A. OSHIO ET AL.
personality dimensions than the German version, and was
equivalent to the original English version. However, non-
significant correlations between the TIPI-J scales and the
facet scores of the NEO-PI-R-J were found for the Values
and Modesty facets, suggesting that these facets may not be
adequately covered by the TIPI-J. However, the problem may
not lie with the content validity of the TIPI-J because the
Value facet had particularly low reliabilities in this study.
Additionally, a previous study in Japan (Shimonaka, Naka-
zato, Gondo, & Takayama, 1998) reported that the Modesty
facet was not successfully comprised in the Agreeableness
factor, and it yielded high negative factor loading on the
Extraversion and Openness factors. The correlation analyses
in this study show that the Modesty facet correlated nega-
tively with both the Extraversion and Openness factors of the
TIPI-J, whereas the joint factor analysis indicated that it is
comprised in Extraversion rather than in Agreeableness. An-
other reason for the lack of correlation between the Modesty
facet and Agreeableness of the TIPI-J involves the character-
istics of the TIPI itself. The correlation coefficient between
these scores was reported to be 0.23 for the English version
(Gosling et al., 2003) and non-significant for the German
version (Muck et al., 2007). Gosling et al. (2003) also re-
ported that the correlation coefficient between the Modesty
facet and Agreeableness of the BFI (John & Srivastava, 1999)
was 0.23. This pattern suggests that the weak correlation
between the scores may reflect something about the Modesty
facet of the NEO-PI-R itself, rather than an inadequacy of the
very brief measures of agreeableness.
This study also shows that the correlations between the
TIPI-J and the facet scores of the NEO-PI-R-J are not in
complete agreement with the predicted relations. For exam-
ple, the Angry Hostility facet had higher correlation with the
Agreeableness scale than with the Neuroticism scale, with
which it is theoretically more strongly related. However, as
before, it is not clear whether the failure of all scales to con-
verge as predicted can be attributed entirely to problems with
the TIPI-J.
The joint factor analysis in this study showed that the five
subscales of the TIPI-J have a Big Five personality structure
that corresponds to the NEO-PI-R-J. The results indicate that
the five subscales of the TIPI-J seem to be good indicator of
the Big Five personality dimensions.
Conclusion
Theoretically, the TIPI-J, being a very brief measure, might
be expected to correlate less strongly with scores of other scales
than longer measures because of the increased measurement
error associated with brief scales. However, as always, there are
trade-offs between ease-of-use and validity to consider in
choosing the most suitable measure. Where only short measures
are needed, the TIPI-J is clearly beneficial in economizing time
and space. The TIPI-J is currently the only brief measure of the
Big Five dimensions available in Japan. Furthermore, it facili-
tates comparisons across cultures because the TIPI is used in
many studies all around the world. As a result, the TIPI-J is
expected to be used in a wide variety of research settings in
Japan.
REFERENCES
Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Mac-
millan.
Aoki, T. (1971). A psycho-lexical study of personality trait words:
Selection, classification and desirability ratings of 455 words. The
Japanese Journal of Psychology, 42, 1-13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.42.1
Aoki, T. (1976). Personality structures constructed from a questionnaire
containing many personality spheres. The Japanese Journal of Per-
sonality, 47, 239-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.47.239
Aronson, Z. H., Reilly, R. R., & Lynn, G. S. (2006). The impact of
leader personality on new product development teamwork and per-
formance: The moderating role of uncertainty. Journal of Engineer-
ing and Technology Management, 23, 221-247.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2006.06.003
Bernard, L. C., Walsh, R. P., & Mills, M. (2005). Ask once, may tell:
Comparative validity of single and multiple item measurement of the
Big-Five personality factors. Counseling and Clinical Psychology
Journal, 2, 40-57.
Bruce, V., Young, A., Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-
names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47, i-
171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0093360
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality
Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI)
professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Re-
sources.
Credé, M., Harms, P., Niehorster, S., & Gaye-Valentine, A. (2012). An
evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big
Five personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
102, 874-888. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027403
Fujishima, Y., Yamada, N., & Tsuji, H. (2005). Construction of short
form of Five Factor Personality Questionnaire. The Japanese Journal
of Personality, 13, 231-241.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2132/personality.13.231
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A very
brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Re-
search in Personality, 37, 504-528.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content
validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to con-
cepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7, 238-247.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238
Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The Dirty Dozen: A concise
measure of the Dark Triad. Psychological Assessment, 22, 420-432.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019265
Kashiwagi, S., Wada, S., & Aoki, T. (1993). The BIG FIVE and the
oblique primary pattern for the items of the ACL, Japanese version.
The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 64, 153-159.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.64.153
Kashiwagi, S., Tsuji, H., Fujishima, Y., & Yamada, N. (2005). Re-
evaluation of Tsuji’s psycholexical study in terms of the Big Five
personality factors. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 76, 368-
374. http://dx.doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.76.368
Muck, P. M., Hell, B., & Gosling, S. D. (2007). Construct validation of
a short five-factor model instrument: A self-peer study on the Ger-
man adaptation of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI-G).
European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 166-175.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.23.3.166
Murakami, Y., & Murakami, T. (1999). Manual of big five. Tokyo:
Gakugeitosho.
Murakami, Y. (2003). Big five and psychometric conditions for their
extraction in Japanese. The Japanese Journal of Personality, 11,
70-85.
Namikawa, T., Tani, I., Wakita, T., Kumagai, R., Nakane, A., & No-
guchi, H. (2012). Development of a short form of the Japanese Big-
Five Scale, and a test of its reliability and validity. The Japanese
Journal of Psychology, 83, 91-99.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.83.91
Oshio, A., Abe, S., & Cutrone, P. (2012). Development, reliability, and
validity of the Japanese version of Ten Item Personality Inventory
(TIPI-J). The Japanese Journal of Personality, 21, 40-52.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2132/personality.21.40
Open Access
928