大五人格量表神经质分量表全式与简式的信效度比较

Comparing the Neuroticism Subscale of the NEO-PI-R with That of the NEO-FFI

目的:比较大五人格量表(NEO Personality Inventory Revised,NEO-PI-R)神经质分量表(全式)和大五人格量表简版(NEO Five Factor Inventory,NEO-FFI)神经质分量表(简式)的信效度,并分别考察其跨性别测量等值性。方法:共有5352名在校大学生完成了神经质分量表全式和简式,以及流调中心用抑郁量表。考察量表的内部一致性,并采用Amos软件进行验证性因素分析以考察量表的构想效度和跨性别测量等值性。结果:神经质分量表全式的信度(Cronbach’sα=0.92,MIC=0.20)以及效度指标(GFI=0.93,CFI=0.91,RMSEA=0.056)均达到标准,并且在男女群组上严格等值(△CFI<0.01)。简式也表现出良好的信度(Cronbach’sα=0.84,MIC=0.31)和效度(GFI=0.96,CFI=0.93,RMSEA=0.067),但在男女群组上只实现部分等值性(严格等值模型中△CFI>0.01)。结论:神经质分量表全式和简式均具有良好的信效度,但是全式呈现出更好的跨性别测量等值性。

Objective： To compare the reliability and validity of the neuroticism subscale of the NEO Personality Inventory Revised（NEO-PI-R） with the neuroticism subscale of the NEO Five Factor Inventory（NEO-FFI）, and examine their measurement equivalence across gender. Methods： A total of 5352 undergraduates completed the neurotieism subscale of the NEO-PI-R, the neuroticism subscale of the NEO-FFI and the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale （CES-D）. Cronbach＇ s alpha coefficient and mean inter-item correlation（MIC） were calculated to test the internal consistency reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis（CFA） were used by Amos to test the theory-based validity and the measurement equivalence across gender respectively. Results： The internal consistency reliability（Cronbach＇ s alpha=0.92, MIC=0.20） and theory-based validity（GFI=0.93, CFI=0.91, RMSEA=0.056） of the neuroticism subscale of the NEO-PI-R met the standards, which also existed strict measurement equivalence across gender（ ΔCFI〈0.01）. The internal consistency reliability （Cronbach＇ s alpha=0.84, MIC=0.31） and theory-based validity（GFI=0.96, CFI=0.93, RMSEA=0.067） of the neurotieism subscale of the NEO-FFI met the standards, while which existed partial measurement equivalence in the strict model（Δ CFI〉0.01）. Conclusion： The neuroticism subscale of the NEO-PI-R and that of the NEO-FFI both showed adequate reliability and validity, while the neuroticism subseale of the NEO-PI-R had better measurement equivalence across gender.