The consistency of personality type classification across samples and five‐factor measures

Abstract

Caspi (1998), Asendorpf and Van Aken (1999), and Asendorpf et al. (2001) described three personality types derived from Q‐factor analysis of Q‐sorts or cluster analysis of multiple trait ratings. The types were labelled as resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers and they were described in terms of averaged Five‐Factor Model (FFM) scores. The present study aimed to investigate the consistency and replicability of these prototypes across different FFM measures (i.e. HiPIC and NEO PI‐R) and ages (children and adolescents). In addition, the stability of prototype classification across a 3 year interval was examined. The types described by Caspi and Asendorpf and colleagues were only partially replicable and consistent across ages starting from HiPIC ratings, but not for NEO‐PI‐R ratings. Prototype classification was not stable across a 3 year interval. It is concluded that cluster replicability, consistency, and stability depend on sample characteristics and the multiple trait measures, although these difficulties do not necessarily limit the usefulness of the types for applied purposes. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Achenbach

T. M.

(1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4–18 and 1991 Profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry.

Asendorpf

J. B.

Borkenau

Ostendorf

Van Aken

(2001).Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 3,169–198.

Asendorpf

J. B.

Van Aken

M. A. G.

(1999).Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality types in childhood: Replicability, predictive power and the trait‐type issue. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77,815–832.

Barbaranelli

(2002).Evaluating cluster analysis solutions: An application to the Italian NEO Personality Inventory. European Journal of Personality, 16,S43–S55.

Block

(1961). Lives through time. Berkeley, CA: Bancroft.

Block

(1971). The Q‐sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research. Springfield, IL: Thomas.

Block

(1995).A contrarian view of the five‐factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117,187–215.

Block

J. H.

(1980). The California Child Q‐set. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Caspi

(1998). Personality development across the life course. In W. Damon (Ed.),Handbook of child psychology,5th ed. N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Social, emotional, and personality development(Vol. 3, pp.311–388). New York: Wiley.

10.

Caspi

(2000).The child is father of the man: Personality continuities from childhood to adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1,158–172.

11.

Costa

P. T.

McCrae

R. R.

(1992). NEO PI‐R. Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

12.

Costa, P. T. , & Widiger, T. A. (Eds.). (1994). Personality disorders and the Five‐Factor Model of personality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

13.

Costa

P. T.

Herbst

J. H.

McCrae

R. R.

(2002).The replicability and utility of three personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16,S73–S87.

14.

De Fruyt

(in press).A person‐centred approach to P‐E fit questions using a multiple trait model. Journal of Vocational Behavior.

15.

De Fruyt

Mervielde

(1998).The assessment of the Big Five in the Dutch language domain. Psychologica Belgica, 38,1–22.

16.

De Fruyt

Mervielde

Hoekstra

H. A.

Rolland

J.‐P.

(2000).Assessing adolescents' personality with the NEO PI‐R. Assessment, 7,329–345.

17.

Digman

J. M.

(1997).Higher‐order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73,1246–1256.

18.

Hoekstra

H. A.

Ormel

De Fruyt

(1996). NEO Persoonlijkheidsvragenlijsten: NEO PI‐R en NEO‐FFI. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

19.

John

O. P.

Robins

R. W.

(1994).Traits and types, dynamics and development: No doors should be closed in the study of personality. Psychological Inquiry, 2,103–113.

20.

Kohnstamm, G. A. , Halverson, C. F., Jr. , Mervielde, I. , & Havill, V. L. (Eds.). (1998). Parental descriptions of child personality: Developmental antecedents of the Big Five?. Hillsdale: Erlbaum, NJ.

21.

McCrae

R. R.

John

O. P.

(1992).An introduction to the 5‐factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60,175–215.

22.

Mervielde

Asendorpf

(2000). Variable‐centered and person‐centered approaches to childhood personality. In S. Hampson (Ed.),Advances in personality psychology(Vol. 1, pp.37–76). London: Routledge.

23.

Mervielde

De Fruyt

(1999). Construction of the Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (HiPIC). In I. Mervielde , I. Deary , F. De Fruyt , & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe(pp.107–127). Tilburg University Press.

24.

Mervielde

De Fruyt

(2000).The ‘Big Five’ personality factors as a model for the structure of children's peer nominations. European Journal of Personality, 14,91–106.

25.

Pervin

L. A.

(1994).A critical analysis of current trait theory. Psychological Inquiry, 5,103–113.

26.

Van Leeuwen

(2000).Deficits in parenting skills as an indicator of behavior problems with children and youth. Development of a screening instrument for the Flemish community. Ghent University Department of Psychology.

27.

Verhulst

F. C.

Van der Ende

Koot

H. M.

(1996).Handleiding voor de CBCL/4–18. Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Afdeling Kinder‐en Jeugdpsychiatrie.