Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2017-6
Item Response Theory Modeling and Categorical Regression Analyses of the Five-Factor Model Rating Form: A Study on Italian Community-Dwelling Adolescent Participants and Adult Participants
To extend the evidence on the reliability and construct validity of the Five-Factor Model Rating Form (FFMRF) in its self-report version, two independent samples of Italian participants, which were composed of 510 adolescent high school students and 457 community-dwelling adults, respectively, were administered the FFMRF in its Italian translation. Adolescent participants were also administered the Italian translation of the Borderline Personality Features Scale for Children–11 (BPFSC-11), whereas adult participants were administered the Italian translation of the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM). Cronbach α values were consistent with previous findings; in both samples, average interitem r values indicated acceptable internal consistency for all FFMRF scales. A multidimensional graded item response theory model indicated that the majority of FFMRF items had adequate discrimination parameters; information indices supported the reliability of the FFMRF scales. Both categorical (i.e., item-level) and scale-level regression analyses suggested that the FFMRF scores may predict a nonnegligible amount of variance in the BPFSC-11 total score in adolescent participants, and in the TriPM scale scores in adult participants.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
AxelrodS. R.WidigerT. A.TrullT. J.CorbittE. M. (1997). Relation of five-factor model antagonism facets with personality disorder symptomatology. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69, 297-313.
3.
BakerF. (2001). The basics of item response theory. College Park, MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, University of Maryland.
4.
BriggsS. R. (1992). Assessing the five-factor model of personality description. Journal of Personality, 60, 253-293.
5.
CaiL.HansenM. (2013). Limited-information goodness-of-fit testing of hierarchical item factor models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 66, 245-276.
6.
CaiL.Maydeu-OlivaresA.CoffmanD. L.ThissenD. (2006). Limited information goodness-of-fit testing of item response theory models for sparse 2p tables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 59, 173-194.
7.
CaldwellM. F.ZiemkeM. H.VitaccoM. J. (2008). An examination of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act as applied to juveniles: Evaluating the ability to predict sexual recidivism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14, 89-114.
8.
ChaE. S.KimK. H.ErlenJ. A. (2007). Translation of scales in cross-cultural research: Issues and techniques. Journal of Advance Nursing, 58, 386-395.
9.
ChalmersR. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1-29.
10.
ChenW. H.ThissenD. (1997). Local dependence indices for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265-289.
11.
ClarkL. A.SimmsL. J.WuK. D.CasillasA. (in press). Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality—Second Edition (SNAP-2). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
ClarkeB.BarronA. R. (1994). Jeffreys’ prior is asymptotically least favorable under entropy risk. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 41, 37-60.
14.
CostaP. T.Jr.McCraeR. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
15.
CostaP. T.Jr.McCraeR. R. (1995). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 21-50.
16.
CregoC.WidigerT. A. (2014). Psychopathy, DSM-5, and a caution. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 335-347.
17.
CrickN. R.Murray-CloseD.WoodsK. (2005). Borderline personality features in childhood: A short-term longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 1051-1070.
18.
CydersM. A.SmithG. T. (2007). Mood-based rash action and its components: Positive and negative urgency. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 839-850.
19.
DenissenJ. J.GeenenR.van AkenM. A.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2008). Development and validation of a Dutch translation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 152-157.
20.
DeYoungC. G.QuiltyL. C.PetersonJ. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880-896.
21.
DrislaneL. E.PatrickC. J.ArsalG. (2014). Clarifying the content coverage of differing psychopathy inventories through reference to the triarchic psychopathy measure. Psychological Assessment, 26, 350-362.
22.
EdelenM. O.ReeveB. B. (2007). Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement. Quality of Life Research, 16, 5-18.
23.
EfronB. (1983). Estimating the error rate of a prediction rule: Improvement on cross-validation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 78, 316-331.
24.
EmbretsonS. E.ReiseS. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25.
ForeroC. G.VilagutG.AdroherN. D.AlonsoJ.ESEMeD/MHEDEA Investigators. (2013). Multidimensional item response theory models yielded good fit and reliable scores for the Short Form-12 questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66, 790-801.
26.
FossatiA.SharpC.BorroniS.SommaA. (2015). Psychometric properties of the Borderline Personality Features Scale for Children-11 (BPFSC-11) in a sample of community dwelling Italian adolescents. Manuscript submitted for publication.
27.
GeisingerK. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6, 304-312.
28.
GhoshM.MergelV.LiuR. (2011). A general divergence criterion for prior selection. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 63, 43-58.
29.
GrettonH. M.HareR. D.CatchpoleR. E. (2004). Psychopathy and offending from adolescence to adulthood: A ten year follow-up. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 72, 636-645.
30.
HattieJ. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing dimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139-164.
HowellA. J.DopkoR. L.TurowskiJ. B.BuroK. (2011). The disposition to apologize. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 509-514.
34.
JeffreysH. (1946). An invariant form for the prior probability in estimation problems. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical, & Engineering Sciences, 186, 453-461.
35.
KennealyP. J.HicksB. M.PatrickC. J. (2007). Validity of the factors of the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised in female prisoners. Assessment, 14, 323-340.
36.
LaneS.StoneC. (2006). Performance assessment. In BrennanR. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 387-431). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger.
37.
LeeK.AshtonM. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329-358.
38.
LivesleyW. J.JacksonD. (2009). Manual for the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology–Basic Questionnaire. Port Huron, MI: Sigma Press.
39.
LynamD. R.WidigerT. A. (2001). Using the five-factor model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders: An expert consensus approach. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110, 401-412.
40.
MarkonK. E. (2013a). Information utility: Quantifying the total psychometric information provided by a measure. Psychological Methods, 18, 15-35.
41.
MarkonK. E. (2013b). infutil: Information utility. R package version 1.0.
42.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (2008). The five factor theory of personality. In JohnO. P.RobinsR. W.PervinL. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality (3rd ed., pp. 159-181). New York, NY: Guilford.
43.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr.TerraccianoA.ParkerW. D.MillsC. J.De FruytF.MervieldeI. (2002). Personality trait development from age 12 to age 18: Longitudinal, cross-sectional and cross-cultural analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1456-1468.
44.
Mullins-SweattS. N.JamersonJ. E.SamuelD. B.OlsonD. R.WidigerT. A. (2006). Psychometric properties of an abbreviated instrument of the five-factor model. Assessment, 13, 119-137.
45.
Mullins-SweattS. N.WidigerT. A. (2010). Personality-related problems in living: An empirical approach. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 1, 230-238.
46.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
47.
PatrickC. J. (2010). Operationalizing the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Preliminary description of brief scales for assessment of boldness, meanness, and disinhibition (Unpublished test manual). Tallahassee: Florida State University. Test retrieved from https://www.phenxtoolkit.org/index.php?pageLink=browse.protocoldetails&id=121601
48.
PatrickC. J.DrislaneL. E. (2015). Triarchic model of psychopathy: Origins, operationalizations, and observed linkages with personality and general psychopathology. Journal of Personality, 83, 627-643. doi:10.1111/jopy.12119
49.
PatrickC. J.FowlesD. C.KruegerR. F. (2009). Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 913-938.
50.
PaunonenS. V.AshtonM. C. (2001). Big five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 524-539.
51.
PaunonenS. V.HaddockG.FosterlingF.KeinonenM. (2003). Broad versus narrow personality measures and the prediction of behaviour across cultures. European Journal of Personality, 17, 413-433.
52.
PoyR.SegarraP.EstellerÀ.LópezR.MoltóJ. (2014). FFM description of the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy in men and women. Psychological Assessment, 26, 69-76.
53.
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
54.
ReiseS.WallerN. (2002). Item response theory for dichotomous assessment data. In DrasgowF.SchmittN. (Eds.), Measuring and analyzing behavior in organizations: Advances in measurement and data analysis (pp. 88-122). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
55.
ReynoldsS. K.ClarkL. A. (2001). Predicting dimensions of personality disorder from domains and facets of the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 69, 199-222.
56.
SamejimaF. (1997). Graded response model. In van der LindenW. J.HambletonR. K. (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory (pp. 85-100). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
57.
SamuelD. B.Mullins-SweattS. N.WidigerT. A. (2013). An investigation of the factor structure and convergent and discriminant validity of the five-factor model rating form. Assessment, 20, 24-35.
58.
SamuelD. B.SimmsL. J.ClarkL. A.LivesleyW. J.WidigerT. A. (2010). An item response theory integration of normal and abnormal personality scales. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 1, 5-21.
59.
SamuelD. B.WidigerT. A. (2008). A meta-analytic review of the relationships between the five-factor model and DSM-IV-TR personality disorders: A facet level analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1326-1342.
60.
SamuelD. B.WidigerT. A. (2011). Clinicians’ use of personality disorder models within a particular treatment setting: A longitudinal comparison of temporal consistency and clinical utility. Personality and Mental Health, 5, 12-28.
61.
SaucierG.GoldbergL. R. (2002). Assessing the Big Five: Applications of 10 psychometric criteria to the development of marker scales. In De RaadB.PeruginiM. (Eds.), Big five assessment (pp. 29-58). Bern, Switzerland: Hogrefe & Huber.
62.
SchenkA. M.RagatzL. L.FremouwW. J. (2012). Vicious dogs part 2: Criminal thinking, callousness, and personality styles of their owners. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 57, 152-159.
63.
SellbomM.PhillipsT. R. (2013). An examination of the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy in incarcerated and nonincarcerated samples. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 208-214.
64.
SharpC.BleibergE. (2007). Borderline personality disorder in children and adolescents. In MartinA.VolkmarF. (Eds.), Lewis’ child and adolescent psychiatry: Comprehensive textbook (pp. 680-691). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
65.
SharpC.SteinbergL.TempleJ.NewlinE. (2014). An 11-item measure to assess borderline traits in adolescents: Refinement of the BPFSC using IRT. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 70-78.
66.
SicaC.DrislaneL.CaudekC.AngrilliA.BottesiG.CereaS.GhisiM. (2015). A test of the construct validity of the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure in an Italian community sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 163-168.
67.
SpenceR.OwensM.GoodyerI. (2012). Item response theory and validity of the NEO-FFI in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 801-807.
68.
ThissenD. (1990). Reliability and measurement precision. In WainerH. (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 161-186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
69.
ThomasK. M.YalchM. M.KruegerR. F.WrightA. G. C.MarkonK. E.HopwoodC. J. (2013). The convergent structure of DSM-5 personality trait facets and Five-Factor Model trait domains. Assessment, 20, 308-311.
70.
TibshiraniR. J. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 58, 267-288.
71.
VandeVijverF. J. R.HambletonR. K. (1996). Translating tests: Some practical guidelines. European Psychologist, 1, 89-99.
72.
van der KooijA.MeulmanJ. J. (2004). Regression with optimal scaling. In MeulmanJ. J.HeiserW. J. (Eds.), SPSS categories13.0 (pp. 107-157). Chicago, IL: SPSS.
73.
van der KooijA. J.MeulmanJ. J.HeiserW. J. (2006). Local minima in categorical multiple regression. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 50, 446-462.
74.
WaltersG. D.KnightR. A.GrannM.DahleK. (2008). Incremental validity of the Psychopathy Checklist facet scores: Predicting release outcome in six samples. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 396-405.
75.
YenW. (1984). Effects of local item dependence on the fit and equating performance of the three parameter logistic model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 125-145.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
