Ten Item Personality Measure (TIPI) The TIPI is a 10-item measure of the Big Five (or Five-Factor Model)

dimensions. Before you use this please read this note on alpha reliability and factor structure. Original reference:

Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A Very Brief Measure of the Big Five P Domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528. Abstract

When time is limited, researchers may be faced with the choice of using an extremely brief measure of the Big-F dimensions or using no measure at all. To meet the need for a very brief measure, 5 and 10-item inventories were evaluated. Although somewhat inferior to standard multi-item instruments, the instruments reached adequate leve convergence with widely used Big-Five measures in self, observer, and peer reports, (b) test-retest reliability, (c) predicted external correlates, and (d) convergence between self and observer ratings. On the basis of these tests, a of the Big Five dimensions is offered for situations when very short measures are needed, personality is not the p interest, or researchers can tolerate the somewhat diminished psychometric properties associated with very brief m More information: 1. TIPI manuscript (pdf format) 2. TIPI scale (html) 3. TIPI scale (pdf format) 4. TIPI norms (pdf format)

Scoring the TIPI

1. Recode the reverse-scored items (i.e., recode a 7 with a 1, a 6 with a 2, a 5 with a 3, etc.). T scored items are 2, 4, 6, 8, & 10.

2. Take the AVERAGE of the two items (the standard item and the recoded reverse-scored item) each scale.

Example using the Extraversion scale: A participant has scores of 5 on item 1 (Extraverted, enth and 2 on item 6 (Reserved, quiet). First, recode the reverse-scored item (i.e., item 6), replacing 6. Second, take the average of the score for item 1 and the (recoded) score for item 6. So the T scale score would be: (5 + 6)/2 = 5.5

LOOKING FOR A QUICK WAY TO COMPUTE AND DISPLAY TIPI SCORES?

Daniel DeNeui has created an excel spreadsheet, which computes your scores and plots them alongsi we have published. Click here to get a copy of the spreadsheet. If you have any questions about the please contact Dr. DeNeui.

Justin Cheng has created an spss syntax file to compute the scores. Click here to get a copy. If you h questions about it, please contact Justin.

Comparisons with other very brief Big Five scales

In response to the need for very brief measures of the Big Five, a couple of other measures have bee addition to the TIPI. These include the Single-Item Measure of Personality (SIMP; Wood & Hampson, 2 another 10-item measure (Rammstedt & John, 2007). In my own (unpublished) analyses all three inst perform about equally well in terms of convergence with the NEO-PI-R assessed several weeks later. three instruments take about the same length of time to complete (because the 5 items of the SIMP more complex than than the items in the 10-item tests). The one published analysis (Furnham, 2008) several very brief measures suggested that the TIPI "achieves slightly better validity than the other m

A Note on Alpha Reliability and Factor Structure in the TIPI

Some researchers have written to me concerned about the low coefficient alphas they have obtained for the TIPI scales or the poor factor structures obtained in factor analyses. However, the TIPI was not designed with these criteria in mind; in fact, the TIPI was designed using criteria that almost guarantee it will perform poorly in terms of alpha and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) or Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) indices. It is almost impossible to get high alphas and good fit indices in instruments like the TIPI, which are designed to measure very broad domains with only two items per dimension and using items at both the positive and negative poles. For this reason some researchers have pointed out that alphas are misleading when calculated on scales with small numbers of items (Kline, 2000; Wood & Hampson, 2005). As noted in the original TIPI manuscript (Gosling et al., 2003), the goal of the TIPI was to create a very short instrument that optimized validity (including content validity). The goal was NOT to create an instrument with

high alphas and good CFA fits. It would have been easy to design scales that optimized alpha and CFA fits. For example, we could have created an Extraversion scale from the items Talkative, verbal and Untalkative, quiet. But had we done this we would have essentially developed a scale measuring just one facet (talkativeness) of Extraversion; the high alphas and impressive fit indices would have come at the high cost of more important concerns like content validity and, in all likelihood, criterion validity. Criteria like alpha and clean factor structures are only meaningful to the extent they reflect improved validity. In cases like the TIPI (using a few items to measure broad domains), they dont. If reliability estimates are needed, a more appropriate index would be test-retest reliability.

A Note on Alpha Reliability and Factor Structure in the TIPI

Some researchers have written to me concerned about the low coefficient alphas they have obtained for the TIPI scales or the poor factor structures obtained in factor analyses. However, the TIPI was not designed with these criteria in mind; in fact, the TIPI was designed using criteria that almost guarantee it will perform poorly in terms of alpha and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) or Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) indices. It is almost impossible to get high alphas and good fit indices in instruments like the TIPI, which are designed to measure very broad domains with only two items per dimension and using items at both the positive and negative poles. For this reason some researchers have pointed out that alphas are misleading when calculated on scales with small numbers of items (Kline, 2000; Wood & Hampson, 2005). As noted in the original TIPI manuscript (Gosling et al., 2003), the goal of the TIPI was to create a very short instrument that optimized validity (including content validity). The goal was NOT to create an instrument with high alphas and good CFA fits. It would have been easy to design scales that optimized alpha and CFA fits. For example, we could have created an Extraversion scale from the items Talkative, verbal and Untalkative, quiet. But had we done this we would have essentially developed a scale measuring just one facet (talkativeness) of Extraversion; the high alphas and impressive fit indices would have come at the high cost of more important concerns like content validity and, in all likelihood, criterion validity. Criteria like alpha and clean factor structures are only meaningful to the extent they reflect improved validity. In cases like the TIPI (using a few

items to measure broad domains), they dont. If reliability estimates are needed, a more appropriate index would be test-retest reliability.

Ten-Item Personality Inventory-(TIPI) Here are a number of personality traits that may or may not apply to you. Please write a number next to each statement to indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with that statement. You should rate the extent to which the pair of traits applies to you, even if one characteristic applies more strongly than the other. 1 = Disagree strongly 2 = Disagree moderately 3 = Disagree a little 4 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Agree a little 6 = Agree moderately 7 = Agree strongly I see myself as: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. _____ Extraverted, enthusiastic. _____ Critical, quarrelsome. _____ Dependable, self-disciplined. _____ Anxious, easily upset. _____ Open to new experiences, complex. _____ Reserved, quiet. _____ Sympathetic, warm. _____ Disorganized, careless. _____ Calm, emotionally stable.

10. _____ Conventional, uncreative.

_______________________________________________________________ _______________ TIPI scale scoring (R denotes reverse-scored items): Extraversion: 1, 6R; Agreeableness: 2R, 7; Conscientiousness; 3, 8R; Emotional Stability: 4R, 9; Openness to Experiences: 5, 10R.