Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
CONTENTS
References ....................... 69
2 15FQ+
15FQ+ 3
®16PF is a registered trademark of the Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc (IPAT).
4 15FQ+
performance behaviours, however, cannot tests (Chan, 2005; Hilliard, 2001; Hurtz &
be reliably assessed by interviews, application Donovan, 2000; Kaufman & Borman, 2004;
forms, bio-data questionnaires and assessment Henry et al., 1990; Wise, et al., 1990). Thus the
centre exercises. Rather, such characteristics can use of personality tests can play a central role in
typically only be reliably assessed by personality most selection and assessment decisions.
ADMINISTERING THE 15FQ+ For hand scoring, the test administrator can
The 15FQ+ can be administered in a pencil use the norm table that is built-into the profile
and paper, or computer (including internet chart. Raw scores are converted into sten
based) format. In the computer administered scores by marking a cross on the appropriate
format, instructions for test administration are raw score on the profile chart that corresponds
automatically provided by the system. Detailed to the sten score for that factor. (Alternatively,
instructions for pencil and paper administration it is possible to refer to norm tables
are provided in Appendix I. constructed from the user’s own in-house
While the 15FQ+ questionnaire booklet norms, where available, in order to convert raw
is designed to be virtually self-administerable, scores to sten scores.)
and contains detailed instructions on how to Once the profile chart has been completed,
complete the test, respondents should not be the next step in hand scoring the 15FQ+
left to self-administer the pencil and paper involves calculating the global (or second
version of the test. order) factors. This is simply done by entering
the appropriate sten scores (not raw scores)
SCORING AND PROFILING THE 15FQ+ into each of the global factor equation boxes
When the 15FQ+ questionnaire is computer inside the self-scoring answer sheet, as
administered, the test is automatically scored described in the instructions in Appendix II,
and profiled by the system. In the pencil and then calculating the weighted total for each
and paper format there are two methods for global factor.
scoring the test:
STEN SCORES
Hand Scoring A self-scoring answer sheet Sten scores have a range 1 to 10, a mean of 5.5
is available. By following the instructions and a standard deviation of 2. Sten scores of
in Appendix II the test administrator 5 or 6 are average, while scores of 4 or 7 are
can obtain raw scores on the 16 primary respectively slightly below, or slightly above,
personality factors, and the Social average; sometimes termed low-average and
Desirability scale, and plot these directly on high-average respectively. Scores of 8, 9 and
the adjacent sten profile chart, along with 10, can be considered to be high, very high
the global (or second order) factor scores. and extremely high respectively, and similarly
Scores for the Faking Good and Faking Bad scores of 1, 2 and 3 can be considered to be
Infrequency and Central Tendency scales extremely low, very low and low.
are not available in the self-scoring pencil
and paper format. RISK SCALED SCORES
The Infrequency and Central Tendency scales
Computerised Scoring For those test are the only scales that are not reported using
users who have the software based sten scores. This is due to these scales not
test administration and scoring system, being normally distributed. Rather, these scores
two further options for test scoring are are scaled according to the risk (probability)
available. Either item data can be entered that a given score indicates that the profile is
on the appropriate screen, or alternatively, not valid. A risk scaled score of 8 or 9 indicates
computer-readable answer sheets can be that the test user should consider the possibility
scanned. The software system will then that the profile may not be interpretable due
automatically generate raw and sten scores to central tendency responding, or due to the
for the 16 primary personality factors as well respondent not having given due consideration
as the response style indicators, the criterion and thought to the items when completing
keyed scales and global factor scores. the test (i.e. due to infrequency responding).
A score of 10 indicates that it is likely that the
Scoring the 15FQ+ involves converting the profile is not valid due to central tendency or
raw scores for each factor to standardised infrequency responding.
(sten) scores. Raw scores are standardised using
a norm table that coverts them into sten scores.
This is done automatically by the software
system.
8 15FQ+
PROFILE INTERPRETATION
IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT factor; ƒC, ƒO and ƒQ. (Correlations
The process of interpreting a 15FQ+ between the Social Desirability scale and
personality profile begins by reviewing the the primary personality factors are reported
impression management scales. These scales in Table 40). In addition, when the 15FQ+
provide important information about the questionnaire is being used for occupational
validity of the personality profile, and thus the assessment and selection, it is possible that
meaning of the profile should be interpreted respondents obtaining high scores on the
in the context of these scales. The Social Social Desirability scale may have either
Desirability scale can be scored either using over, or under reported their scores on
the self-scoring answer sheet/profile form, any other primary source traits that may be
or the computerised scoring software. (The particularly job relevant.
additional impression management scales,
described below, are only available to those Infrequency Scale This scale assesses the
using GeneSys Assessment Software.) Unlike extent to which a respondent has attended
the additional impression management scales diligently to the questionnaire and has
(described below) the Social Desirability avoided infrequent responses. Respondents
scale is a dedicated scale that is independent who obtain high risk scaled scores (scores
of the primary personality factors (i.e. it is of 8-10) on this scale may not have given
not comprised of items selected from the 16 due thought and consideration to the
primary factors). As such, it forms the test items when completing the questionnaire
user’s principal source of information about a or may not have diligently followed
person’s response style. the questionnaire’s instructions. When
interpreting the significance of such scores
Social Desirability Scale This scale assessors need to consider a number of
assesses a person’s desire to present an factors. Given that attempts at sabotaging
unrealistically positive image of themselves test results are rare in most occupational
to others, with high scorers being motivated assessment settings, the first question which
to deny the presence of the minor failings needs to be addressed is the possibility that
and idiosyncrasies that are typical of most the respondent did not fully understand
people. Thus high scores on this scale (stens the test instructions and/or items due to a
8-10) may reflect either a deliberate attempt poor command of formal written English.
at distortion or, alternatively, a highly Once this possibility has been ruled out
over-idealised (and possibly unrealistic) assessors should consider the scores the
self-image. Therefore, before considering respondent has obtained on the other
the likely impact of high scores on the 15FQ+ scales, along with the characteristics
validity of the test profile it is important of the assessment context. If the respondent
to consider the candidate’s motivation for has high scores on the Global Anxiety
responding in a socially desirable manner. Factor, consideration should be given to
Information elicited from the feedback the possibility that the respondent was
session may be particularly useful in this so distressed during the assessment that
regard. For example, individuals who are he/she was unable to attend adequately
heavily engaged in charitable activities, or to the questionnaire’s instructions and/or
work of a self-sacrificing nature, may have items. If the Faking Bad scale is also high,
higher than average scores on this scale. such a pattern of test scores may possibly
Similarly, people who have been brought up represent a ‘cry for help’ from a respondent
according to a very strict moral or religious who is having difficulty coping with the
code may be motivated to opt for more pressures of work. (Such an interpretation
socially desirable responses to test items. of the test’s results is most likely to occur
Alternatively, if there are good grounds for in an outplacement or performance review
considering that high scores are likely to context.) The assessor should then consider
reflect a deliberate attempt at distortion, possible reasons the respondent may have
then it is likely that the candidate will have had for sabotaging the assessment by
under-reported their true scores on the responding in a random or semi-random
Anxiety Global Factor, and the primary way to the questionnaire. Attempts at
source traits that contribute to this global sabotaging an assessment are most likely to
15FQ+ 9
have occurred if the respondent has been Faking Bad This scale assesses a
placed under pressure to complete the respondent’s tendency to present him or
questionnaire unwillingly, in a redeployment herself in an unfavourable light, admitting
or outplacement context. to a variety of problem behaviours and
difficulties that do not routinely apply
Central Tendency Scale This scale assesses to him or herself. If the respondent is
the degree to which respondents have highly anxious or distressed then a high
been prepared to answer the questionnaire Faking Bad score should be interpreted
decisively - avoiding middle, or non- with caution, as it may be elevated due to
committal responses. High risk scaled his or her scores on the primary factors
scores (of 8 or 9) can suggest either that the that contribute to this scale, rather than
respondent has a poorly defined self-concept, reflecting an attempt to present a negative
has been indecisive or reluctant to commit impression of him or herself. In this
him or herself to particular attitudes or situation the test user should interpret the
actions, or is genuinely moderate in respect elevated Faking Bad score in the context
to many personality traits and dispositions. of the person’s overall personality profile,
(These competing interpretations of an taking into account relevant information
elevated Central Tendency risk scaled score gained from the feedback session.
should be explored during the candidate
feedback session, to facilitate the assessor’s When interpreting the meaning of the
formulation of the most likely reason for impression management scales, the test user
this elevated score.) An extremely high must give due consideration to the context
risk scaled score (a score of 10) suggests in which the test was administered. Similarly,
that the personality profile is likely not to when interpreting the profile of a respondent
be valid, due to the respondent not having who has obtained a high score on any of the
been willing to reveal very much about him impression management scales, the test user
or herself by seeking refuge in the middle, should use his or her knowledge about the
uncertain or in-between response. (Possible demand characteristics of the assessment
reasons why the respondent may have been process to identify those personality factor
reluctant to have revealed much about him scores that may have been distorted by the
or herself should be sought by considering respondent’s response set.
the demand characteristics of the assessment
context in greater detail.)
INTERPRETING THE GLOBAL FACTOR SCORES the primary source traits that contribute to that
The next step in interpreting the 15FQ+ global factor are in the same direction as the
profile is to review the global factor scale global factor score. Thus, if the respondent
scores. These assess the ‘Big Five’ personality has a high Extraversion Global Factor score,
dimensions, about which much has been and has above average scores on each of the
written (Costa & McCrae, 1987; Goldberg, primary source traits that contribute to this
1990; Tupes & Crystal, 1961). The global factor global factor (ƒA, ƒF, ƒH and ƒQ2), then
scale names, as well as a brief description of it is likely that the respondent will act in a
their meanings, are presented on Page 11. consistently extraverted manner. If, however,
When interpreting these factors, it should the respondent has low scores on any of the
be noted that they provide a ‘broad-brush primary source traits that contribute to the
approach’ to describing the respondent’s Extraversion Global Factor, then it should be
personality; indicating the respondent’s general noted that the respondent is unlikely to have
personality orientation. The respondent’s all the characteristics of a typical extravert. For
scores on these dimensions thus provide the example, if the respondent has a low score on
test user with an overall orientation to the Factor ƒA, they may lack warmth, empathy and
respondent’s character, and provide a basis interest in others, while still having a broadly
for integrating the primary source traits within extraverted personality. Similarly, if they have
this ‘broader picture’. When interpreting the a low score on Factor ƒH, they may be lacking
meaning of these global personality factors, the in social boldness and social presence and be
test user should bear in mind that these global somewhat slower than a typical extravert to
factor scores are calculated from the 16 source come forward in social settings. However, they
traits assessed by the 15FQ+. are still likely to be interested in people, to be
When interpreting the global factor scores, sociable, friendly outgoing and fun-loving.
the test user should examine whether each of
15FQ+ 11
E Extraversion
Orientated to the outer world of
people, events and external activities.
Introversion
Orientated towards their own inner
world of thoughts, perceptions
Needing social contact and external and experiences. Not requiring
stimulation. much social contact and external
stimulation.
N Low aNxiety
Well adjusted, calm, resilient, and
able to cope with emotionally
High aNxiety
Vulnerable, touchy, sensitive, prone
to mood swings, challenged by
demanding situations. emotionally gruelling situations.
Independence Agreeableness
A Self-determined with regard to own
thoughts and actions. Independent
Agreeable, tolerant and obliging.
Neither stubborn, disagreeable nor
minded. May be intractable, strong- opinionated. Is likely to be happy to
willed and confrontational. compromise.
FACTOR ƒA
Low scorers tend to be cool, distant and High scorers are friendly, warm, participating
somewhat aloof in their interpersonal individuals who are interested in the people
relationships. They are disinclined to express around them and have a natural understanding
their feelings and may feel somewhat of ‘what makes others tick’. Quick to offer
uncomfortable with people who are overly support and encouragement to friends and
friendly or familiar. Being extremely private colleagues, they will be viewed as good
individuals, they are likely to relate to others listeners. Their interest in other people means
in an impersonal manner and may be seen they are likely to remember personal details
as being somewhat detached and distant by about the people they meet, and be generous
all but their closest friends. They are likely to in interpersonal relationships. Their natural
have difficulty understanding other’s feelings, understanding and empathy for other’s feelings
and may be viewed as lacking in empathy means they will be seen as sympathetic,
and warmth. They dislike talking about concerned, caring individuals. Warm-hearted
personal matters and will be slow to express and attentive to the needs of others, they
sympathy or understanding for other’s personal are likely to be valued team members.
problems. Having a low need for affiliation, Expressing their feelings in a genuine, heartfelt
they are inclined to be slow to form close, manner, they will have a friendly, personable
warm relationships and emotional attachments interpersonal style.
to others.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒA contributes to the Extraversion Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Enthusiastic (ƒF), Socially Bold (ƒH) and Group-orientated (-ve ƒQ2). This
reflects the fact that high ƒA scores (Empathic) are associated with an interest in, and a desire to seek
closeness with, other people. Factor ƒA also correlates negatively with Factor ƒI (Tender-minded),
indicating that low Factor ƒA (Distant Aloof) scores are often associated with a tough, unsentimental,
utilitarian interpersonal style.
INTELLECTANCE ß
Low Intellectance, Lacking confidence in one’s High Intellectance, Confident of one’s own
own intellectual abilities intellectual abilities
Low scorers are likely to lack confidence in High scorers are confident of their own
their own intellectual abilities. As a result they intellectual ability. As a result they are likely to
may be disinclined to work on intellectually enjoy working on tasks that are intellectually
demanding tasks, which they may be prone to demanding and challenging. Intellectually
view as being ‘beyond them’. They are inclined orientated, they will generally be keen to learn
to view themselves as not having a particularly new information and acquire new intellectual
large vocabulary, and as lacking a broad range skills. They may be quick to take advantage
of general knowledge. Thus, they tend to avoid of situations in which they can display their
discussing issues which they may consider to knowledge and intellectual prowess. As a result
be ‘high brow’. They may feel uncomfortable in they may be prone to use long words and talk
situations where they have to explain complex about intricate, intellectual matters. Moreover,
ideas to others, possibly feeling somewhat ‘out they are likely to enjoy explaining complex
of their depth’. ideas and problems to others.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ß (Intellectance) contributes to the Independence Global Factor,
along with the other primary factors; Dominant (ƒE), Suspicious (ƒL) and Radical (ƒQ1). This reflects
the fact that high Factor ß (Intellectance) scores are associated with an independent minded self-
assurance. Intellectance (Factor ß) also correlates modestly with Factor ƒE (Dominant) and Factor
ƒO (Confident). This indicates that low Factor ß (Intellectance) scores are associated with a lack of
confidence in one’s own intellectual abilities.
FACTOR ƒC
Low scorers are inclined to experience mood High scorers are likely to be emotionally
swings. Lacking emotional resilience, they stable, steady, resilient individuals. They rarely
may at times have difficulty summoning experience anxiety symptoms and are likely
up sufficient energy to face demanding to have more than sufficient energy to meet
situations. Being prone to experiencing anxiety life’s challenges. Phlegmatic and inclined to
symptoms, they may find themselves being ‘take most things in their stride’, they will
troubled by sleep problems, psychosomatic rarely be ruffled by life’s ups and downs. As
symptoms, phobias, etc. Moreover, they may such they are unlikely to experience feelings
occasionally find themselves bothered by of depression or despondency. However, as
feelings of despondency or even depression. a result, they may be viewed as somewhat
They may sometimes ‘over-react’ to situations, lacking in emotion, drive or passion. They tend
with their judgement being clouded by their to be confident and secure in themselves and
strong emotional reactions. They are likely to satisfied with their life and their achievements.
be changeable, and may be viewed as being Sometimes this may prompt them to
fickle, moody or capricious. However their become complacent, or overly accepting of
emotional temperament may also be a source unsatisfactory situations. Others are likely
of drive, spurring them on to resolve situations to view them as being mature, dependable
they are unhappy with, or which they find individuals who can be relied upon to cope in
unsatisfactory or unrewarding. a crisis.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒC contributes to the Anxiety Global Factor, along with the
other primary factors; Self-doubting (ƒO), Tense-driven (ƒQ4) and Suspicious (ƒL). This reflects the
fact that low ƒC scores (Affected by Feelings) are associated with high levels of anxiety, tension and
threat sensitivity. Factor ƒC also correlates modestly with Factor ƒH (Socially-bold), indicating that
high Factor ƒC (Emotionally Stable) scores are associated with a tendency to feel confident in social
settings and not worry about the impression one creates.
FACTOR ƒE
Co-operative, accommodating and obliging, Determined to get their own way, high scorers
low scorers are inclined to give way to others. may on occasion be aggressively assertive and
Passive and unassuming, they will be keen pushy when dealing with others. Forceful, and
to avoid upsetting friends and colleagues. vocal in expressing their opinions, they may
As a result they may have difficulty when be seen as opinionated or even somewhat
called upon to take charge of situations and dogmatic. Not being unduly concerned about
give orders. Self-effacing, humble and mild- upsetting people, they may be disinclined to
mannered, they are likely to be modest and listen to other’s points of view. As a result
deferential in their inter-personal relationships. they may have difficulty compromising, and
They may lack aggression and be inclined to conceding when others have a valid point. On
be passive and overly compliant when dealing occasion they may ‘ride roughshod’ over less
with more assertive, self-assured individuals. assertive colleagues, alienating people who do
Quick to acquiesce to other’s wishes, they not agree with them. Feeling free to criticise
may have difficulty ‘standing their ground’ and others, they may generate conflict and discord
asserting their own views and opinions when in those around them. They will be happy
faced with active disagreement from others. to take charge of a situation, and give clear
They dislike conflict, arguments and discord, instructions and orders, but may be overly
which they are likely to avoid at all costs; even controlling and domineering with colleagues
if this means ignoring their own personal needs who are less assertive and forceful.
and goals.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒE contributes to the Independence Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Intellectance (ß), Suspicious (ƒL) and Radical (ƒQ1). This reflects the fact
that high ƒE scores (Dominant) are associated with an independent minded, direct and determined
interpersonal style. Factor ƒE also correlates negatively with Factor ƒO (Self-doubting), indicating that
low Factor ƒE (Accommodating) scores are often associated with a lack of social confidence and a
tendency to worry about how others may view one.
FACTOR ƒF
Low scorers are restrained individuals whom High scorers are lively, talkative individuals
others may view as being rather dour and who enjoy ‘letting themselves go’ and ‘having
lacking in a sense of fun. Serious minded, and a good time’. Always ‘game for a laugh’, they
somewhat inhibited, they are disinclined to will be keen to take part in any activity that
attend lively social events and parties. They promises fun, thrills and excitement. Drawn
are inclined to be restrained and to avoid to stimulating social situations, they may on
participating actively in social events. This may occasion act in a somewhat attention seeking
cause others to view them as being somewhat manner. Moreover their sense of fun, and
taciturn or saturnine. They have little time for effervescent, carefree character, may cause
light-hearted trivial entertainment, preferring them on occasion to step beyond the bounds
instead to engage in more serious-minded of decorum. Light-hearted, cheerful, easy-going
activities. They find it difficult to ‘let their individuals, people are likely to view them as
hair down’ and have a good time. Lacking a being ‘young at heart’ and carefree. Actively
sense of playful fun, and joie de vivre, they may seeking excitement and stimulation, they are
appear somewhat constricted or stiff in social quick to act, and enjoy ‘getting stuck into
situations. They are likely to have fewer friends things’. Happy-go-lucky and fun-loving, others
than many people, and it may take others a are likely to appreciate their enthusiasm for life
while to warm to them. and their joie de vivre.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒF contributes to the Extraversion Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Socially-bold (ƒH), Group-orientated (-ve ƒQ2) and Empathic (ƒA). This
reflects the fact that high ƒF scores (Enthusiastic) are associated with a desire to have fun, and
actively participate in social and group activities. Factor ƒF also correlates negatively with Factor ƒN
(Restrained), indicating that low Factor ƒF (Sober-serious) scores are often associated with a socially
restrained, diplomatic reserve.
FACTOR ƒG
Low scorers tend to lack a strong sense of High scorers have a strong sense of duty and
duty, and may have difficulty persevering with responsibility. They are persevering and are
boring or repetitive tasks. They are inclined inclined to be neat, tidy and well organised.
to disregard well-established rules and set They are likely to set high standards both for
procedures and systems, which they may view themselves and for others. They believe it is
as stifling creativity and spontaneity. Thus important to be detail-conscious, precise and
they may be inclined to be somewhat careless exacting in their work. On occasion they may
when attending to detail. They generally be somewhat obsessive, perfectionistic or
approach tasks in an expedient, casual manner, rigid. Thus they may be prone to obsessive-
preferring to solve problems as they arise compulsive symptoms (e.g. repeatedly checking
rather than follow a detailed action plan or or counting the same thing, etc.). Meticulous
schedule. They may be untidy and possibly and systematic in their work, they will be keen
somewhat disorganised, or even a little chaotic, to make sure that things are done ‘just right’.
in both their home and work life. Flexible and As a result they may find that others do not
spontaneous, they are inclined to view things always live up to their own high standards.
‘from the broader prospective’. They are likely They may have difficulty viewing things from
to prefer thinking strategically, rather than ‘the broader perspective’, and on occasion ‘may
being responsible for creating detailed plans not see the wood for the trees.’
and work schedules.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒG contributes to the self-Control Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Restrained (ƒN) and Self-disciplined (ƒQ3). This reflects the fact that high
ƒG scores (Conscientious) are associated with responsibility, an attention to detail and a preference
for following established procedures and routines. Factor ƒG also correlates negatively with Factor
ƒM (Abstract), indicating that low Factor ƒG (Expedient) scores are associated with a spontaneous,
flexible openness and a tendency to view things from the broader perspective.
FACTOR ƒH
Shy and retiring, low scorers may be slow to Quick to come to the fore in social settings,
come forward in social situations. They do high scorers will be seen as venturesome,
not find it easy to start conversations with socially bold individuals. They feel self-assured
strangers, and as a result it may take others a and confident in most social settings and are
while to get to know them. If they suddenly likely to be happy speaking in front of a large
and unexpectedly become the focus of audience. In fact, they may actively seek out
attention at a social gathering they may find roles that place them ‘in the limelight’ and give
themselves feeling uncomfortable or self- them an opportunity to ‘perform on the social
conscious. They may be prone to feelings stage’. Quick to initiate social contacts, they
of ‘stage fright’, and are likely to be slow to are good conversationalists who enjoy meeting
speak up and express their views and opinions new people. Whatever the setting, they usually
in front of people they do not know well. have something to say, and readily contribute
At parties and social events they may find to group discussions and debates. They are
themselves slipping into the background. likely to be good at ‘making small talk’ and
They may feel ill at ease and self-conscious if bringing ‘others out of their shell’. Natural,
they have to speak in front of a large group easy communicators, they are likely to make a
of people. In group situations they may be big impression on the people they meet.
inclined to ‘take a back seat’ and let others do
the talking.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒH contributes to the Extraversion Global Factor, along with the
other primary factors; Enthusiastic (ƒF), Group-orientated (-ve ƒQ2) and Empathic (ƒA). This reflects
the fact that high ƒH scores are associated with a tendency to participate in social and group activities
in a lively, enthusiastic manner. Factor ƒH also correlates negatively with Factor ƒE (Dominant),
indicating that low Factor ƒH (Retiring) scores are associated with a tendency to take a ‘back seat’ in
meetings and group discussions, and give way to more assertive, self-assured colleagues.
FACTOR ƒI
Low scorers lack aesthetic sensitivity and have High scorers have a strong interest in cultural
little interest in cultural or artistic pursuits. and artistic activities and pursuits. They are
They are rarely moved by feelings of beauty, likely to have refined sophisticated tastes and
wonderment or awe; adopting a rather tough- to appreciate fine art, literature, music, etc.
minded, no-nonsense approach to life. Having Highly subjective in their outlook, they often
little time for subjective, creative matters, respond to situations and events at an intuitive,
they will be primarily concerned with whether emotional level. Focusing on the subtle,
things work effectively; giving little thought aesthetic aspects of a task they are unlikely to
to aesthetic considerations such as design. have much interest in science or engineering.
They are likely to enjoy working with their They may be viewed as being impractical or
hands and fixing things, participating in and ‘arty’ and are unlikely to approach problems in
watching sports and other physical activities. a particularly task-focused way. Their decisions
Others may see them as lacking refinement, are likely to be swayed by sentiment, rather
culture or sophistication. They will however than being based on cool rational logic, or on
view themselves as being utilitarian realists a utilitarian focus on ‘what works’. Creative,
who have little time for ‘artistic people’. Their aesthetically sensitive individuals, they will
decisions will be based on practical, functional generally have little interest in working with
considerations rather than being influenced by their hands, in fixing or repairing things.
sentiment or emotion.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒI contributes to the Openness (to ideas) Global Factor, along
with the other primary factors; Empathic (ƒA), Abstract (ƒM) and Radical (ƒQ1). This reflects the
fact that high Factor ƒI (Tender-minded) scores are associated with an openness to feelings, and
to new, radical, artistic ideas. Factor ƒI also correlates negatively with Factor ƒO (Self-doubting),
indicating that low Factor ƒI (Hard-headed) scores are associated with a tendency to take a realistic,
unsentimental approach towards life.
FACTOR ƒL
Low scorers tend to take people at face High scorers tend to be doubtful and
value, rather than question their motives. mistrusting of other’s motives. Not being
They are quick to place their faith in others, inclined to take people at face value, they
believing that most people are dependable tend to reserve their judgements about others
and trustworthy. Not in the least cynical, they until they have hard, irrefutable evidence of
are likely to have a positive view of human their trustworthiness and honesty. Adopting
nature, believing that people are basically kind, a suspicious and sceptical approach to life,
thoughtful and genuinely concerned about others may view them as being rather jaded
the welfare of others. Not at all suspicious or cynical. Tending to believe that people are
or sceptical, they may on occasion appear to likely to try to take advantage of their goodwill
be a little naïve. Inclined to give others the if given the chance, they will be reluctant to
benefit of the doubt, they may at times be place their faith in others. As a result they may
overly trusting. If others take advantage of adopt a machiavellian, cynical approach to
their trust or good-will they are likely to feel interpersonal relationships. This may reflect
let down. However, only in the most extreme either a tendency to be manipulative or,
circumstances will such events prompt them to alternatively, may be due to them having been
question their positive, trusting view of human repeatedly let down by people in the past.
nature.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒL contributes to the Independence Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Intellectance (ß), Dominant (ƒE) and Radical (ƒQ1). This reflects the fact
that high ƒL scores (Suspicious) are associated with a tendency to be questioning, doubtful and
somewhat machiavellian in interpersonal relationships. Factor ƒL also correlates negatively with
Factor ƒO (Confident), indicating that low Factor ƒL (Trusting) scores are associated with a tendency
to be more confident and trusting in interpersonal relationships.
FACTOR ƒM
Low scorers tend to be practical, down-to- High scorers are creative, imaginative
earth realists. They are more concerned to individuals who have a strong interest in
ensure that things work, rather than explore abstract theoretical ideas. Lacking concern for
how or why they work. Firmly grounded in practical day-to-day realities, they may be seen
the here-and-now, they tend to be very matter as being somewhat ‘other worldly’. Concerned
of fact in their outlook. Concrete thinkers, to understand fundamental principles and
they are inclined to reject abstract theoretical concepts, they are likely to have little interest
perspectives. They may be disinclined to look in mundane practical matters, which they may
beyond the obvious facts in a given situation in not give due consideration and thought to.
search of deeper possibilities and meanings. As Naturally inclined to look beyond the obvious
a result others may view them as being rather facts in a given situation, they are likely to
pedestrian or unimaginative in their outlook. come up with novel, innovative ideas. Without
Focusing on observable facts and hard data, clear goals, however, they may find themselves
they may on occasion be overly concrete or being carried away by their own thoughts and
literal in their thinking style. Not in the least ideas, which may sometimes be quite unrealistic
prone to flights of fantasy, and not inclined or fanciful. Orientated towards the world of
to day-dream, they will be viewed as sensible theory and imagination, they may become so
pragmatists whose decisions emphasise the engrossed in their own ideas and thoughts as to
practicable and achievable. lose sight of practicalities.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒM contributes to the Openness (to ideas) Global Factor, along
with the other primary factors; Empathic (ƒA), Tender-minded (ƒI) and Radical (ƒQ1). This reflects
the fact that high Factor ƒM (Abstract) scores are associated with an openness to abstract theoretical
ideas and a tendency to become lost in thought. Factor ƒM also correlates negatively with Factor ƒG
(Conscientious) and Factor ƒQ3 (Self-disciplined), indicating that low Factor ƒM (Concrete) scores
are associated with a tendency to take a task-focused, realistic approach to problems and have a
preference for working on real-world, achievable goals.
FACTOR ƒN
Direct, Genuine, Artless, Open, Direct, Restrained, Diplomatic, Socially astute, Shrewd,
Straightforward Socially aware, Restrained
Low scorers tend to be direct and to the point High scorers tend to be diplomatic and
in their social interactions. On occasion this restrained in their social interactions. Acutely
may even verge towards being somewhat aware of the subtle nuances of social settings,
blunt or tactless. Thus others may be inclined they are likely to be concerned not to do or
to view them as lacking discretion or social say anything that may seem inappropriate or
sophistication. Genuine, forthright individuals, out of place. As a result others are likely to
who are open and straightforward, they consider them to be shrewd and socially astute.
are likely to be direct in their interpersonal Conscious of the impact they make on those
relationships. Having little concern for the around them, they are inclined to monitor
impression they create in social situations, their behaviour closely to ensure that they do
they may on occasion express their views in not upset or offend others. Naturally discrete
an artless or ill-considered manner. Inclined and diplomatic, others may view them as
to ‘put their cards on the table’, others are being excessively guarded individuals. Shrewd
likely to know where they stand with them. and socially astute, they may on occasion
Most people will appreciate their honest, open, be somewhat manipulative in interpersonal
genuineness. However, lacking awareness relationships. Tending to ‘play their cards close
of the nuances of social situations they may to their chest’, they may often be reluctant to
on occasion pass ill-considered, thoughtless reveal their true feelings and opinions.
comments.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒN contributes to the self-Control Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Conscientious (ƒG) and Self-disciplined (ƒQ3). This reflects the fact that
high ƒN scores (Restrained) are associated with a tendency to show restraint and decorum in social
situations, and a sensitivity to protocol and social expectations. Factor ƒN also correlates negatively
with Factor ƒE (Dominant) and Factor ƒH (Socially-bold), indicating that low Factor ƒN (Direct)
scores are associated with a tendency to freely express views and opinions heedless of the social
consequences of doing so.
FACTOR ƒO
Low scorers are confident of their ability to High scorers tend to be self-reproaching and
deal successfully with life’s challenges. As a troubled by feelings of insecurity and self-
result, they rarely worry about anticipated doubt. Threat sensitive, they tend to focus on
problems or difficulties. Secure and self- anticipated dangers and pitfalls. Often fearing
assured, they are rarely troubled by feelings the worst, they may feel apprehensive when
of guilt or self-doubt. To others, they may faced with new, unexpected challenges. Their
on occasion appear to be overly confident, natural apprehension and self-doubt may spur
possibly lacking insight into their own personal them on to perfect their own skills and abilities,
weaknesses or failings. At times their lack so as to be better able to deal successfully with
of self-doubt, and their unquestioning belief challenges in the future. However their lack of
in their own abilities, may cause them to be self-confidence, and tendency to doubt their
heedless of potential difficulties or problems. own abilities, may on occasion prompt them
Not in the least apprehensive about facing to appear tentative, indecisive or lacking in
possible challenges or threats, they rarely dwell resolve. Guilt prone, they may find themselves
on past problems and failures. Satisfied with dwelling on past, often imagined, failures or
their own achievements and accomplishments, mistakes. Concerned about what others may
they may be inclined to disregard potential think of them, they may often need reassurance
opportunities for self-evaluation, self- and encouragement from those around them.
improvement and growth, believing that this is
not needed.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒO contributes to the Anxiety Global Factor, along with the
other primary factors; Emotionally Stable (-ve ƒC), Tense-driven (ƒQ4) and Suspicious (ƒL). This
reflects the fact that high ƒO scores (Self-doubting) are associated with a tendency to be worrying,
apprehensive and lacking in confidence in one’s own abilities. Factor ƒO also correlates negatively
with Factor ƒH (Socially-bold), indicating that low Factor ƒO (Confident) scores are associated with
a tendency to feel confident and self-assured in social settings and not worry about the impression
others form of them.
FACTOR ƒQ1
Low scorers tend to be conventional in their High scorers value progress, innovation and
outlook on life. They value traditional and change. They are inclined to reject tried and
tried and tested methods, and are likely to be tested methods in favour of new, radical
wary of change for change’s sake. Accepting approaches to problems – even if these are
of the status quo, they approach life with the unproven. Their attitudes and opinions are
motto ‘if it’s not broken, don’t fix it’. They likely to be fairly unconventional, with them
are inclined to question innovation, often being naturally inclined to question the status
believing that new approaches represent little quo. They dislike ‘getting stuck in a rut’ and
more than change for the sake of change. will prefer to work in environments where
Valuing convention and tradition, more radical they are free to initiate change, experiment
colleagues may see them as being ‘stick in and innovate. They may on occasion be overly
the muds’ who are not open to new ideas. quick to reject received opinion, which they
Disliking change, they may on occasion reject may tend to dismiss ‘out of hand’ as being
novel, innovative ideas out of hand. They little more than ‘old hat’. As a result they may
are likely to feel uncomfortable in rapidly at times ignore the value of acquired wisdom
changing environments that demand constant and knowledge. They should be comfortable
innovation, adaptation and adjustment. working in rapidly changing environments,
which require constant adaptation and
adjustment.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒQ1 contributes to the Openness (to ideas) Global Factor,
along with the other primary factors; Empathic (ƒA), Tender-minded (ƒI) and Abstract (ƒM) . This
reflects the fact that high Factor ƒQ1 (Radical) scores are associated with an openness to new ideas
and a willingness to break with tradition. Factor ƒQ1 also correlates negatively with Factor ƒQ3 (Self-
disciplined), indicating that low Factor ƒQ1 (Conventional) scores are associated with a tendency to
value protocol and convention and a desire to preserve tradition.
FACTOR ƒQ2
Low scorers like to be surrounded by people. High scorers are autonomous, self-sufficient
They prefer to take decisions in discussion individuals who prefer to take decisions on
with others, rather than act in an autonomous, their own, rather than in discussion with
independent manner. They dislike being on others. They dislike working in team settings
their own for long periods of time and may and may be reluctant to ask others for help or
have difficulty working in environments that advice. As a result, they may not always give
do not provide high levels of social contact. sufficient regard to public opinion, or other’s
They like to take an active part in social affairs expectations, when making decisions. They
and will generally be happy to join social are comfortable spending time on their own
organisations, participate in committees, and are likely to be happy in occupations that
etc. Being extremely group-orientated, they offer little social support or contact. They will
may have difficulty functioning effectively prefer to avoid becoming actively involved
in situations where they have to work with committees and group activities. They
independently from others and where social enjoy solitary pastimes, with others possibly
contact is not readily available. They are viewing them as being somewhat reclusive, or
likely to enjoy team-work, but on occasion even a little taciturn by nature. As a result, they
their strong need for social contact may may not always attend fully to the interpersonal
interfere with their ability to complete work aspects of a task.
independently of others.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒQ2 contributes to the Extraversion Global Factor, along with
the other primary factors; Enthusiastic (ƒF), Socially-bold (ƒH) and Empathic (ƒA). This reflects the
fact that low ƒQ2 (Group-orientated) scores are associated with a desire to be surrounded by people
and participate in social and group activities. Factor ƒQ2 also correlates negatively with Factor ƒN
(Restrained), indicating that high Factor ƒQ2 (Self-sufficient) scores are often associated with a social
reserve and a tendency to withdraw from social interactions and group activities.
FACTOR ƒQ3
Low scorers have little concern for their High scorers are concerned to maintain their
perceived social standing. Tending to question social standing and reputation. Valuing self-
authority, they believe that respect has to be control and self-discipline, they are unlikely
earned rather than simply being due to one’s to seek immediate gratification of their
position or rank. Believing that it is important own needs and desires. In fact, they may be
to be free-thinking and ‘true to oneself’ they inclined actively to repress any thoughts or
tend not to conform to traditional social mores impulses that others might consider to be
– unless they are personally convinced of their socially unacceptable or inappropriate. They
value. Inclined to question accepted moral are respectful of authority, status and social
values, they believe that it is more important position, and believe it is important to follow
to follow the spirit of the law rather than obey correct protocol and procedure. They have a
it to the letter. As a result they are unlikely to clear, well-defined set of moral values, which
be rigid or moralistic. They may lack discipline they believe it is important to adhere to. As a
and self-control, and be inclined to seek result others may possibly view them as being
immediate gratification of their needs, wants somewhat moralistic or rigid, and on occasion
and desires. As a result they may on occasion they may be a little dogmatic or obstinate.
appear to be somewhat impetuous, and they This however simply reflects the importance
may have difficulty conforming to strict rules they attach to adhering to their strict code
and regulations. of conduct and their expressed high moral
standards.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒQ3 contributes to the self-Control Global Factor, along with the
other primary factors; Conscientious (ƒG) and Restrained (ƒN). This reflects the fact that high ƒQ3
scores (Self-disciplined) are associated with a diligent sense of duty and responsibility, and a strong
moral imperative. Factor ƒQ3 also correlates negatively with Factor ƒI (Tender-minded) and Factor
ƒM (Abstract), indicating that low Factor ƒQ3 scores (Informal) are associated with a tendency to be
free-thinking and questioning.
FACTOR ƒQ4
Low scorers tend to be relaxed and composed, High scorers tend to be tense, impatient and
dealing with frustrations in a calm, steady, easy- hard-driving. Having low levels of frustration
going manner. They can work under pressure tolerance, they may at times appear to be
without getting unduly ‘wound-up’ or tense. restless, fidgety or ill-at-ease. Due to their
They are unlikely to become short-tempered high levels of personal drive, and resultant
or irritable if things go wrong. In general, they tense, nervous energy, they are likely to be
will be patient with friends and colleagues and short-tempered with people or things that get
tolerant of interruptions. They do not easily in their way. They dislike being kept waiting
lose their temper and are not prone to angry and may quickly become annoyed or irritable
out-bursts or fits of rage. They are not easily when things go wrong. As a result others may
frustrated by set-backs or failures and are rarely view them as being temperamental, ‘touchy’
irritable or short-tempered. Others may view or easily offended. Driven to succeed, they
them as lacking motivation or drive, with them may be prone to believe that the only way
possibly appearing to be somewhat complacent to ensure that something is done properly is
when things go wrong. In general, they will to do it oneself. As a result they are likely to
find it easy to relax and unwind after a hard have difficulty relaxing and may be prone to
day and are unlikely to experience stress related stress related health problems and feelings of
health problems. excessive tension and irritability.
Correlations with other factors: Factor ƒQ4 contributes to the Anxiety Global Factor, along with the
other primary factors; Emotionally Stable (-ve ƒC), Self-doubting (ƒO) and Suspicious (ƒL). This
reflects the fact that high Factor ƒQ4 scores (Tense-driven) are associated with high levels of tension,
and a low level of frustration tolerance, that often prompts short temperedness and irritability.
Factor ƒQ4 also correlates negatively with Factor ƒN (Restrained), indicating that low Factor ƒQ4
(Composed) scores are associated with a tendency to be calm, relaxed and placid in social settings; not
being inclined to temper outbursts.
eIQ
Low scorers tend to lack insight into other’s High scorers are insightful and perceptive,
thoughts, feelings and behaviour. As a result, having genuine empathy and understanding
in social situations, they may come across as for others. As a result, they are likely to come
artless and insensitive and they may be inclined across as warm, caring and considerate. Aware
to make social blunders. Failing to understand of the nuances of social situations, they will be
things in the broader social context, they may motivated to avoid social gaffes or blunders.
tend to take things personally and be defensive In tune with those around them, they will be
in the face of criticism. Having poor emotional viewed as being sensitive and responsive to
regulation skills, they may appear moody and other’s needs and feelings. Emotionally mature,
temperamental at times. Lacking the ability to they have insight into their own feelings and
manage frustration effectively, they may be are able to manage and regulate their emotions
prone to emotional outbursts. They may have in a constructive manner. Feeling secure and
difficulty dealing with the emotional challenges confident in themselves, they are not prone to
of setbacks and failures and this may limit their emotional outbursts. Generally satisfied with
ability to meet future demands and challenges. their past achievements, they face challenges in
Emotionally vulnerable, with a fragile sense a constructive and mature manner and are not
of self, they may not always be in touch with prone to inappropriate feelings of self-doubt,
their own core feelings, values and needs. As a despair or despondency. Having a grasp of
consequence they may come across as lacking the broader social picture, and understanding
in interpersonal warmth, and as being distant, other’s motives, they are unlikely to become
uncaring and unsympathetic. engaged in petty disputes and rivalries.
Correlations with other factors: Emotional Intelligence (eIQ) weights on the low end of the Anxiety
Global Factor, along with the primary factors; Emotionally Stable (ƒC), Suspicious (ƒL),
Self-doubting (ƒO) and Composed (ƒQ4). This reflects the fact that high eIQ scorers are emotionally
mature and resilient. eIQ also weights on Factor ƒA (Empathic) and Factor ƒN (Restrained). The
former reflects the lack of empathy and interpersonal warmth of low scorers and the latter their lack
of social astuteness.
WORK ATTITUDE
Low scorers are unconventional, radical and High scorers are persevering, conscientious and
inclined to question accepted wisdom. Seeing dutiful. Methodical and systematic, they will be
little reason to blindly follow custom and motivated to diligently follow set systems and
practice, they may be disinclined to follow procedures. Conventional and conservative in
rules and may circumvent set systems and their approach to problem solving, they will
procedures. Believing that respect has to be prefer established methods over experimental
earned, rather than being due to status and ways of doing things. Their contribution to
position, they are inclined to question authority. the organisation will be more in the area of
Their contribution to the organisation may be ensuring that tasks are completed to agreed
more in the areas of creation and innovation standards, rather than being innovative and
rather than ensuring that tasks are competed creative. Rule-bound and conforming, they will
on time and to standard. They may be inclined be respectful of authority and are unlikely to
to go their own way, possibly sacrificing those challenge the status-quo. This will pre-dispose
obligations and duties that they see as being them to be honest and trustworthy employees
onerous or unnecessary in order to achieve who are committed to the organisation, its
their objectives. They may be unsystematic culture and rules. Perfectionistic and attentive
and disorganised in their work, preferring to to detail, they will set themselves high
focus on the bigger picture than on the detailed standards of task completion, believing that if a
aspects of the task at hand. job is worth doing it is worth doing well.
Correlations with other factors: WA weights on the self-Control Global Factor, along with Conscientious
(ƒG), Self-disciplined (ƒQ3) and Conventional (ƒQ1). This reflects the fact that high scorers are
persevering with a strong sense of duty and obligation. WA also weights on Abstract (ƒM), indicating
that low scores can be absent-minded and unrealistic, with little focus on the practical considerations
of the task at hand.
SD .74 –
LONG TERM TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY Table 6: Long Term (four months) Test-Retest
Table 6 presents long term (four months) test- for the 15FQ+ Scales
retest reliability coefficients for the standard
(Form A) and short forms (Form C) of the 15FQ+ Form A Form C
15FQ+ on a sample of 82 undergraduates.
These data demonstrate that the 15FQ+ ƒA .79 .68
has a high degree of temporal stability over ß .88 .75
reasonable periods of time. Inspection of this ƒC .82 .73
table reveals that all these scales have excellent ƒE .82 .71
levels of reliability, when the relative lengths ƒF .85 .73
of the standard and short forms are taken into ƒG .88 .77
account. These test-retest coefficients are more ƒH .86 .78
than comparable to those reported for similar ƒI .86 .77
personality instruments. ƒL .84 .72
ƒM .87 .76
RELIABILITY (INTERNAL CONSISTENCY) OF ƒN .79 .71
THE CRITERION KEYED (DERIVED) SCALES ƒO .77 .69
Table 7 presents the alpha coefficients for ƒQ1 .85 .75
each of the criterion keyed scales, for both the ƒQ2 .86 .76
standard (Form A) and the short forms (Form ƒQ3 .84 .73
C) of the 15FQ+. Inspection of this table ƒQ4 .89 .78
reveals that all these scales have acceptable
levels of internal consistency, when the length SD .74 –
of the scales is taken into account. Most
significantly, the alpha coefficients for these
scales are somewhat lower than are those for Table 7: Reliability Coefficients (alpha) for the
the 16 personality factors. This reflects the fact Criterion Keyed Scales
that these scales were constructed via criterion
keying (which maximises the scale’s validity) Scale 15FQ+ Form A 15FQ+ Form C
rather than being constructed via traditional
item analytic procedures (which maximise the Fake Good .84 .73 .69 .62
scale’s internal consistency). Fake Bad .78 .72 - -
eIQ .79 -
WA .79 -
LONG TERM TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY OF Table 9: Long Term (four months) Test-Retest
THE CRITERION KEYED (DERIVED) SCALES Reliability Coefficients for the Criterion Keyed
Table 9 presents the long term (four months) Scales
test-retest reliability coefficients for each of the
criterion keyed scales, for both the standard Scale Form A Form C
(Form A) and the short forms (Form C) of
the 15FQ+. This table demonstrates that Fake Good .71 .55
these scales have acceptable levels of temporal Fake Bad .69 -
stability over moderate periods of time.
eIQ .71 -
ALTERNATE FORM RELIABILITY FOR THE WA .73 -
STANDARD (FORM A) AND SHORT (FORM C)
FORMS OF THE 15FQ+ student sample student sample
(n=82) (n=82)
Table 10 presents the correlations (corrected
and uncorrected) between forms A and C
of the 15FQ+. (These correlations can be Table 10: Correlations (uncorrected and
interpreted as being broadly equivalent to corrected) between forms A and C of the
alternate form reliabilities.) The correlations 15FQ+
between these forms provide evidence of the
congruence of these scales across these two Factor Uncorrected Corrected
forms of the 15FQ+. However, as all the
items in the short form (Form C) of this test ƒA .69 .91
are included in the standard form (Form A), ß .76 .93
the uncorrected correlation between these two ƒC .69 .91
forms will be inflated due to their shared items. ƒE .72 .92
Thus the uncorrected correlations provide an ƒF .69 .90
upper bound estimate of the ‘true’ correlation ƒG .73 .91
between these forms. Similarly, the corrected ƒH .72 .89
correlations (Levy, 1967) estimate the lower ƒI .67 .87
bound of the ‘true’ correlation between these ƒL .69 .90
two forms. ƒM .69 .90
Inspection of Table 10 indicates that the ƒN .68 .89
corrected correlations between Form A and ƒO .75 .91
Form C of the 15FQ+ are all substantial, ƒQ 1 .74 .91
demonstrating that these forms are broadly ƒQ 2 .93 .69
congruent with each other. Thus the validity ƒQ 3 .68 .89
data presented below (for Form A of the ƒQ 4 .61 .91
15FQ+) can also be considered to be relevant
to Form C of the 15FQ+. However, just as the
reliabilities for Form C are lower than they are
for Form A (due to the relative brevity of this
test), so too will Form C have lower validity
than Form A.
15FQ+ 37
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ Table 11: Correlations between the 15FQ+
FACTORS AND THE ORIGINAL 15FQ factors and the original 15FQ
Table 11 presents correlations between the
personality factors assessed by the 15FQ 15FQ+ 15FQ
and the 15FQ+, on a sample of 70 course Factor
delegates who completed both of these tests (corrected)
corrected and uncorrected for attenuation Table 13: Correlation between 15FQ+ and
due to measurement error. Inspection of this 16PF4 global factors
table reveals that all of these correlations are
substantial, and that many of the corrected PF4 PF4 PF4 PF4 PF4
correlations approach unity. These correlations EX AX TM IN SC
demonstrate that the 15FQ+ is measuring
factors that are broadly equivalent to those I Extroversion .76 -.29 -.01 .41 -.03
originally identified by Cattell and his II Anxiety -.22 .84 -.04 .08 -.17
colleagues. III Openness .27 .10 -.48 .25 -.02
Most notably, however, the 15FQ+ IV Agreeableness -.28 .14 .16 -.71 -.05
Factor ƒG (Conscientious) correlated most V self-Control -.05 .14 .09 -.12 .59
substantially with the 16PF5 Factor ƒQ3
and the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ3 correlated most
substantially with the 16PF5 Factor ƒG. This Table 14: Correlation between 15FQ+ and
reflects the fact that the meaning of these two 16PF5 global factors
factors has been reversed in the fifth edition
of the 16PF, providing further evidence that PF5 PF5 PF5 PF5 PF5
the 15FQ+ has stayed true to the original EX AX TM IN SC
source traits first identified by Cattell and his
colleagues. I Extroversion .88 -.27 -.12 .45 -.29
II Anxiety -.22 .87 -.04 -.05 -.03
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+, III Openness .11 .14 -.65 .29 -.29
THE 16PF4 & 16PF5 GLOBAL FACTORS IV Agreeableness -.03 .08 .29 -.81 .19
Table 13 and Table 14 present the V self-Control -.08 .13 .43 -.21 .79
relationship between the 15FQ+ global
factors and (respectively) their equivalent
global factors on the 16PF4 and 16PF5, on demonstrate excellent, and largely similar,
distinct undergraduate samples of 82 and 85 levels of convergent and divergent validity
participants. It is evident from these tables with the 16PF4 and 16PF5 global factors. It
that there is considerable overlap at the global can be observed that the 15FQ+ Extroversion
factor level between the 15FQ+ and these two Global Factor shows some correlation with
forms of the 16PF. the Independence Global Factor in both
The substantial correlations between the 16PF4 and 16PF5. This partly reflects
the 15FQ+ and 16PF4 Extroversion, the fact that in both the 16PF4 and 16PF5,
Agreeableness and Anxiety global factors Factor H (Socially-bold), weights highly on the
indicate that these broad personality traits are Independence Global Factor whereas in the
measuring comparable constructs across these 15FQ+ Factor ƒH weights exclusively on the
two tests. Although the correlations remain Extraversion Global Factor. The overlap that
high, and highly statistically significant, some exists between 15FQ+ self-Control and 16PF5
divergence is observed between the self- Tough-mindedness global factors may also be
Control and Openness global factors for the accounted for by the fact that these otherwise
15FQ+ and the 16PF4. In part this is likely to distinct global factors respectively share Q1 and
reflect the fact that Factor M (the least reliable ƒQ1 as contributing primary factors.
of the 16PF4 factors) loads very highly on the In order to explore further the validity
Openness Global Factor, with the associated of the 15FQ+, the scale scores were factor
increase in measurement error attenuating this analysed (on a student sample) along with the
correlation. scale scores from the 16PF4. (This is often
The overlap between the 15FQ+ and considered to be the most robust method
16PF5 global factors is much higher than for examining the validity of a personality
it is with the 16PF4 global factors, with the questionnaire.) The scree test indicated that
median correlation between the respective these data were best described by a five-factor
global factors being 0.81. Once again the solution, with five factors being retained
lowest correlation is with the Openness Global and rotated to simple structures via Varimax
Factor, although this remains highly statistically rotation. The results of this factor analysis are
significant. presented in Table 15. Inspection of this table
Another notable feature of the correlations indicates that, although this factor structure is
presented in these tables is that they not totally equivalent with the global 15FQ+
15FQ+ 39
factors identified above, these data nonetheless Table 15: Factor analysis of the 15FQ+ and
provide broad support for the validity of the 16PF (Form A) scales
15FQ+. (The slight discrepancy between this
factor structure and the global factors reported Scale Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor
for the 15FQ+ is likely to reflect issues of Factors 1 2 3 4 5
sampling error, resulting from the relatively
small size of the sample – with a ratio of items 15FQ+ ƒA .61 - - .31 -
to participants of only 5.7). 15FQ+ ß - - - .48 -
Table 15 indicates that all the 15FQ+ 15FQ+ ƒC - .76 - - -
primaries that weight on the Extraversion 15FQ+ ƒE .40 - - .68 -
Global Factor, weight on the first factor 15FQ+ ƒF .82 - - - -
along with the extraversion scales from the 15FQ+ ƒG - - - - .75
16PF4. This provides strong support for the 15FQ+ ƒH .63 - - .42 -
convergent construct validity of these primary 15FQ+ ƒI - - .63 - -
factors across these two tests. Moreover, 15FQ+ ƒL -.38 - - -
the finding that the 16PF4 Factor E, and 15FQ+ ƒM - - .51 - -.36
the 15FQ+ Factors ƒE and ƒN, also weight 15FQ+ ƒN - - - -.39 .50
on this extraversion factor indicates that, 15FQ+ ƒO - -.61 -.40 -
not surprisingly, people who are Dominant 15FQ+ ƒQ1 - - .45 - -
(+ve ƒE) and Forthright (-ve ƒN) tend to 15FQ+ ƒQ2 -.71 - - - -
be more extraverted than do people who are 15FQ+ ƒQ3 - - - - .65
Accommodating (-ve ƒE) and Restrained 15FQ+ ƒQ4 - .71 - - -
(+ve ƒN). Inspection of Table 15 further 16PF A .31 - - - -
demonstrates that all the anxiety factors on 16PF B - - - - -
the 15FQ+ weight on the second factor, along 16PF C - .74 - - -
with the anxiety scales from the 16PF4. This 16PF E .32 - - .65 -
provides strong support for the convergent 16PF F .69 - - - -
construct validity of these primaries across 16PF G - - - - .74
these two tests. 16PF H .71 - - .31 -
The third factor presented in Table 15 is 16PF I - - .61 - -
broadly equivalent to the 16PF4 Global Factor 16PF L - -.67 - - -
Tough-Poise – with the exception that the 16PF M - - .45 - -
15FQ+ dimension ƒA (Empathic) does not 16PF N -.43 - - -.37 .37
load on this factor. The 15FQ+ Factors ƒI, 16PF O - -.65 - -.42 -
ƒM and ƒQ1 weight on this factor, along with 16PF Q1 - - - - -
the 16PF4 Factors I and M. This suggests 16PF Q2 -.56 - - - -
that these 15FQ+ primaries are, as would 16PF Q3 - - - - .69
be expected, assessing a broadly aesthetically 16PF Q4 - .85 - - -
minded, abstract, radical, intellectual
student sample n=183
orientation.
The fourth factor presented in Table 15
assesses a broad construct of self-assured to express views and opinions boldly in group
assertiveness, with this factor consisting settings.
of the 15FQ+ Factors ƒE (Dominant), ß Inspection of Table 15 indicates that
(Intellectance) and ƒN (Direct). The finding Factors G Q3 and N from the 16PF4 and
that Intellectance (15FQ+ ß) weights on this Factors ƒG, ƒQ3 and ƒN from the 15FQ+
higher order factor reflects the fact that this weight on the fifth and final factor. This
scale assesses a person’s confidence in their is consistent with this higher order factor
intellectual abilities, and hence their willingness assessing self-control, thus providing further
to express their views and opinions in a evidence of the convergent construct validity
forthright manner. Similarly, the finding that of these primary factors across these tests.
the 15FQ+ Factors ƒH and ƒO, as well as the Finally, the fact that the 15FQ+ Factor ƒI
16PF4 Factors H and O also weight on this (Tender-minded) weights on the fifth factor
factor, reflects the fact that high ƒH scores in this factor analysis may reflect the finding
are associated with social confidence, and that that in many samples the Global Factors self-
low ƒO scores are associated with a lack of Control and Tough Poise are often modestly
threat sensitivity. This results in a willingness correlated with each other.
40 15FQ+
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ Table 16: Correlations between the 15FQ+ and
AND THE NEO PI-R the NEO PI-R facets
Table 16 lists the most significant
correlations between the NEO facets and the 15FQ+ NEO
15FQ+ primary factors on a sample of 60 Factor facet
undergraduates. (All correlations are significant
at the 1% level or less.) ƒA Warmth .46, Tender-minded .45,
Inspection of the correlations presented in Angry hostility -.38
this table indicates that these provide strong ß Competence .52, Assertiveness .50,
support for the construct validity of the Modesty -.41
15FQ+ primaries. Most notably, this pattern ƒC Anxiety -.69, Depression -.69,
of results is broadly similar to the pattern of Vulnerability -.60
correlations reported between the NEO PI-R ƒE Assertiveness .69, Modesty -.60,
and the 16PF5. Compliance -.55
With regard to the 15FQ+ primaries that ƒF Gregariousness .63, Positive emotion .45,
load on the Extraversion Global Factor the Excitement seeking .41
following points are noteworthy. Firstly, as ƒG Order .75, Fantasy -.46, Achievement .44
would be expected, the largest correlation ƒH Self-consciousness -.57, Modesty -.50,
with the 15FQ+ Factor ƒA (Empathic) is Activity .46
with the NEO PI-R facet Warmth, followed ƒI Aesthetics .44, Warmth .30
by the facet Tender-minded. This provides ƒL Trust -.74, Angry hostility .40,
strong support for the convergent construct Vulnerability .33
validity of this 15FQ+ primary factor, which ƒM Fantasy .67, Ideas .39, Impulsiveness .38
assesses a warm-hearted interest in people. ƒN Compliance .46, Angry hostility -.45,
Similarly, the modest negative correlation Deliberation .40
between this primary and the NEO PI-R ƒO Self-consciousness .62, Anxiety .57,
facet Angry hostility, is consistent with the Vulnerability .48
definition of this 15FQ+ primary factor as ƒQ 1 Actions .46, Values .46, Ideas .44
assessing an empathic, caring concern for ƒQ 2 Gregariousness -.67, Warmth -.43,
others. Secondly, as would be predicted, the Dutifulness .36
strongest correlation between the 15FQ+ ƒQ 3 Feelings -.54, Values -.51, Fantasy -.41
Factor ƒF (Enthusiastic) and the NEO PI-R ƒQ 4 Angry hostility .80, Compliance -.67,
is with the facet Gregariousness, reflecting the Impulsiveness .45
fact that high scores on this primary factor are
associated with an enthusiastic, lively interest in
people and an active participative approach to assessing a tendency to be self-reliant and
social relationships. Moreover, the correlations independent, and a preference for avoiding
with the NEO PI-R facets Positive emotion group activities.
and Excitement seeking are consistent with this The correlations presented in Table 16
primary factor’s definition as assessing a happy- provide strong support for the validity of the
go-lucky, carefree approach to life. Thirdly, 15FQ+ primaries that load on the Global
the negative correlations between the 15FQ+ Anxiety Factor. Most notably the substantial
Factor ƒH (Socially bold) and the negative correlations between the 15FQ+ Factor
NEO PI-R facets Self-consciousness ƒC (Emotionally stable) and the NEO PI-R
and Modesty, provide strong support for facets Anxiety, Depression and Vulnerability
the convergent construct validity of this are consistent with the definition of this 15FQ+
primary factor, which assesses boldness and primary, with ƒC assessing a tendency to be
confidence in social settings. Moreover, the emotionally labile, moody, changeable, and
correlation between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒH easily affected by feelings. Similarly, the strong
and the NEO PI-R facet Activity reflects correlations between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒO
the fact that this 15FQ+ primary assesses a (Self-doubting) and the NEO PI-R facets Self-
venturesome orientation towards life. Finally, consciousness, Anxiety and Vulnerability are
the substantial negative correlations between consistent with the definition of this 15FQ+
the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ2 (Self-sufficient) and the primary as assessing a proneness to be troubled
NEO PI-R facets Gregariousness and Warmth by sundry worries, and feelings of insecurity and
is consistent with the definition of this primary, self-doubt. Finally, the substantial correlation
with high scores on this 15FQ+ primary factor between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ4 (Tense-driven)
15FQ+ 41
and the NEO PI-R facet Angry hostility, between this 15FQ+ primary factor and the
provides strong support for the convergent NEO PI-R facet Angry hostility reflects the
construct validity of this 15FQ+ primary, tendency for people who obtain high scores
which assesses an impatient, short tempered on this primary to be restrained in their
and hostile temperament, reflecting a low dealings with others and avoid angry, volatile
ability to tolerate frustration. outbursts. Finally, the significant negative
The correlations presented in Table 16 correlations between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ3
also provide strong support for the validity of (Self-disciplined) and the NEO PI-R facets
the 15FQ+ primary factors that contribute to Feelings, Values and Fantasy is consistent
the Openness Global Factor. The significant with this primary factor’s definition, with this
correlation between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒI 15FQ+ primary assessing the tendency to be
(Tender-minded) and the NEO PI-R facet self-disciplined and to maintain high levels of
Aesthetics reflects the fact that high scores on self-control.
this 15FQ+ primary are associated with an The correlations presented in Table 16 also
interest in aesthetic, artistic pursuits. Moreover, provide strong support for the validity of the
the modest correlation between ƒI and the 15FQ+ primary factors that weight on the
NEO PI-R facet Warmth is consistent with 15FQ+ Agreeableness Global Factor. Most
this scale’s definition, with high scores being notably the significant positive correlation
associated with an openness to emotional between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒE (Dominant)
experience. Similarly the significant correlations and the NEO PI-R facet Assertiveness,
between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒM (Abstract) and its negative correlation with Modesty
and the NEO PI-R facets Fantasy and Ideas and Compliance, are consistent with the
provide further support for the convergent definition of this 15FQ+ primary. Similarly,
construct validity of this 15FQ+ primary factor, the substantial negative correlation between
which assesses a tendency to focus on abstract the 15FQ+ Factor ƒL (Suspicious) and the
intellectual ideas, fantasy and imagination. NEO PI-R facet Trusting provides strong
Moreover, the modest correlation between support for the convergent construct validity
ƒM and the NEO PI-R facet Impulsiveness is of this 15FQ+ primary. Finally, the significant
likely to reflect the fact that high scores on this
15FQ+ factor are associated with a tendency to
become lost in thought, have a lack of concern Table 17: Correlations between the 15FQ+ and
for practical matters and an inclination to the NEO PI-R global factors
approach problems in an unrealistic, fanciful
manner. As would be expected the 15FQ+ 15FQ+ Global Factor r
Factor ƒQ1 (Radical) correlates significantly
with the NEO PI-R facets Actions, Values and E Extraversion with NEO-E .74
Ideas. This reflects the fact that high scores N aNxiety with NEO-N .77
on this 15FQ+ primary are associated with an O Openness with NEO-O .66
openness to radical innovation and change. A Agreeableness with NEO-A .61
With regard to the 15FQ+ primary factors C self-Control with NEO-C .67
that weight on the Global Factor self-Control, p<.001for all correlations
Table 19: Correlations between the OPQ32i and the 15FQ+ factors (n=82)
support for the convergent construct validity exception of this 15FQ+ primary, however,
of this 15FQ+ primary. With the exception of there was little convergence between the other
this 15FQ+ primary however, there was little 15FQ+ primaries that weight on the Global
convergence between the 15FQ+ primaries Factor High self-Control (ƒN and ƒQ3) and
that weight on the Openness (to experience) the OPQ scales. This suggests that the 15FQ+
Global Factor and the OPQ scales. This primaries that weight on this global factor are
suggests that the other 15FQ+ primaries that assessing traits that are not fully covered by the
weight on this global factor (ƒA, ƒI and ƒM) OPQ scales.
are assessing traits that are not fully covered by
the OPQ scales. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+
The 15FQ+ primaries that weight on the AND THE MBTI®
Extraversion Global Factor showed good A sample of 46 course delegates completed the
convergence with their associated OPQ scales. 15FQ+ and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
The strong positive correlation between the (MBTI). The MBTI contains eight scales
15FQ+ Factor ƒF (Enthusiastic) and the OPQ which assess; Extraversion versus Introversion,
scale Outgoing, and the negative correlation of Sensing versus iNtuiting, Thinking versus
the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ2 (Self-sufficient) with the Feeling and Judging versus Perceiving. The
OPQ scale Affiliative, provides good evidence correlations between the MBTI scales and the
to support the construct validity of these 15FQ+ 15FQ+ primary factors are presented in Table
primaries. The significant negative correlations 20. (For ease of interpretation correlations of
between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒH (Socially Bold) less than .3 are not reported.)
and the OPQ anxiety scales Emotionally Inspection of this table indicates that these
Controlled and Worrying is consistent with correlations provide good support for the
the definition of this 15FQ+ primary, which convergent and discriminant construct validity
assesses a person’s concern about their social of each of the 15FQ+ primary factors that
presentation and a tendency to worry about weight on the Global Extraversion Factor;
how others see them (social anxiety). The fact Enthusiastic (ƒF), Socially-bold (ƒH) and Self-
that the OPQ scales Modest and Persuasive also sufficient (ƒQ2). As would be expected each of
correlated significantly with this 15FQ+ primary these primaries was found to be significantly
is consistent with the definition of this primary correlated with both the MBTI Extraversion
as assessing social confidence. and Introversion scales, and not to correlate
The strong positive correlation between the significantly with any of the other MBTI scales.
15FQ+ Factor ƒE (Dominant) and the OPQ The 15FQ+ ƒM (Factor Abstract) was
scales Outspoken and Controlling, and the found to correlate significantly with the MBTI
substantial negative correlation between this iNtuiting scale, which assesses a preference
15FQ+ primary and the OPQ scale Modest, is for viewing life from an abstract, theoretical
consistent with the definition of this 15FQ+ perspective. This correlation is consistent with
primary factor, with more dominant people the definition of this 15FQ+ primary factor
being more outspoken and controlling, and and therefore provides further support for the
less modest, than less dominant people. These construct validity of this primary. Only modest
correlations therefore provide strong support correlations were found between the MBTI
for the convergent construct validity of the Thinking and Feeling scales and the 15FQ+
15FQ+ Factor ƒE (Dominant). factors, with this reflecting the fact that this
The significant positive correlation between construct is specific to the MBTI and shares
the 15FQ+ Factor ƒG (Conscientious) and little common variance with any of the 15FQ+
the OPQ scale Detail Conscious provides primaries.
further support for the construct validity of Finally the 15FQ+ Factor Conscientious
this 15FQ+ primary. The modest negative (ƒG) was found to be correlated significantly
correlation between this primary and the OPQ with both the Judging and Perceiving scales of
scale Variety Seeking, and the modest positive the MBTI, with these MBTI scales assessing
correlation between this 15FQ+ primary and a preference for attending to the detailed
the OPQ scale Conventional, are similarly requirements of a task rather than focusing on
consistent with the definition of this 15FQ+ the broader picture. Moreover, this primary did
primary. In summary these correlations indicate not correlate significantly with any of the other
that people who score highly on this primary MBTI scales, proving good evidence of the
are attentive to detail, enjoy routine and are convergent and discriminant construct validity
conventional in their outlook on life. With the of this 15FQ+ primary factor.
®Myers-Briggs Type Indictator and MBTI are registered trademarks of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust.
44 15FQ+
Table 20: Correlations between the 15FQ+ relationships than are more trusting people,
factors and the MBTI scales and hence are likely to be more extraverted
than are more trusting people. Thus, this
E I S N T F J P correlation is consistent with the definition
of Factor ƒL. Finally, the modest correlation
ƒA between Factor ƒC and the Extraversion-
ß .34 -.34 Introversion dimension of the JTI is likely to
reflect the commonly observed finding that
ƒC extraverts tend to be more emotionally stable
ƒE than introverts.
ƒF .66 -.86 The substantial correlations between the
15FQ+ Factors ƒI (Tender-minded) and
ƒG .52 -.69 ƒM (Abstract), with the Sensing-Intuiting
ƒH .46 -.72 dimension of the JTI provides strong support
ƒI .39 for the convergent construct validity of these
two 15FQ+ primaries. This reflects the fact
ƒL that the SN dimension of the JTI assesses an
ƒM .57 interest in aesthetic and artistic matters, and a
ƒN preference for focusing on abstract ideas and
imagination versus focusing on hard facts and
ƒO objective reality.
ƒQ1 The substantial correlation between the
ƒQ2 -.33 .60 15FQ+ Factor ƒA (Empathic) and the JTI
dimension Thinking-Feeling provides strong
ƒQ3 support for the convergent construct validity of
ƒQ4 this 15FQ+ factor, as both of these dimensions
SD assess an empathic concern for others and
a sensitivity to other’s feelings. Moreover,
the finding that 15FQ+ Factors ƒI (Tender-
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ minded) and ƒM (Abstract) also correlate
AND THE JUNG TYPE INDICATOR significantly with this JTI dimension provides
Table 21 presents correlations between further support for these 15FQ+ primary
the 15FQ+ primary factors and the four
personality dimensions assessed by the
JTI, on a sample of 57 MBA students. Table 21: Correlations between the 15FQ+ and
(Correlations of less than .3 have been the JTI
excluded from this table to facilitate the
interpretation of these results.) Inspection of EI SN TF JP
this table indicates that each of the 15FQ+
primaries that weight on the Extraversion ƒA .52 - -.53 -
Global Factor correlate substantially with ß - - - -
the Extraversion-Introversion dimension ƒC .38 - - -
of the JTI, providing strong support for the ƒE .39 - - -
convergent (construct) validity of these 15FQ+ ƒF .68 - - -
primaries. Moreover, the correlation between ƒG - - - .78
the 15FQ+ Factor ƒE (Dominant) and the ƒH .62 -.37 - -
JTI dimension Extraversion-Introversion ƒI - -.55 -.46 -
indicates, not surprisingly, that people who ƒL .47 .32 .45 -
are more dominant also tend to be more ƒM - -.68 -.43 -
extraverted. Thus this finding is consistent ƒN - - - -
with the definition of Factor ƒE, providing ƒO - - - -
further support for the validity of this 15FQ+ ƒQ 1 - -.33 - -
primary. Similarly, the correlation between the ƒQ 2 .48 - - -
15FQ+ Factor ƒL (Suspicious) and the JTI ƒQ 3 - - - -.46
dimension Extraversion-Introversion suggests ƒQ 4 - - - -
that people who are suspicious by nature are
likely to be more manipulative in interpersonal n=57 all correlations are significant at the 5% level or less
15FQ+ 45
factors as both of these primaries assesses was, however, a slight tendency for people
an individual’s emotional and psychological scoring higher on psychoticism to be less Self-
openness. Finally the significant correlation disciplined and more Dominant, as might be
between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒL (Trusting) expected given the definition of these 15FQ+
and JTI dimension Thinking-Feeling, reflects primaries.
the fact that more emotionally sensitive There was a strong correlation between
people are likely to be more trusting and the 15FQ+ Social Desirability dimension and
open in interpersonal relationships. Thus this the EPQR Lie Scale (which assesses social
significant correlation provides further support desirability), thereby providing good support
for the validity of this 15FQ+ primary. for the convergent validity of this 15FQ+
The large correlation between the 15FQ+ scale. Moreover, the significant correlation
Factor ƒG (Conscientious) and the JTI between the EPQR Lie Scale and the 15FQ+
dimension Judging-Perceiving provides strong primary factor Self-disciplined (ƒQ3), reflects
support for the validity of this 15FQ+ primary, the fact that high ƒQ3 scores are associated
as both of these dimensions assess a preference with an adherence to a strong moral code. As
for order, neatness and structure. Similarly, such, respondents who score highly on this
the significant correlation between the 15FQ+ 15FQ+ primary are unlikely to freely agree
Factor ƒQ3 (Self-disciplined) and the JTI with the items on the EPQR Lie Scale; which
dimension Judging-Perceiving is consistent assess social desirability via an individual’s
with the definition of this 15FQ+ primary, as willingness to admit to a range of minor
both of these personality dimensions assess moral transgressions and peccadilloes that
the tendency to set oneself high standards of are common among many people. Thus this
personal conduct and place great weight on correlation provides further support for the
social expectations and norms. Moreover, the construct validity of this 15FQ+ primary.
failure of these 15FQ+ primaries to weight As would be expected, there were few
on any other JTI dimensions, provides good substantial correlations between the EPQR
evidence of the discriminant validity of these Impulsivity and Venturesomeness scales, and
15FQ+ factor primary factors. any of the 15FQ+ primary factors, providing
support for the divergent construct validity
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ of the 15FQ+ primaries. However, the
AND THE EPQR modest (but statistically significant) positive
A sample of 112 undergraduates completed correlation between Venturesomeness and
both the 15FQ+ and the EPQR as part of 15FQ+ Intellectance, and the modest (but
a test validation exercise. As can be seen statistically significant) negative correlation
from Table 22, the EPQR Extraversion and between Neuroticism and Intellectance, are
Neuroticism scales showed good concordance consistent with the observation that confidence
with each of their respective 15FQ+ primary in one’s own intellectual abilities is associated
factors. EPQR Extraversion correlated more generally with self-confidence. These
substantially with the 15FQ+ primary factors; correlations therefore provide some support
Enthusiastic (ƒF), Socially-bold (ƒH) and for the construct validity of this 15FQ+ scale.
Group-orientated (ƒQ2). This provides strong
support for the convergent construct validity THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+
of each of these 15FQ+ primaries. EPQR AND THE PPQ
Neuroticism similarly correlated strongly with A sample of 103 volunteers completed both
each of the related 15FQ+ primary factors; the 15FQ+ and the PPQ as part of a test
Affected by Feelings (ƒC), Apprehensive validation exercise. The PPQ was constructed
(ƒO) and Tense-driven (ƒQ4). This likewise by Prof. Paul Kline and is based on the Five
provides strong support for the convergent Factor Model of personality popularised by
construct validity of these 15FQ+ primaries. Costa and McCrae (1985). The correlations
Moreover, the strong correlation between the between these two tests are presented in Table
EPQR Empathy scale and the 15FQ+ Factor 23 (r>.3).
ƒA (Empathic) provides strong support for the As would be predicted, the PPQ dimension
convergent validity of this 15FQ+ primary. Insecure was most strongly correlated with
Psychoticism did not correspond with any the 15FQ+ primary factors that weight on the
of the 15FQ+ primary factors, as would be Anxiety Global Factor; Affected by Feelings
expected, providing support for the divergent (ƒC), Apprehensive (ƒO) and Tense-driven
validity of the 15FQ+ primaries. There (ƒQ4). As such these correlations provide
46 15FQ+
support for the convergent construct validity 15FQ+ primaries and therefore provide good
of these 15FQ+ primaries. The somewhat support for the convergent construct validity
smaller, but nonetheless significant correlations of these 15FQ+ primary factors. The OPPro
between the PPQ scale Insecure and the dimension Trusting correlated highly with its
15FQ+ Factors Intellectance (ß), Dominant 15FQ+ counterpart (ƒL), similarly providing
(ƒE) and Socially-bold (ƒH) reflect the strong support for the construct validity of this
fact that each of these 15FQ+ primaries is 15FQ+ factor.
associated social confidence and, as a result, As would be expected, the Phlegmatic
these 15FQ+ factors would be expected to dimension of the OPPro correlated
correlate modestly with scales that measure substantially with each of the 15FQ+ primary
anxiety (lack of self-confidence). Therefore factors that weight on the Anxiety Global
these correlations are not inconsistent with the Factor; Emotionally stable (ƒC), Self-assured
definition of these 15FQ+ primary factors. (ƒO) and Composed (ƒQ4). Similarly, as
The PPQ Extraversion scale was most would be predicted, the OPPro dimension
strongly correlated with the 15FQ+ primary Gregarious, which measures extraversion,
factors that weight on the Extraversion correlated substantially with each of the
Global Factor; Enthusiastic (ƒF), Socially- 15FQ+ primary factors that weight on the
bold (ƒH) and Group-orientated (ƒQ4). This Extroversion Global Factor; ƒA (Empathic),
pattern of relationships would be expected, ƒF (Enthusiastic), ƒH (Socially Bold) and ƒQ2
providing support for the convergent construct (Group Oriented). The OPPro dimension
validity of these 15FQ+ primary factors. Persuasive was most strongly related with
The PPQ Conscientious scale was most the 15FQ+ primaries Enthusiastic (ƒF) and
strongly correlated with the 15FQ+ primary Socially-bold (ƒH), which are clearly two
Consciousness (ƒG), providing support for the important traits in determining a person’s
validity of this primary. persuasive powers. The correlations between
Surprisingly, there was little correspondence each of the 15FQ+ primary factors that load
between any of the 15FQ+ primaries that on the Extraversion and Anxiety global factors,
contribute to the Openness Global Factor and their associated OPPro dimensions,
and the corresponding PPQ dimension, therefore provide strong support for the
Unconventionality. The reasons for this are convergent construct validity of each of these
unclear. While the lack of any association 15FQ+ primary factors.
between these scales does not directly call into The OPPro dimension Contesting, which
question the validity of these 15FQ+ primaries, assesses the Type A personality pattern,
these results similarly do not provide any correlated substantially with the 15FQ+ Factor
support for the convergent construct validity of Tense-driven (ƒQ4), as well as correlating (not
these 15FQ+ primary factors. surprisingly) with the 15FQ+ Factor Suspicious
(ƒL). This is consistent with the definition of
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ each of these primaries and therefore provides
AND THE OPPro further support for the construct validity of
A sample of 274 applicants completed both these 15FQ+ primary factors.
the 15FQ+ and the Occupational Personality The OPP dimension External, which
Profile (OPPro) as part of a selection process measures Locus of Control, was not strongly
with a number of different organisations. Table correlated with any of the 15FQ+ primaries.
24 presents the correlations (r>.3) between This is to be expected given that this scale was
these two tests. derived from social learning theory and assesses
It can be seen from this table that the a cognitive style rather than a personality
OPPro Assertive dimension correlated trait. The lack of any strong correlations
significantly with the 15FQ+ Factors between the 15FQ+ primaries and this
Dominant (ƒE ) and Direct (ƒN), providing OPPro dimension therefore demonstrates the
good support for the convergent construct discriminate construct validity of the 15FQ+
validity of these two primaries. The OPPro factors. However, its modest association with
dimension Detail-conscious correlated a cluster of 15FQ+ primary factors that load
substantially with the 15FQ+ primaries on the Anxiety Global Factor – Tense-driven
Conscientious (ƒG) and Conventional (ƒQ1), (ƒQ4), Apprehensive (ƒO) and Suspicious (ƒL)
and to a lesser extent with the 15FQ+ primary – reflects the finding that individuals who
Self-disciplined (ƒQ3). These correlations are have an External Locus of Control lack self-
consistent with the definitions of each of these confidence and are prone to worry and self-
15FQ+ 47
Table 22: Correlations between the 15FQ+ global factors and the EPQR
Table 23: Correlations between the 15FQ+ factors and the PPQ scales
ƒA .57 .27
ß -.38
ƒC .52
ƒE -.31 .39 .38
ƒF -.34 .51
ƒG .52
ƒH -.39 .45
ƒI -.36
ƒL
ƒM .38
ƒN
ƒO .58
ƒQ 1 -.42 .31
ƒQ 2 -.58
ƒQ 3 .31 -.39
ƒQ 4 .46
SD
48 15FQ+
doubt. These modest correlations are therefore – ƒF (Enthusiastic), ƒH (Socially-bold) and ƒQ2
consistent with the definition of these 15FQ+ (Self-sufficient) – were found to be correlated
primaries and provide further support for the substantially with the OIP+ Extraversion scale.
construct validity of these primaries. As would Similarly, the 15FQ+ Factors ƒC (Emotionally
be expected, the OPPro dimension Pragmatic Stable) and ƒO (Apprehensive) correlated
– which assess open-mindedness – was substantially with the OIP+ Stability scale.
strongly correlated with the each of the 15FQ+ The modest correlation between the OIP+
primary factors that weight on the Openness Stability scale and the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ4
(to experience) Global Factor; Abstract (ƒM), (Tense-driven) probably reflects the fact that
Tender-minded (ƒI) and Radical (ƒQ1). These this 15FQ+ primary is not a simple measure
correlations therefore provide strong support of emotional stability, but rather assesses
for the convergent construct validity of these frustration tolerance and the tendency to
15FQ+ primary factors. become short tempered and irritable when
confronted with frustrations. The pattern of
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ correlations noted above is therefore consistent
AND THE OIP+ with the definitions of the 15FQ+ primary
A sample of 48 adults completed the 15FQ+ factors that weight on the Extraversion and
and the Occupational Interest Profile Plus Anxiety global factors and thus provides
(OIP+) as part of a careers guidance process. further support for the construct validity of
The OIP+ assesses eight career interests these primaries.
and eight personal work needs. While few The strong correlation that was observed
substantial correlations would be expected between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒE (Factor
between the OIP+ career interest scales and Dominant) and the Managerial occupational
the 15FQ+ primary personality factors, a interest scale is consistent with the definition
consistent pattern of small correlations between of this 15FQ+ primary. This OIP+ scale
occupational interests and the 15FQ+ primaries assesses an interest in managing people and
would be expected given the well demonstrated giving directions and instructions to others,
(but modest) associations that are known to with people who score highly on this OIP+
exist between personality and work interests. occupational interest indicating that they
Moreover, as five of the eight personal work feel comfortable telling people what to do
needs assessed by the OIP+ measure facets of and taking the lead. Similarly, the significant
the ‘Big Five’ personality factors, a number of negative correlation between the 15FQ+
the personal work needs that are assessed by Factor ƒL (Suspicious) and the OIP+ scale
the OIP+ would be expected to be substantially Agreeableness is consistent with both of
correlated with some of the 15FQ+ primaries. these scale’s definitions, with this OIP+
Table 25 presents the significant correlations scale assessing a cynical attitude towards life
(r>.3) that were found between these two tests. and a tendency to question other’s motives.
Most significantly the 15FQ+ primaries Finally, the substantial correlation between the
that weight on the Extraversion Global Factor 15FQ+ Factor ƒM (Abstract) and the OIP+
Table 24: Correlations (r>.3) between the 15FQ+ factors and the OPPro scales
Table 25: Correlations (r>.3) Between the 15FQ+ factors and the OIP+ scales
scale Openness is noteworthy. This OIP+ for temper outbursts. Moreover, the significant
scale assesses an openness to new ideas and correlation between the Bar-on dimension
experiences, with people who score highly on Stress tolerance and the 15FQ+ Factor ƒC
this OIP+ scale expressing a strong interest in (Emotionally Stable) is consistent with this
abstract theoretical ideas and a tendency to take factor’s definition, as is the negative correlation
an academic intellectual approach to problem between Factor ƒO (Self-doubting) and the
solving. As such, this correlation provides Bar-on dimension Optimism. Similarly, the
strong support for the convergent construct significant correlation between the 15FQ+
validity of this 15FQ+ primary factors. Factor ƒQ1 (Self-disciplined) and the Bar-on
dimension Independence, is consistent with
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ this factor’s definition as assessing a tendency
AND THE BAR-ON EQI SCALES to be radical, experimenting and independent
Table 26 presents the correlations between the of mainstream views and opinions. These
15FQ+ primary factors and the dimensions correlations therefore provide good evidence
assessed by the Bar-on Emotional Quotient of the convergent construct validity of these
Inventory. Inspection of this table provides 15FQ+ primaries.
further evidence to support the construct The significant correlation between the
validity of the 15FQ+. Most notable are the 15FQ+ Factor ƒG (Conscientious) and the
substantial correlations of 15FQ+ Factors Bar-on dimension Problem Solving reflects
ƒA (Empathic) with the Bar-on dimension the fact that this latter dimension assesses
Empathy, and ƒE (Dominant) with the Bar-on a tendency to adopt a planful, systematic
dimension Assertiveness. These correlations approach to problem solving – providing
provide clear support for the convergent further support for the construct validity of
construct validity of these 15FQ+ primary this 15FQ+ primary factor. The significant
factors. correlation between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒI
The substantial negative correlation between (Tender-minded) and the Bar-on dimension
the 15FQ+ Factor ƒQ4 (Tense-driven) and the Self-actualisation, reflects the fact that this
Bar-on dimension Impulse Control similarly latter dimension assesses a person’s desire to
provides support for convergent construct seek self-actualisation and personal growth
validity this 15FQ+ primary, demonstrating through (amongst other things) an interest
that high ƒQ4 scores are associated with a low in aesthetic and cultural activities – similarly
level of frustration tolerance and a tendency providing support for validity of this
50 15FQ+
Table 26: Correlations between the 15FQ+ and positively correlated with both the Extraversion
the Emotional Quotient Inventory. (r=.21) and Openness Global Factors (r=.34)
and negatively correlated with the Anxiety
Scale 15FQ+ Factors Global Factor (r=-.18).
Emotional ƒA (.51) ƒI (36) Surface Approach was found to be positively
self-awareness ƒN (.40) ƒQ4 (.38) correlated with the Anxiety (r=.44) and
Agreeableness (r=.21) global factors. Finally,
Assertiveness ß (.36) ƒE (.53) ƒH Strategic Approach was found to be positively
(.34) ƒQ1 (.36) correlated with the Extraversion (r=.38)
Self-regard ƒC (.52) ƒO (-.52) and self-Control (r=.42) Global Factors and
ƒQ4 (-.39) negatively correlated with the Anxiety Global
Factor (r=.24). Of the criterion keyed scales,
Self-actualisation ƒA (.48) ƒI (.44)
eIQ was found to be positively correlated with
Independence ƒE (.48) ƒO (-.31) both Deep Approach (r=.24) and Strategic
ƒQ1 (.36) Approach (r=.27) and negatively correlated with
Empathy ƒA (.66) ƒN (.36) Surface Approach (r=-.37). Moreover, Work
Attitude was found to be positively correlated
Interpersonal ƒA (.55) ƒN (.41) with Strategic Approach (r=.39).
Relationships Although not the focus of the study, the
Social responsibility ƒA (.52) ƒN (.45) researchers found a small positive (r=.14)
correlation between the self-Control Global
Problem solving ƒA (.33) ƒG (.39) Factor and academic success and a small
ƒN (.31) negative (r=-.16) between the Anxiety
Reality testing ƒA (.41) ƒC (.42) Global Factor and academic success. This
ƒN (.36) is consistent with the commonly observed
finding that conscientiousness and stability
Flexibility No 16PF scales
are related to academic performance. These
correlate
meaningful patterns of association between
Stress tolerance ƒC (.48) Learning Style (as assessed by the ALQ) and
Impulse control ƒN (.52) ƒQ4 (.68) the 15FQ+ primary factors and criterion
keyed scales, therefore provide further support
Happiness ƒA (.39) ƒC (.39) for the construct validity of the 15FQ+.
ƒF (.41) ƒQ2 (.32)
Optimism ƒO (.49) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTELLECTANCE (ß)
AND REASONING ABILITY
Unlike Factor B of the 16PF, the Intellectance
15FQ+ primary. Moreover, the significant scale of 15FQ+ is not a measure of reasoning
correlations between the 15FQ+ Factor ƒN ability. Instead, Intellectance (ß) is a meta-
(Restrained) and the Bar-on dimensions of cognitive personality trait, which assesses
Social Responsibility and Impulse Control is how confident a person is in their intellectual
consistent with the definition of this primary ability. What then is the relationship between
factor, which assess a discreet, diplomatic, a person’s confidence in their ability and
shrewd awareness of social expectations. These their measured ability? To investigate this,
correlations thus provide further support for the relationship between Intellectance and
the construct validity of this 15FQ+ factor. reasoning ability was examined using a variety
of reasoning tests on a number of different
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ samples. These data are presented in Table
GLOBAL FACTOR AND LEARNING STYLES 28, along with the correlations between
As part of a research study to investigate Intellectance and Factor B on the 16PF4 and
the relationship between learning styles and 16PF5, that were obtained from the construct
personality, a sample of 144 undergraduate validity studies reported earlier. Taking all
students (109 female, 35 male) at a UK these data into account, the results indicate
university completed the 15FQ+ and the that there is a modest positive relationship
revised Approaches to Learning Questionnaire between intellectual self-confidence and ability,
(Duff, 1997). Consistent with the researcher’s as measured by a variety of reasoning tests.
expectations, Deep Approach was found to be However, this association is not strong, with
15FQ+ 51
these correlations being in the range of 0.30. the respondent’s objectively measured ability
Thus, while the 15FQ+ ß dimension cannot is relatively high. Arguably a more challenging
and should not substitute for a dedicated development intervention is required in the
measure of ability, used alongside a measure reverse situation.
of ability it does provide useful information As a final observation on the relationship
about how a person’s self-reported ability between Intellectance and intellectual ability it
compares with objective assessments of their is interesting to note that performance on the
ability. In the ideal world there should be a final assessment for the BPS Level B certificate
level of congruence between the two measures. in competence in occupational testing was
Development opportunities are identified when, modestly correlated (0.31) with this 15FQ+
for example, a person’s score on ß is low but scale.
Table 27: Correlations between 15FQ+ and approaches to learning and academic success (n=144)
*p < 0.01
†
p < 0.01
GRT2 (n=28) GRT1 (n=34) CRTB2 (n=32) ART (n=132) 16PF (n=183)
VR2 .10 VR1 .29 VCR2 .32 ART .32 16PF4-B .10
NR2 .38 NR1 .20 NCR2 .12 16PF5-B .34
AR2 .23 AR1 .27
52 15FQ+
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+ eIQ THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE 15FQ+
SCALE AND THE BAR-ON EQ-i WORK ATTITUDE SCALE AND WORK
The Bar-on Emotional Quotient Inventory BEHAVIOUR
is reported to be the first scientifically In order to examine the validity of the criterion
developed and validated measure of emotional keyed Work Attitude scale this 15FQ+ scale
intelligence. Consisting of 133 items, and taking was correlated with the Absa Work Habits
approximately 30 minutes to complete, the Bar- and Attitudes Questionnaire (WHAQ). The
on provides an overall emotional intelligence WHAQ was commissioned by ABSA, South
score (EQ-i) as well as scores for five composite Africa’s largest banking group, whose aim
scales and 15 subscales. was to recruit honest, high calibre staff with a
The Bar-on EQ-i measure was used as the positive work ethnic and high level of personal
criterion for validation of the 15FQ+ Emotional integrity.
Intelligence criterion keyed scale. The 15FQ+ The 15FQ+ and WHAQ were administered
scale was administered to a sample of 62 to a sample of 196 UK undergraduates. The
undergraduate students who also completed the correlation between the overall WHAQ
Bar-on measure of emotional intelligence (EQ-i). Integrity score and the 15FQ+ Work Attitude
The correlation between the 15FQ+ eIQ scale scale was 0.52, demonstrating a high degree
and the Bar-on EQ-i scale was 0.80 (corrected of construct validity when compared to a
r=1), demonstrating an exceptionally high comparable measure of integrity.
degree of convergent validity when compared The construct validity of the 15FQ+
to this well validated measure of emotional Work Attitude Scale was further examined by
intelligence. correlating this scale with a checklist of acts of
delinquency and counterproductive workplace
behaviour. The 15FQ+ (criterion keyed)
Work Attitude Scale correlated 0.61 with this
checklist , demonstrating convergence between
the 15FQ+ Work Attitude Scale and reported
acts of dishonest behaviour. This substantial
correlation therefore provides further support
for the construct validity of this criterion
referenced scale.
15FQ+ 53
Table 30: Significant correlations between the 15FQ+ factors and rated
competencies
53 police officers at their subsequent annual primary ƒQ4 (Tense-driven) was found to
performance review. Table 31 presents the correlate significantly (r=-.38, p<.01) with the
statistically significant correlations between the officer’s performance, as rated at their annual
15FQ+ primaries and self-rated performance. performance appraisal, with those police
Inspection of this table indicates that each officers who performed better in their job
of the 15FQ+ primaries (ƒC, ƒL, ƒO and ƒQ4) being less tense and impatient, and being better
that weight on the Anxiety Global Factor able to tolerate frustration, than those whose
were found to be significantly correlated performance was poorer. These data therefore
with performance, with those police officers provide evidence of both the concurrent and
who had lower levels of anxiety reporting predictive criterion validity of the 15FQ+,
performing more effectively in this stressful demonstrating the utility of this test in
role. In addition, the 15FQ+ Factor ƒG predicting job performance.
(Conscientious) was also found to be correlated
with self-reported performance, indicating
that success as a police officer is associated
with a tendency to be more detail conscious,
planful and diligent. Finally, the 15FQ+
15FQ+ 55
Table 32: Correlations between the 15FQ+ factors and each facet of job performance
Table 33: Correlations between the 15FQ+ factors and each facet of job performance for Sales and
Service Consultants
Table 34: Correlations between the 15FQ+ factors and each facet of job performance for Support Specialists
Table 35: Correlations between the 15FQ+ factors and each facet of job performance for Customer
Service Consultants
Table 36: Step-wise multiple regressions predicting each of the listed competencies from the 15FQ+
primary factors and the subtests of the GRT2 and the TTB
further improves the prediction of staff expected, that each of these competencies
performance. (They have termed this the was well predicted by a combination of
incremental validity of personality tests.) personality factors and reasoning tests scores.
Given that reasoning tests are known to be These results provide strong evidence of
the best single predictor of job performance, the utility of the 15FQ+ as a staff selection
demonstrating the incremental validity of the tool, demonstrating that the primary factors
15FQ+, when used in combination with a well improve the prediction of staff performance
validated reasoning test, provides an important over and above that achieved through the use
test of the utility of this instrument for aiding of reasoning tests alone.
staff selection decisions.
To explore the incremental validity of the PREDICTING THE PERFORMANCE OF
15FQ+ a sample of staff of mixed race (Black, BRANCH MANAGERS
n=56; White, =46; Coloured, n= 3), working A major UK based electrical goods wholesaler
for a major South African utility company, administered the 15FQ to a sample of 39
completed the 15FQ+ along with the General branch managers, whose performance had
Reasoning Test (GRT2) and the Technical been rated by their District Manager. The
Test Battery (TTB). The GRT2 and TTB performance rating was made (without
are well validated measures of mental ability, reference to the respondent’s 15FQ scores) on
with the former consisting of subtests which a four-point scale defined as follows:
assess Verbal (VR2), Numerical (NR2) and
Abstract (ART2) reasoning ability and the latter Exceptional: Fully able to plan,
consisting of subtests which assess Mechanical co-ordinate and control resources to
Reasoning (MR), Spatial Reasoning (SR) and maximum effect.
Visual Acuity (VA). Staff performance was Good: Fully able to plan, co-ordinate and
rated on a number of different competencies control resources to good effect.
(see Table 36) and step-wise multiple Acceptable: Able to plan co-ordinate and
regression was used to predict each rated control resources to a satisfactory level.
competency from the 15FQ+, GRT2 and TTB. Poor: Unable to plan, co-ordinate and
Inspection of Table 36 indicates, as would be control resources to a satisfactory level.
58 15FQ+
A step-wise multiple regression indicated Table 38: Correlations between the listed 15FQ
that three 15FQ factors predicted the scales and performance for trainee solicitors (n=30)
performance measure (R=0.54 F(3,35)=4.75
p< .01). The results (presented in Table 37) 15FQ Factor Correlation
indicated that those managers who were rated
as being more effective tended to be more ƒC .41
Hard-headed (realistic), more Emotionally ƒE .32
Resilient and more Self-sufficient than those
ƒG .38
who were rated as being less effective. These
three 15FQ factors (ƒI, ƒC and ƒQ2) were ƒH .40
able to account for approximately 25% of ƒO -.51
the variance in rated performance, clearly
demonstrating the concurrent criterion ƒQ 4 -.35
validity of the 15FQ. Given the high level
of convergence that has previously been data therefore provide strong evidence of the
demonstrated between the 15FQ and the (predictive) criterion validity of the 15FQ.
second edition of this test, it is reasonable to Given the high level of convergence that has
generalise these validities to the 15FQ+. previously been demonstrated between the
15FQ and the second edition of this test, it is
Table 37: Multiple Regression results for reasonable to generalise these validities to the
the prediction of the performance of branch 15FQ+.
managers (electrical retail)
PREDICTING THE PERFORMANCE SALES
15FQ+ Factor Beta weight p-level STAFF (FINANCIAL SERVICES)
The sales performance of staff (n=98) at a
ƒI Tender-minded -.39 p <. 01
major UK financial services company was rated
ƒC Emotionally stable .32 p < .05 by their area manager (on the basis of their
ƒQ2 self-sufficient .33 p < .05 sales figures) on a five-point scale, defined as:
excellent; good; average; acceptable or poor.
The performance rating was made without
PREDICTING THE PERFORMANCE OF TRAINEE reference to the respondent’s 15FQ scores.
SOLICITORS A step-wise multiple regression indicated
A sample of 30 trainee solicitors completed that four of the 15FQ factors predicted sales
the 15FQ prior to beginning their training performance (R=.48). As would be predicted,
contract. Their performance was assessed by those sales managers who were rated as being
their line manager at the end of the first year of more effective were more Self-assured
their training period. The performance of each (-ve ƒO) and more Emotionally stable (ƒC)
trainee solicitor was rated on a five point scale than were those who were rated as being less
(5 = excellent, 1 = poor). Seven 15FQ factors effective. This clearly indicates the importance
were found to be correlated with performance. of the ability to cope effectively with stress for
These correlations are presented in Table 38. staff working in the high pressured financial
The 15FQ factors Self-assurance (-ve ƒO), services sector. Moreover, those sales managers
Emotionally Stable (ƒC) and Composure who were rated as being more effective were
(-ve ƒQ4) were found to be strongly associated also found to be more Socially-bold (ƒH)
with rated success as a trainee solicitor, than were those who were rated as being less
indicating that the ability to cope well
with pressure is critical for success in this Table 39: Multiple Regression results for the
challenging professional role. The factors prediction of the sales performance of staff
Socially-bold (ƒH) and Dominant (ƒE) were working in the financial services sector
also found to be significantly correlated
with success, indicating the need for trainee 15FQ Factor Beta weight p-level
solicitors to be confident and appropriately
assertive in work situations. Finally, and not ƒO Self-assured -.41 p <. 01
at all surprisingly, Conscientiousness (ƒG) ƒC Emotionally stable .33 p < .05
was also found to be associated with better ƒH Socially bold .31 p < .05
performance, with this factor assessing ƒG Conscientious .31 p < .05
attention to detail and planfullness. These
15FQ+ 59
effective, as we would expect from sales staff. Table 40: Correlations between the 15FQ+
Finally, the 15FQ factor Conscientious (ƒG) factors and SD
was found to be significantly correlated with
performance in this industrial sector, with the 15FQ+ Correlation
more conscientious financial sales managers with SD
being rated as having superior performance
to their less conscientious colleagues. These ƒA .18
four personality factors were able to account ß .06
for just over 20% of the variance in rated ƒC .31
sales performance, clearly demonstrating ƒE .13
the concurrent criterion validity of the ƒF .09
15FQ. As noted earlier, given the high level ƒG .14
of convergence that has previously been ƒH .21
demonstrated between the 15FQ and the ƒI -.11
second edition of this test, it is reasonable to ƒL -.26
generalise this concurrent criterion data to the ƒM .01
15FQ+. ƒN .20
ƒO -.39
CONTAMINATION OF THE PRIMARY ƒQ1 .17
PERSONALITY FACTORS WITH SOCIAL ƒQ2 -.05
DESIRABILITY ƒQ3 -.20
In order to explore whether the primary ƒQ4 -.34
personality factors that are assessed by the
15FQ+ are contaminated by social desirability,
correlations were calculated between the Social
Desirability scale and the 16 primary factors.
These correlations are reported in Table 40.
Inspection of this table indicates that most of
these correlations are small, demonstrating
little contamination of the primary personality
factors with social desirability. Moreover, as
would be expected, the largest correlations
are with the anxiety dimensions. As noted
earlier this result should be born in mind when
interpreting test profiles.
60 15FQ+
Bonferroni adjustment. Inspection of Table 44 agreed cut-off that indicates the presence of
indicates that a number of these mean scores item bias, all the correlations are sufficiently
are significantly different for men and women. high as to suggest that the rank order of these
As has often been noted, woman obtained items’ thresholds do not vary substantially
significantly higher scores than men on the across sex. This suggests that item bias is
15FQ+ Factors ƒA (Empathic), ƒI (Tender- unlikely to be accounting for the mean scale
minded) and ƒO (Self-doubting). Men, on score differences between men and women
the other hand, obtained significantly higher reported above.
scores than women on the 15FQ+ Factors ß
(Intellectance), ƒC (Emotionally Stable), ƒE INVARIANCE OF THE LATENT TRAITS BY SEX
(Dominant) and ƒM (Abstract). To examine sex bias in the measurement
As Wilson (2005) has noted, if the mean model the factor structure of the 15FQ+
differences in test scores across groups is due was compared for men and women on the
to real group differences, rather than being data reported in Table 44. If the 15FQ+ is
due to test bias, it would be expected that the measuring the same latent traits for both of
order of the item thresholds will be invariant these groups, the factor structures obtained for
across the groups even though the absolute each group should be invariant. To examine
level of the items’ endorsements will vary this, the 15FQ+ primaries were factor analysed
between groups. To examine this issue the rank (using principal axis factoring) and five
order of the items’ means for each primary factors were retained. The factor congruence
were compared across men and women coefficient (Barrett, 1986) was calculated to
by calculating the rank order correlation compare the factor structures obtained for
(Spearman’s Rho) of the items’ mean scores. the samples of men and women. The factor
These correlations are reported in column four congruence coefficient was 0.96, indicating
of Table 44. that the latent traits assessed by the 15FQ+ are
Inspection of this column indicates that invariant across sex.
all these average rank order correlations are
extremely high. While there is no generally
MEAN DIFFERENCES IN PERSONALITY AND ethnic groups occur on the 15FQ+ Factors
ITEM BIAS BY ETHNIC GROUP [UK DATA] ƒC (Emotionally Stable), ƒL (Suspicious), ƒQ1
Table 45 presents mean scores on the 15FQ+ (Radical) and ƒQ3 (Self-disciplined).
primary factors for each of the four listed As previously noted, if the mean differences
ethnic groups. Due to small numbers, ethnic in test scores across groups is due to real group
groups were pooled to form broader ethnic differences, rather than being due to test bias,
categories, such that: Pakistani and Bangladeshi it would be expected that the order of the item
respondents were combined with other ethnic thresholds will be invariant across the groups
groups from the Indian subcontinent to form even though the absolute level of the items’
one combined ethnic group; respondents who endorsements will vary between groups. To
identified themselves as being from another examine this issue the rank order of the items’
Asian (e.g. Malay, Japanese, etc.) ethnic means for each primary were compared across
group were combined to form one group; each of the four ethnic groups by calculating
respondents who identified themselves as being the average rank order correlation (Spearman’s
of Black African, or Black Other ethnic origin Rho) of the items’ means across each of the
were combined with those who identified five possible pairs of ethnic groups. These
themselves as being of being Afro-Caribbean data are presented in column five of Table
ethnic origin to form a combined ethnic group. 44. Inspection of this column indicates that
The significance of the mean differences all these average rank order correlations are
between these ethnic groups, on the 15FQ+ extremely high. While there is no generally
primaries, was examined using the t-statistic agreed cut-off that indicates the presence of
(pooled variances), with the associated item bias, all the correlations are sufficiently
significance levels being corrected using the high as to suggest that the rank order of these
Bonferroni adjustment. Inspection of Table items’ thresholds do not vary substantially
45 indicates that most of the mean differences across these ethnic groups. This suggests that
between the ethnic groups are quite modest in item bias is unlikely to be accounting for the
size, with few being statistically significant. The mean scale score differences between the
main differences that do exist between different ethnic groups reported above.
INVARIANCE OF THE LATENT TRAITS (These data were first reported by Packman,
BETWEEN ETHNIC GROUPS et al., 2005.) The significance of the mean
To examine bias in the measurement model, differences between each group was examined
the factor structure of the 15FQ+ was by expressing these differences as effect sizes
compared for each of the ethnic groups listed (using pooled variances) and calculating the
in Table 45. If the 15FQ+ is measuring the confidence intervals for each effect size.
same latent traits in each of these groups, (Packman et. al. (2005), reported ethnic
the factor structures obtained for each group differences on the global as well as the primary
should be invariant. To examine this, the 15FQ+ factors. As a result they adjusted the
15FQ+ primaries were factor analysed (using significance of the confidence intervals for
principal axis factoring) and five factors were testing the differences between the ethnic
retained. The factor congruence coefficient groups on the 15FQ+ primaries so that the
(Barrett, 1986) was calculated to compare the alpha level for testing these differences was
factor structure obtained for each ethnic group identical across the primary and second order
with that obtained for the other ethnic groups. factors. This adjusted significance level is
These coefficients varied from 0.92 to 0.97, reported in Table 43.) Inspection of this table
indicating that the latent traits assessed by the indicates that with the exception of the 15FQ+
15FQ+ are invariant across ethnic group. Factors Intellectance (ß) and Suspicious (ƒL)
there are few significant differences in mean
MEAN DIFFERENCES IN PERSONALITY BY scores across these ethnic groups.
ETHNIC GROUP (NEW ZEALAND & SOUTH
PACIFIC DATA) THE HOMOGENEITY OF THE 15FQ+ PRIMARY
Table 46 presents the mean scores on each FACTORS FOR BLACK SOUTH AFRICANS
of the 15FQ+ primary factors for each of Table 47 presents the alpha coefficients for
three ethnic groups in New Zealand; White each of the 16 primary factors measured by the
Europeans, Maori and Pacific Islanders. 15FQ+, on a sample of Black South Africans
broken down by their score on the VCR2 (a
test of verbal reasoning ability). Inspection of
Table 46: Mean scores on the 15FQ+ primaries this table indicates that for groups of average
for respondents of New Zealanders of White or above average verbal reasoning ability, the
European, Maori and Pacific Island ethnic 15FQ+ primaries have good levels of internal
origin consistency. This suggests that what bias there
is in the 15FQ+ primary factors for Black
15Q+ White Maori Pacific South Africans reflects differences in verbal
Factor European (n=102) Islander ability rather than reflecting racial differences.
A related finding has been reported by van
(n=545) (n=78)
der Walt et al. (2002) in a meta-analysis of the
ƒA 18.52 18.59 18.29 validities of Five Factor Model personality tests
ß ‡†
19.22 †
17.29 ‡
15.68 in predicting job performance in Black South
ƒC ‡
17.37 16.30 ‡
15.22 African groups. These authors concluded
ƒE 14.59 14.44 13.69 from their meta-analysis that educational
ƒF †
15.79 †
14.24 14.45 level moderated these tests’ validities, with
ƒG 17.65 17.85 17.58 Emotional Stability and Conscientiousness
only being good predictors of job performance
ƒH 13.24 12.58 12.78
for Black South African respondents who had
ƒI 14.26 14.79 13.49 achieved Grade 12 education or above.
*† *‡
ƒL ‡†
5.33 7.67 9.85
ƒM 9.65 10.19 10.45
ƒN 18.11 17.90 18.44
ƒO 12.37 13.42 13.09
ƒQ1 7.29 7.01 7.51
ƒQ2 7.60 8.68 7.71
ƒQ3 ‡
18.01 18.88 ‡
19.81
ƒQ4 8.88 10.20 9.00
*‡†
Means which share the same superscript character are significantly
different from each other p<.0156
64 15FQ+
Table 47: Alpha coefficients for each of the 15FQ+ primaries on a sample of Black South Africans,
broken down by verbal reasoning ability
15Q+ Factor VCR2 Stanine VCR2 Stanine VCR2 Stanine VCR2 Stanine VCR2 Stanine
1-2 3-4 5 6-7 8-9
ƒA .49 .61 .69 .70 .71
ß .69 .72 .71 .73 .70
ƒC .73 .72 .74 .72 .71
ƒE .48 .59 .64 .71 .73
ƒF .73 .74 .77 .76 .76
ƒG .54 .66 .77 .76 .78
ƒH .74 .78 .79 .82 .83
ƒI .62 .79 .71 .75 .72
ƒL .62 .67 .71 .73 .74
ƒM .35 .44 .56 .65 .64
ƒN .53 .69 .73 .76 .75
ƒO .49 .66 .75 .72 .79
ƒQ1 .35 .53 .63 .72 .76
ƒQ2 .62 .68 .72 .77 .72
ƒQ3 .51 .43 .57 .65 .66
ƒQ4 .55 .72 .76 .78 .82
15FQ+ 65
I will shortly hand out the question booklet and There is no time limit, however, most
answer sheet for the questionnaire, but before people take about 30 minutes to complete
I do I would like to make a couple of general the questionnaire.
points. Make sure that you have an answer sheet
and a pencil before you begin.
For the 15FQ+ there is a question booklet You are asked to choose between three
and a separate answer sheet. Please do not possible answers to each question – A, B or
mark the question booklet in any way, as C.
we like to use them more than once. When you have selected your answer,
When completing the answer sheet, it is record this by blackening in the
important to give a clear indication of your corresponding box on your answer sheet.
answer. If you want to change an answer, Study the example in the booklet. If your
do not rub out your original, but cross it out choice of answer is A ‘true’, then you would
clearly and mark your alternative. Ensure blacken box A against question one on your
that there is no doubt about which is your answer sheet.
preferred answer.
Are there any questions?”
Are there any questions about what I have said
so far?”
66 15FQ+
Deal with any questions appropriately, then Answer only questions relating to procedure at
say: this stage, but enter in the Administrator’s Test
Record any other problems which occur. Walk
“Before you start completing the around the room at appropriate intervals to
questionnaire, please make sure that you check for potential problems.
have recorded your name and any other
details requested on the answer sheet. When Once all the candidates have indicated that
answering the questions remember the they have completed the questionnaire, collect
following: all the test materials. The answer sheets should
be kept until they are scored and the other test
Make sure you answer EVERY question, materials should now be stored away securely
even those which do not seem to apply until they are required again.
directly to you.
Do not spend too much time considering Make sure that you collect all information,
your answer to each question. The materials and equipment before finally thanking
information given in a question may not be the candidates and allowing them to go. Record
as full as you would wish, but answer the any event, which might have disturbed the
best you can. candidates for future reference.
Try to avoid the middle answer wherever
possible. Say:
Be as honest and truthful as you can. Don’t
give an answer just because it seems to be “Thank you for completing the Fifteen Factor
the right thing to say. Plus Questionnaire.”
If you wish to change an answer, please
mark it clearly with a cross and insert your
new answer.
A respondent has scored a sten of 6 on Factor ƒC, 3 on Factor ƒL, 2 on Factor ƒO and 7 on Factor ƒQ4.
1. Transcribe the sten scores for ƒC (6), ƒL (3), ƒO (2) and ƒQ4 (7) into their respective boxes.
2. Multiply .35 by 6 and enter the product into M- (memory minus) as the weight is negative.
3. Multiply .15 by 3 and enter the product into M+ (memory plus).
4. Multiply .31 by 2 and enter the product into M+ (memory plus).
5. Multiply .41 by 7 and enter the product into M+ (memory plus)
6. Enter 2.64 into M+
7. Press MR and write the total in the N box.
The global factor score can be rounded to the nearest whole number, where .5 is rounded up. In the
example, we would round .48 down and use a sten value of 4.
6. FINAL STEP
As a convention, the dots for each of the primaries and global factors are joined by straight
interconnecting lines.
15FQ+ 69
REFERENCES
Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Furnham, A. (2001). Personality and individual
Performance evaluation in work settings. differences in the workplace: Person
Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 141-168. – organisation – outcome fit. In R. W. Roberts,
& R. Hogan (Eds.), Personality psychology in the
Barrett, P., & Kline, P. (1982). An item and workplace, (pp. 223-251). Washington, DC:
radial parcel analysis of the 16PF questionnaire. American Psychological Association.
Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 259-270.
George, J. M. (1996). Trait and state affect.
Barrett, P. T. (1986). Factor Comparison: An In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), Individual differences
examination of three methods. Personality and and behaviour in organizations, (pp. 145-175). San
Individual Differences, 6, 645-647. Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence: Why
Beyond Expectation. New York: Free Press. it can matter more than IQ. London: Bloomsbury
Publishing.
Belbin, R. M. (2003). Management teams: Why they
succeed or fail. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Hilliard, P. A. (2001). Comparison of the
predictive validity of a written test, an integrity
Cattell, R. B. (1946). The Description and test, a conscientiousness questionnaire,
Measurement of Personality. Yonkers-on-Hudson, a structured behavioural interview and a
New York: World Book Co. personality inventory in the assessment of
job applicant’s background investigations,
Cattell, R. B. (1957). Personality, Motivation and subsequent task and contextual job
Structure and Measurement. Yonkers-on-Hudson, performance. Dissertation Abstracts International:
New York: World Book Co. Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, 62 (6-B),
2981. (UMI No. 0419-4217).
Cattell, R. B., Eber, Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970).
Handbook for the 16PF. Champaign, Illinois: Hogan, R. (1986). Hogan Personality Inventory
IPAT. Manual. Minneapolis: NCS.
Kline, P. (1986). Handbook of Test Construction. Saville, P. & Blinkhorn, S. (1981). Reliability,
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Homogeneity and the Construct Validity
of Cattell’s 16PF. Personality and Individual
Kline, P. (1993). Personality: The Psychometric Differences, 2, 325-333.
View. London: Routledge.
Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The
Kroeck, K. G., & Brown, K. W. (2004). validity and utility of selection methods in
Work applications of the big five model of personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical
personality. In J. C. Thomas (Ed.), Comprehensive implications of 85 years of research findings.
handbook of psychological assessment: Vol. 4, Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.
Industrial and organizational assessment, (pp.109-
130). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Spencer, L. M, & Spencer, S. M. (1993).
Competence at work: Models for superior performance.
Lowman, R. L. (1996). Work dysfunctions New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
and mental disorders. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.),
Individual differences and behavior in organizations Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M.
(pp. 371-416). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (1991). Personality measures as predictors
Publishers. of job performance: A meta-analytic review.
Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P.
(2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, Tupes, E., & Christal, R. (1961). Recurrent
52, 397-422. Personality Factors based on Trait Ratings.
USAF ASD Technical Report (61-97). Lackland
Krug, S. E. (1984). The Adult Personality Inventory Air Force Base, Texas.
Manual. Champaign, Illinois: Mertitech.
van der Walt, H.S., Meiring, D., Rothmann,
Ones, D,. Viswesvaran, C. & Schmidt, S. & Barrick, M.R. (2002). Meta-analysis of the
F. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis relationship between personality measurements
of integrity test validities: Findings and and job performance in South Africa. Paper
implications for personnel selection and presented at the 5th conference of the Society
theories of job performance. Journal of Applied for Industrial Psychology. Pretoria, South
Psychology, 78, 679-703. Africa.
Ones, D. & Viswesvaran, C. (2001). Integrity Warr, P., Bartram, D., & Martin, T. (2005).
tests and other criterion focused occupational Personality and sales performance: Situational
personality scales (COPS) used in personnel variation and interactions between traits.
selection. International Journal of Selection and International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13,
Assessment, 9, 31-39. 87-91.
Packman, T., Brown, G. S., Englert, P., Sisarich, Wilson, M. (2005) Constructing measures: An
H. & Bauer, F. (2005). Differences in personality item response theory approach. Mahaw, NJ:
traits across ethnic groups within New Zealand Lawrence Erlbaum.
and across an international sample. New Zealand
Journal of Psychology, 34, 77-85.