The five‐factor personality inventory: cross‐cultural generalizability across 13 countries

By A. A. Jolijn Hendriks, Marco Perugini, A. Angleitner, F. Ostendorf, John A. Johnson, Filip De Fruyt, M. Hřebíčková, S. Kreitler, Takashi Murakami, D. Bratko and 4 more. 2003

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/08d878bdb10d38fbf8dd34679edab49b54b1960f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The intervening role of social worldviews in the relationship between the five‐factor model of personality and social attitudes (2007, methodology): “Nevertheless, given the many significant relationships between the acquiescent responding score and the variables under study, acquiescence variance was partialled out and residuals were used as input of all following analyses (see Hendriks et al., 2003; Ten Berge, 1999).”
Relations between personality and coping: a meta-analysis. (2007, background): “These traits are also relatively stable across age groups and cultures (Hendriks et al., 2003; McCrae, Costa, del Pilar, Rolland, & Parker, 1998), making the Big Five model a good starting point for organizing diverse measures of temperament and personality.”
Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance (2007, methodology): “…measurement invariance has been increasingly tested in applied research (e.g., Byrne & Campbell, 1999; Chen, in press; Chen, Sousa, & West, 2005; Hendriks et al., 2003; Kwan, Bond, & Singelis, 1997; Little, 1997; Rhee, Uleman, & Lee; 1996; Steenkamp & Baumgartner, 1998), an important question…”
Impact of Stressors on Employee Performance: Moderating Role of Big Five Traits (2015, background): “The most important thing about this model is that traits are comparatively stable in different cultures and age groups (Jolijn Hendriks et al., 2003; McCrae et al., 2000).”
Towards A Pan–Cultural Personality Structure: Input from 11 Psycholexical Studies (2014, background): “…content-wise comparisons (e.g. Ashton et al., 2004; Benet-Martinez & Waller, 1997; Saucier, Hampson, & Goldberg, 2000), often nourished by information from imposed-etic comparisons (e.g. Hendriks et al., 2003; McCrae, Terracciano, & 78 members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures Project, 2005).”
Self and partner personality in intimate relationships (2005, methodology): “The FFPI has good psychometric properties (Hendriks et al., 1999, 2003).”
Personality and school performance: Incremental validity of self- and peer-ratings over intelligence (2006, methodology): “Participants were 255 (88 males and 167 females) Croatian school pupils, of which 158 attended a general, 52 a scientific, and 45 a humanistic curriculum.”
A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. (2009, background): “…obtained from analyses of varied item sets (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1988; Goldberg & Rosolack, 1994; Goldberg, Sweeney, Merenda, & Hughes, 1996) and has been confirmed within different cultures (e.g., Hendriks et al., 2003) provides evidence not only for the FFM but also for the lexical hypothesis.”
Love at first sight or friends first? Ties among partner personality trait similarity, relationship onset, relationship quality, and love (2007, methodology): “Personality was measured by the Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI; Hendriks, 1997; Hendriks et al., 2003).”
Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? an extension of personality prototype research (2006, methodology): “…on personality traits has revealed that Big-Five inventories provide reliable and valid measures of personality in a wide variety of cultures (e.g. Hendriks et al., 2003), the appropriateness of the discriminant function for cultures other than German still needs to be established empirically.”