The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Should the Internal Structure of Personality Inventories Be Evaluated?
Open accessAbstract
Personality trait inventories often perform poorly when their structure is evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The authors demonstrate poor CFA fit for several widely used personality measures with documented evidence of criterion-related validity but also show that some measures perform well from an exploratory factor analytic perspective. In light of these results, the authors suggest that the failure of these measures to fit CFA models is because of the inherent complexity of personality, issues related to its measurement, and issues related to the application and interpretation of CFA models. This leads to three recommendations for researchers interested in the structure and assessment of personality traits: (a) utilize and report on a range of factor analytic methods, (b) avoid global evaluations regarding the internal validity of multiscale personality measures based on model fit according to conventional CFA cutoffs, and (c) consider the substantive and practical implications of model modifications designed to improve fit.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
The satisfaction with life scale
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 · Cited by 31,768
Society and the Adolescent Self-Image
Rosenberg, M. (1965) · doi:10.1515/9781400876136 · Cited by 30,126
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research
(2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2769 · Cited by 15,614
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.424 · Cited by 12,298
Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.4.3.272 · Cited by 9,587
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 · Cited by 6,691
Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Third Edition
Byrne, B. M. (2016) · doi:10.4324/9781315757421 · Cited by 4,653
Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments.
Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.286 · Cited by 3,970
Cited by
Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5
Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2012) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291711002674 · Cited by 1,908
Choi, S. W., Schalet, B., Cook, K. F., & Cella, D. (2014) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/a0035768 · Cited by 480
“Following commonly used benchmark values (Hopwood & Donnellan, 2010; Lance, Butts, & Michels, 2006), model fit was evaluated using standard fit indices including the comparative fit index (CFI; >.90 = adequate fit, >.95 = very good fit), the Tucker Lewis index (TLI; >.90 = adequate fit, >.95 = very…”
BackgroundMethodSwami, V., & Barron, D. (2019) · Body Image · doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2018.08.014 · Cited by 454
The empirical structure of narrative identity: The initial Big Three
McLean, K. C., Syed, M., Pasupathi, M., Adler, J. M., Dunlop, W. L., Drustrup, D., Fivush, R., Graci, M. E., Lilgendahl, J. P., Lodi-Smith, J., et al. (2020) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000247 · Cited by 358
Validierung einer deutschen Version der Self-Compassion Scale (SCS-D)
Hupfeld, J., & Ruffieux, N. (2011) · Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie · doi:10.1026/1616-3443/a000088 · Cited by 237
Metadata
- Authors
- Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-04-30
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 332-346
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W2159230122
- Cited by
- 659
- References
- 76
- FWCI
- 44.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How Should the Internal Structure of Personality Inventories Be Evaluated? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1088868310361240
- The paper
- Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How Should the Internal Structure of Personality Inventories Be Evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310361240
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
