Christian, L. M., Parsons, N. L., & Dillman, D. A. (2009). Designing scalar questions for web surveys. Sociological Methods & Research, 37(3), 393–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124108330004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Church, A. T. (2001). Personality measurement in cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 979–1006. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.696172
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chyung, S. Y., Roberts, K., Swanson, I., & Hankinson, A. (2017). Evidence-based survey design: The use of a midpoint on the Likert scale. Performance Improvement, 56(10), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21727
   Google Scholar
• Colledani, D., Anselmi, P., & Robusto, E. (2019). Development of a new abbreviated form of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised with multidimensional item response theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 149, 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Neo personality inventory-revised (NEO PI-R). Psychological Assessment Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Chen, F., Paxton, P., & Kirby, J. B. (2003). Finite sampling properties of the point estimates and confidence intervals of the RMSEA. Sociological Methods & Research, 32(2), 208–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124103256130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daikeler, J., Bošnjak, M., & Lozar Manfreda, K. (2020). Web versus other survey modes: an updated and extended meta-analysis comparing response rates. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 8(3), 513–539. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smz008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeRouvray, C., & Couper, M. P. (2002). Designing a strategy for reducing “no opinion” responses in web-based surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 20(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443930202000101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebesutani, C., Drescher, C. F., Reise, S. P., Heiden, L., Hight, T. L., Damon, J. D., & Young, J. (2012). The Loneliness Questionnaire-Short Version: An evaluation of reverse-worded and non-reverse-worded items via item response theory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94(4), 427–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2012.662188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldt, L. S., Woodruff, D. J., & Salih, F. A. (1987). Statistical inference for coefficient alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11(1), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168701100107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B.Jr, (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn, E., Gottschling, J., & Spinath, F. M. (2012). Short measurements of personality – Validity and reliability of the GSOEP Big Five Inventory (BFI-S). Journal of Research in Personality, 46(3), 355–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakulinen, C., Elovainio, M., Pulkki-Råback, L., Virtanen, M., Kivimäki, M., & Jokela, M. (2015). Personality and depressive symptoms: Individual participant meta-analysis of 10 cohort studies. Depression and Anxiety, 32(7), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22376
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamamura, T., Heine, S. J., & Paulhus, D. L. (2008). Cultural differences in response styles: The role of dialectical thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(4), 932–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and ltenls. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9(2), 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168500900204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, J., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2016). The motivation-achievement paradox in international educational achievement tests: Toward a better understanding. In R. B. King & A. B. I. Bernardo (Eds.), The Psychology of Asian Learners: A Festschrift in Honor of David Watkins (pp. 253–268). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-576-1_16
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Social Science Survey, P. U. (2015). China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) Version V42) [Survey Data]. Peking University Open Research Data Platform. https://doi.org/10.18170/DVN/45LCSO
   Google Scholar
• Johns, R. (2005). One Size Doesn’t Fit All: Selecting response scales for attitude items. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties, 15(2), 237–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/13689880500178849
   Google Scholar
• Kam, C. C. S., & Chan, G. H-h. (2018). Examination of the validity of instructed response items in identifying careless respondents. Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 83–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, C. C. S., Meyer, J. P., & Sun, S. (2021). Why do people agree with both regular and reversed items? A logical response perspective. Assessment, 28(4), 1110–1124. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911211001931
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulas, J. T., & Stachowski, A. A. (2009). Middle category endorsement in odd-numbered Likert response scales: Associated item characteristics, cognitive demands, and preferred meanings. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 489–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulas, J. T., Stachowski, A. A., & Haynes, B. A. (2008). Middle response functioning in likert-responses to personality items. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(3), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9064-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, F. R., John, D., Lüdtke, O., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2011). Short assessment of the Big Five: Robust across survey methods except telephone interviewing. Behavior Research Methods, 43(2), 548–567. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0066-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2006). The five-factor model of personality and smoking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education, 36(1), 47–58.:https://doi.org/10.2190/9EP8-17P8-EKG7-66AD
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., de Lima, M. P., Simões, A., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., Marušić, I., Bratko, D., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Chae, J.-H., & Piedmont, R. L. (1999). Age differences in personality across the adult life span: Parallels in five cultures. Developmental Psychology, 35(2), 466–477. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.35.2.466
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myszkowski, N., Storme, M., & Tavani, J.-L. (2019). Are reflective models appropriate for very short scales? Proofs of concept of formative models using the Ten-Item Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality, 87(2), 363–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12395
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrillo, J., Cano, S. J., McLeod, L. D., & Coon, C. D. (2015). Using classical test theory, item response theory, and rasch measurement theory to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures: A comparison of worked examples. Value in Health : The Journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 18(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.10.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. E., & Smith, N. E. I. (2006). Personality correlates of physical activity: A review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 40(12), 958–965. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2006.028860
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 34(S1), 1–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03372160
   Google Scholar
• Schimmack, U., Oishi, S., Furr, R. M., & Funder, D. C. (2004). Personality and Life Satisfaction: A Facet-Level Analysis. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), 1062–1075. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264292
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Si, S. X., & Cullen, J. B. (1998). Response categories and potential cultural bias: Effects of an explicit middle point in cross-cultural surveys. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 6(3), 218–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028885
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. L., Hamplová, D., Kelley, J., & Evans, M. D. R. (2021). Concise survey measures for the Big Five personality traits. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 73, 100595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2021.100595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer-Rodgers, J., Peng, K., Wang, L., & Hou, Y. (2004). Dialectical self-esteem and east-west differences in psychological well-being. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(11), 1416–1432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264243
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suárez Álvarez, J., Pedrosa, I., Lozano, L. M., García Cueto, E., Cuesta Izquierdo, M., & Muñiz Fernández, J. (2018). Using reversed items in Likert scales: A questionable practice. Psicothema, 30(2):149–158.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Vaerenbergh, Y., & Thomas, T. D. (2013). Response styles in survey research: A literature review of antecedents, consequences, and remedies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25(2), 195–217. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/eds021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, R., & Krosnick, J. A. (2020). Middle alternatives and measurement validity: A recommendation for survey researchers. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(2), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1645384
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weems, G. H., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). The impact of midpoint responses and reverse coding on survey data. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 166–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weijters, B., Cabooter, E., & Schillewaert, N. (2010). The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(3), 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, K. E., & Dishman, R. K. (2015). Personality and physical activity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 230–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, N., Rindfleisch, A., & Burroughs, J. E. (2003). Do reverse-worded items confound measures in cross-cultural consumer research? The case of the material values scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(1), 72–91. https://doi.org/10.1086/374697
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, Y., & Hu, J. (2014). An Introduction to the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS). Chinese Sociological Review, 47(1), 1–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, Y., & Lu, P. (2015). The sampling design of the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS). Chinese Journal of Sociology, 1(4), 471–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057150X15614535
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhang, X., Wang, M.-C., He, L., Jie, L., & Deng, J. (2019). The development and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory-15. PLoS One, 14(8), e0221621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221621
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar