2005 13 2 231 241 2005 5 (FFPQ 50) 1)2) 5 FFPQ FFPQ 2002 FFPQ 5 5 150 FFPQ 50 FFPQ (FFPQ 50) 900 5 (TEG) FFPQ FFPQ 50 5 (FFPQ) FFPQ Big Five (De Raad & Perugini, 2002; John & Srivastava, 1999; McCrae & John, 1992) ACL (Adjective Check List) (1996) Big Five Costa & McCrae (1992) Goldberg (1981) 5 FFPQ (1998) 5 (FFPQ) 3) (1999) Costa & McCrae (1992) NEO PI R Gold- 1) 2) FFPQ 3) FFPQ (2002) FFPQ 1998 FFPQ 2 FFPQ berg (1992) (1999) 5 90 5 FFPQ 5 6 NEO PI R 5 6 8 5
232 13 2 FFPQ 150 NEO PI R 240 NEO PI R 5 60 NEO FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992) FFPQ 5 NEO FFI 4) NEO PI (Costa & McCrae, 1985) 5 (lexical approach) 5 Goldberg, 1981; 1996 NEO PI R (McCrae & Allik, 2002) AB5C format (Abridged Big Five Circumplex format; Hofstee, De Raad & Goldberg, 1992) NEO PI R McCrae (2000) 5 4) NEO PI NE O 3 A C 2 Mervielde & De Fruyt (1999) (Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children; HiPIC) NEO PI R FFPQ 5 5 5 5 (Paunonen & Jackson, 2000; Saucier & Goldberg, 1998; Saucier & Ostendorf, 1999) McCrae (Costa & Widiger, 2002) FFPQ (1997)
5 (FFPQ 50) 233 5 FFPQ FFPQ (FFPQ 50) 1 2 3 4 1 FFPQ 50 FFPQ150 FFPQ 50 50 50 FFPQ 50 10 5 50 FFPQ 5 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 1,152 342 810 19.2 SD 1.0 FFPQ 30 1 5 2 10 50 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 1 2 3 4 5 5 900 375 525 19.0 SD 0.9 104 55 49 18.6 SD=0.8 FFPQ 50 2 3 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 5) 50 5 6 5 50.27 (Table 1) 35.1% 10 a.70 5 5 FFPQ 5 5) t 0.3 1 FFPQ 50
234 13 2 Table 1 5 FFPQ 50 N 900 (F 525, M 375) 1 2 3 4 5 a.80 a.80 a.79 a.84 a.74 (Em3) 0.73 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.57 (Em4) 0.69 0.12 0.10 0.03 0.07 0.50 (Em1) 0.63 0.04 0.12 0.06 0.08 0.43 (Em1) 0.63 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.42 (Em3) 0.61 0.09 0.12 0.08 0.00 0.40 (Em4) 0.61 0.13 0.15 0.06 0.11 0.43 (Em5) 0.55 0.23 0.12 0.18 0.15 0.42 (Em2) 0.49 0.15 0.03 0.18 0.04 0.30 (Em5) 0.48 0.22 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.32 (Em2) 0.42 0.13 0.02 0.11 0.01 0.20 (Ex3) 0.10 0.61 0.13 0.31 0.20 0.53 (Ex5) 0.20 0.57 0.08 0.02 0.21 0.42 (Ex4) 0.09 0.60 0.09 0.24 0.20 0.47 (Ex3) 0.07 0.60 0.06 0.25 0.19 0.47 (Ex1) 0.13 0.55 0.08 0.11 0.04 0.34 (Ex2) 0.11 0.57 0.30 0.13 0.30 0.53 (Ex2) 0.11 0.53 0.32 0.12 0.28 0.49 (Ex1) 0.05 0.47 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.24 (Ex5) 0.01 0.45 0.01 0.08 0.21 0.25 (Ex4) 0.05 0.31 0.04 0.17 0.07 0.13 (C1) 0.02 0.04 0.65 0.00 0.11 0.44 (C3) 0.28 0.03 0.54 0.17 0.01 0.40 (C5) 0.03 0.15 0.55 0.08 0.01 0.33 (C5) 0.09 0.08 0.52 0.10 0.06 0.30 (C3) 0.17 0.04 0.53 0.15 0.09 0.35 (C2) 0.04 0.03 0.50 0.17 0.01 0.29 (C2) 0.21 0.00 0.49 0.12 0.02 0.30 (C1) 0.14 0.01 0.49 0.04 0.05 0.27 (C4) 0.13 0.18 0.40 0.24 0.12 0.28 (C4) 0.05 0.18 0.37 0.08 0.15 0.20 (A5) 0.03 0.08 0.20 0.67 0.04 0.50 (A1) 0.04 0.20 0.12 0.64 0.09 0.47 (A4) 0.08 0.13 0.21 0.56 0.13 0.40 (A1) 0.03 0.11 0.35 0.50 0.01 0.38 (A2) 0.12 0.25 0.15 0.50 0.21 0.39 (A4) 0.00 0.24 0.05 0.48 0.05 0.29 (A3) 0.23 0.03 0.00 0.47 0.03 0.28 (A3) 0.07 0.26 0.02 0.47 0.04 0.30 (A2) 0.16 0.10 0.30 0.39 0.05 0.28 (A5) 0.11 0.18 0.13 0.36 0.14 0.21 (P3) 0.03 0.09 0.04 0.08 0.60 0.38 (P3) 0.04 0.11 0.03 0.08 0.56 0.34 (P1) 0.04 0.10 0.07 0.02 0.52 0.28 (P2) 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.03 0.51 0.28 (P4) 0.18 0.14 0.09 0.11 0.44 0.27 (P5) 0.13 0.03 0.17 0.10 0.44 0.25 (P2) 0.29 0.12 0.17 0.04 0.45 0.33 (P1) 0.07 0.36 0.01 0.12 0.42 0.32 (P4) 0.03 0.39 0.03 0.31 0.42 0.42 (P5) 0.26 0.02 0.17 0.05 0.27 0.17 4.13 3.81 3.41 3.37 2.84 17.56 1.35 2 ( ) FFPQ Ex1: Ex2: Ex3: Ex4: Ex5: A1: A2: A3: A4: A5: C1: C2: C3: C4: C5: Em1: Em2: Em3: Em4: Em5: P1: P2: P3: P4: P5
5 (FFPQ 50) 235 Table 2 FFPQ 50 Ex 0.72 A 0.74 C 0.75 Em 0.70 P 0.76 Ex1 0.72 A1 0.58 C1 0.70 Em1 0.65 P1 0.47 Ex2 0.60 A2 0.53 C2 0.79 Em2 0.72 P2 0.71 Ex3 0.60 A3 0.59 C3 0.46 Em3 0.54 P3 0.76 Ex4 0.57 A4 0.66 C4 0.53 Em4 0.64 P4 0.56 Ex5 0.67 A5 0.64 C5 0.56 Em5 0.59 P5 0.63 p,.01 5 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 1 2 Table 2.70 FFPQ 50 2 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 (TEG) FFPQ 50 1) FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ FFPQ 50 1 124 49 75 19.3 SD 1.1 (Table 3) FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ.74.70.80.87.73 Table 3 FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ Ex A C Em P FFPQ 50 Ex 0.74 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.20 A 0.30 0.70 0.42 0.04 0.02 C 0.21 0.40 0.80 0.29 0.18 Em 0.16 0.03 0.22 0.87 0.18 P 0.20 0.04 0.09 0.26 0.73 p.01, p.05 6) FFPQ FFPQ 50 2) FFPQ 50 (TEG) CP NPA FC AC 5 CP NP A FC AC 6) FFPQ 50 FFPQ.42 FFPQ 50 FFPQ.40 FFPQ.49, FFPQ 50.50
236 13 2 TEG 2002 (1998) 5 FFPQ (1998) (TEG) 2 1993 TEG TEG 1999 FFPQ 50 7) FFPQ 50 FFPQ TEG 2 69 18.9 SD 0.6 TEG 5 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 5 (Table 4) FFPQ 50.35 TEG CP (.43) FC (.57) NP (.49) A (.39) AC (.54) CP (.36) TEG FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ TEG TEG FFPQ 50 5 7) FFPQ TEG TEG 2002, p. 93 TEG FFPQ Table 4 TEG TEG FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ Ex A C Em P CP 0.43 0.09 0.30 0.11 0.36 0.52 0.10 0.35 0.06 0.25 NP 0.12 0.49 0.33 0.14 0.25 0.11 0.41 0.30 0.19 0.21 A 0.26 0.17 0.39 0.00 0.15 0.30 0.00 0.28 0.08 0.09 FC 0.57 0.36 0.07 0.25 0.18 0.55 0.11 0.05 0.16 0.23 AC 0.33 0.16 0.16 0.54 0.02 0.40 0.05 0.12 0.51 0.11 ** p.01, * p.05 3) FFPQ 50 (1998) TEG CP.36 FFPQ 1998 1997, 1998 FFPQ 50 14 1 FFPQ 50 FFPQ (Figure 1) FFPQ 1,152 810 19.1 SD 1.0 FFPQ 50 525 18.9 SD 0.9 8 (1997,
5 (FFPQ 50) 237 Figure 1 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 1998) FFPQ 50 3 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 2 2 FFPQ 50 5 1 FFPQ 50 2 FFPQ 50 25 5 5 8) 25.45 (Table 5) 44.5% 5 a 1.77 2.75 3.76 4.76 5.69 5 5 FFPQ 5 5 FFPQ 50 2 Table 2 (C3).46 (P1).47.50 FFPQ 50 8) FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ
238 13 2 Table 5 5 FFPQ 50 N 900 (F 525, M 375) 1 2 3 4 5 a.77 a.75 a.76 a.76 a.69 Em3 0.83 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.11 0.74 Em1 0.72 0.09 0.01 0.08 0.06 0.53 Em4 0.69 0.15 0.06 0.15 0.06 0.53 Em5 0.48 0.19 0.14 0.12 0.17 0.33 Em2 0.47 0.13 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.25 Ex3 0.07 0.68 0.27 0.08 0.16 0.57 Ex1 0.10 0.66 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.46 Ex5 0.14 0.62 0.04 0.06 0.27 0.48 Ex4 0.00 0.60 0.23 0.01 0.04 0.41 Ex2 0.13 0.47 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.38 A1 0.04 0.17 0.70 0.26 0.05 0.58 A5 0.04 0.07 0.66 0.18 0.08 0.48 A4 0.06 0.23 0.63 0.13 0.10 0.48 A2 0.16 0.21 0.54 0.23 0.17 0.45 A3 0.16 0.13 0.48 0.01 0.01 0.28 C5 0.01 0.04 0.11 0.67 0.05 0.46 C3 0.24 0.02 0.21 0.63 0.03 0.50 C1 0.10 0.02 0.01 0.62 0.08 0.41 C2 0.08 0.02 0.16 0.59 0.02 0.38 C4 0.09 0.03 0.23 0.53 0.03 0.34 P2 0.15 0.03 0.04 0.11 0.65 0.45 P1 0.10 0.26 0.07 0.06 0.63 0.49 P3 0.05 0.09 0.07 0.01 0.54 0.31 P4 0.10 0.32 0.26 0.08 0.54 0.48 P5 0.23 0.02 0.11 0.21 0.50 0.36 2.41 2.28 2.25 2.24 1.93 11.11.40 4 FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 2 FFPQ 50 FFPQ (Table 6) FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 25 23 FFPQ (Ex4).27.40 FFPQ a.49 (A2) (A3)
5 (FFPQ 50) 239 Table 6 FFPQ 50 FFPQ Ex1 0.42 A1 0.47 C1 0.62 Em1 0.67 P1 0.44 Ex2 0.59 A2 0.29 C2 0.54 Em2 0.51 P2 0.61 Ex3 0.62 A3 0.37 C3 0.51 Em3 0.69 P3 0.64 Ex4 0.27 A4 0.58 C4 0.43 Em4 0.76 P4 0.55 Ex5 0.51 A5 0.42 C5 0.64 Em5 0.63 P5 0.44 p.01.29.37 FFPQ FFPQ 50 (Figure 1) FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 5 150 FFPQ 5 5 6 5 5 6 5 FFPQ FFPQ FFPQ 150 50 FFPQ (FFPQ 50) FFPQ 50 5 5 FFPQ TEG 4 FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ FFPQ 50 FFPQ 50 2 FFPQ (Kashiwagi, 2002)
240 13 2 2001 Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. 1985 The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. 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 Resources. Costa, P. T. Jr., & Widiger, T. A. 2002 Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. De Raad, B., & Perugini, M. 2002 Big Five factor assessment: Introduction. In B. de Raad, & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five Assessment. Kirkland, WA: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers. Pp. 1 26. FFPQ 1998 FFPQ 5 FFPQ 2002 FFPQ 5 1997 5 5 27, 17 34. 1998 FFPQ 5 Pp. 210 217. Goldberg, L. R. 1981 Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology. Vol. 2. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Pp. 141 165. Goldberg, L. R. 1992 The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26 42. Hofstee, W. K. B., De Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. 1992 Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 146 163. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. 1999 The Big Five trait Taxonomy: History, measurement and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: theory and research. 2nd ed. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Pp. 102 138. Kashiwagi, S. 2002 Japanese Adjective List for the Big Five. In B. de Raad, & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five Assessment. Kirkland, WA: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers. Pp. 305 326. 1998 5 Pp. 218 226. McCrae, R. R. 2000 The private conversation with Fujishima, Y. at the 27th International Congress of Psychology in Stockholm, Sweden. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. 1992 An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175 215. McCrae, R. R., & Allik, J. 2002 The five-factor model of personality across cultures. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Mervielde, I., & De Fruyt, F. 1999 Construction of the Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (HiPIC). In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe. Tilburg, NL: Triburg University Press. Pp. 107 127. 1998 FFPQ (TEG) 5 Pp. 163 172. 1999 5 8, 32 42. Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. 2000 What is beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of Personality, 68, 821 835. Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. 1998 What is beyond the Big Five? Journal of Personality, 66, 495 524. Saucier, G., & Ostendorf, F. 1999 Hierarchical subcomponents of the Big Five personality factors: A cross-language replication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 613 627. 1999 NEO-PI-R, NEO-FFI 1993 TEG 2 TEG 1999 TEG TEG 2002 TEG 2001 10, 11, 12 C 10610151 1996 Big Five 67, 61 67. 2004. 6. 4 2004. 12. 1
5 (FFPQ 50) 241 Construction of Short form of Five Factor Personality Questionnaire Yutaka FUJISHIMA 1, Naoko YAMADA 2 and Heijiro TSUJI 3 1 Faculty of Human Science, Konan Women's University 2 Institute of Clinical Psychology, Graduate School of Konan Women's University 3 Faculty of Human Science, Konan Women s University THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY 2005, Vol. 13 NO. 2, 231 241 The purpose of this study was to construct a short form of Five Factor Personality Questionnaire (FFPQ; Tsuji et al., 2002). FFPQ is a 150-item questionnaire that measures five super traits: Extraversion, Attachment, Controlling, Emotionality, and Playfulness. Each super trait consists of five component traits. Fifty items (FFPQ 50) carefully chosen from FFPQ to keep its hierarchical structure were administered, with a 5- point rating format, to 900 undergraduates, 525 women and 375 men. Principal component analysis was performed on the data, and five factors were extracted. The Varimax-rotated solution with principal factor analysis showed a simple structure and alpha coefficients for the super traits were sufficiently high, ranging from.74 to.84. Furthermore, FFPQ 50 showed concurrent validity with Tokyo University Egogram (TEG) and was able to describe the personality characteristics of music students as distinctively as FFPQ. The results were discussed from the viewpoint of the usefulness of a short form with the hierarchical structure. Key words: Five-Factor Personality Questionnaire, a short form of FFPQ, hierarchical structure