Assessing the big five: Applications of 10 psychometric criteria to the development of marker scales.

By G. Saucier, L. R. Goldberg. 2002

119 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5f2c8c55537b607ebc1a93663cccaa73882cc985

How researchers see this paper

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

1. L. Stankov
2. D. Samuel
3. Jihyun Lee
4. Alan J. Gow
5. T. Widiger
6. M. Whiteman
7. B. Donnellan
8. A. Pattie

Citations in the corpus

• A meta-analytic review of the relationships between the five-factor model and DSM-IV-TR personality disorders: a facet level analysis. (2008, background): “Nevertheless, reasonable questions have been raised regarding this particular structure for the FFM, including the selection and placement of facet scales (Saucier & Goldberg, 2002).”
• Resonance to archetypes in media: There’s some accounting for taste (2009, methodology): “Study 1 presents a new psychometric procedure for testing the existence of classes of archetypes (see Goldberg, 1992; Saucier & Goldberg, 2002).”
• CONFIDENCE AND COGNITIVE TEST PERFORMANCE (2007, background): “Thus far, personality and ability domains have been mapped out reasonably well (see Carroll, 1993; Saucier & Goldberg, 2002).”
• A Multifactor Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Positive Identity Measure (LGB-PIM) (2014, unknown): “Following Saucier and Goldberg’s (2002) reasoning, we chose five item subscales as being reliable and consistent without being overly long.”
• Authenticity at Work: Development and Validation of an Individual Authenticity Measure at Work (2013, background): “Saucier and Goldberg (2002) argued that four-item scales are the practical minimum, with scales consisting of fewer than four items often showing poor psychometric properties.”
• The mini-IPIP scales: tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. (2006, background): “As noted by Saucier and Goldberg (2002), “scale construction can serve any of many possible masters, but these masters can lead us in divergent directions” (p. 53).”
• Goldberg’s ‘IPIP’ Big-Five factor markers: Internal consistency and concurrent validation in Scotland (2005, methodology): “For the purposes of the current study, however, a 5-factor model is employed due to the general consensus that exists about what those factors are; models with a higher number of factors are not entirely in agreement about what a 6th, 7th or nth factor would be.”