Wayne D. Parker

Personality trait development from age 12 to age 18: longitudinal, cross-sectional, and cross-cultural analyses.

Three studies were conducted to assess mean level changes in personality traits during adolescence. Versions of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (P. T. Costa, Jr., & R. R. McCrae, 1992a) were used to assess the 5 major personality factors. A 4-year longitudinal study of intellectually gifted students (N = 230) was supplemented by cross-sectional studies of nonselected American (N = 1,959) and Flemish (N = 789) adolescents. Personality factors were reasonably invariant across ages, although rank-order stability of individual differences was low. Neuroticism appeared to increase in girls, and Openness to Experience increased in both boys and girls; mean levels of Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness were stable. Results extend knowledge of the developmental curve of personality traits backward from adulthood and help bridge the gap with child temperament studies.

A hierarchical structural analysis of perfectionism and its relation to other personality characteristics

This study examined components of perfectionism and their relation to other personality constructs, based on data on the Frost et al. [Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Mattia, J.S., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A comparison of two measures of perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 119–126; Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 15, 245–261] Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, the Brief Symptom Inventory, the NEO Five-Factor Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in a population of academically talented students. The six scales of the MPS had been well recovered factor-analytically before. On a somewhat higher level of generality, four intercorrelated factors, Concerns and Doubts, Personal Standards, Organization and Parental Pressure were found to underlie self description on the MPS. This finding was consistent with previous observations. Two orthogonal higher-order factors were extracted from the intercorrelations of these four dimensions. These two factors could be clearly interpreted as healthy and unhealthy perfectionism; similar factors had been observed before in analyses of the scale scores on the MPS. This hierarchical structure of four first-order and two second-order factors could be well replicated in a second sample of subjects. The various factors on both levels showed distinct patterns of correlations with a large range of personality characteristics as measured by the other questionnaires mentioned above. In particular, healthy perfectionism was correlated with conscientiousness, unhealthy perfectionism with lack of self-esteem. Given this pattern of correlations, healthy and unhealthy perfectionism appear not to be opposite poles of one continuum, but distinct, independent factors, which are embedded in the overall personality in different ways.

Cross-Cultural Assessment of the Five-Factor Model The Revised NEO Personality Inventory

The five-factor model (FFM) is a representation of the patterns of covariation of personality traits in terms of five broad factors. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory, a questionnaire measure of the FFM, has recently been translated into a number of different languages, permitting tests of its cross-cultural replicability. Data from Filipino and French translations are presented, showing clear and detailed replication of the American normative factor structure when targeted rotation is used. Results from these and other cross-cultural and behavior genetic studies suggest that the FFM is a biologically based human universal. Applications of trait psychology in clinical, educational, and organizational settings may prove generalizable across cultures, and cross-cultural psychologists can profitably explore the expression of the same personality traits in different cultural contexts.

The Incidence of Perfectionism in Gifted Students

Using the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale, (Frost et al., 1990) perfectionism scores were compared between a group of 600 students identified as academically talented and a group of 418 peers from the general cohort. In this nationally gathered sample, all students were sixth graders and of similar socioeconomic status. Findings indicated little difference between the mean scores of the two groups. Comparisons were also made between the gifted students and the general cohort using an empirical typology of perfectionism. This analysis did not indicate a statistically significant difference in the frequency of perfectionistic types between gifted students and the general cohort. These findings suggest that the frequent anecdotal reports of greater perfectionism among the gifted may be a product of differential labeling patterns of similar behaviors when demonstrated by gifted students and the general cohort. A greater distinction between perfectionistic strivings which stimulate excellence and those perfectionistic strivings which frustrate and inhibit achievement needs to be made.

An Examination of the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale with a Sample of Academically Talented Children

The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990) was constructed and normed on an all-female college student sample. The present study is a psychometric examination of the instrument for use with a mixed-gender sample of 855 academically talented children who were participating in the longitudinal Developmental Study of Talented Youth conducted by the Center for Talented Youth of Johns Hopkins University. The internal consistency of the MPS total score was .87; coefficient alphas for the subscales ranged from .67 to .90. The matrix of intercorrelations of MPS subscales was consistent with that obtained with the college sample used to develop the instrument. A confirmatory item factor analysis demonstrated an acceptable degree of fit. A factor analysis of raw scores on the MPS subscales yielded two factors. The first factor appears to represent dysfunctional perfectionism, the second factor reflects healthy perfectionism. The scores on these factors were correlated with the five-factor domain scores obtained on the NEO-FFI. The first factor correlated most strongly with N (Neuroticism); the second factor correlated most strongly with C (Conscientiousness).

A validation of the five-factor model of personality in academically talented youth across observers and instruments

Abstract Four instruments—the NEO-Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), the Adjective Check List (ACL), the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the California Child Q-Set (CCQ)—and two data sources—self reports and parental ratings—were used to assess personality dimensions according to the five-factor model of personality in 870 academically talented youth (mean age = 13.77) from the U.S.A. Data from the parents of 565 of these children were also analysed. The factor structure of the self and parent reports, the convergence between the two sources of reports and the correlations of the adjectives in the ACL with the scores on the NEO-FFI were all consistent with previous results obtained from adults. The findings largely support the notion that the five-factor model as derived from data from adults is applicable to academically talented youth.

A psychometric examination of the multidimensional perfectionism scale

The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS), developed by Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate (1990), was constructed using an all female sample at an elite university. This study examined the psychometric properties of the instrument using a more typical sample (n=278) of college students from a large state university and a small liberal arts college, both located in the South. Significant differences were found on the overall MPS score as well as six of the seven subscales between this sample and that of Frostet al. No gender differences were found for any of the MPS scores. Internal reliability was found to be .88 for the total score, with subtests ranging from .57 to .95. Interscore correlations were relatively consistent with the Frostet al. sample except for a negative correlation between the PS subscale and the total score. There was a strong confirmation of the underlying factor structure reported by Frostet al. The overall impression was that the MPS is a psychometrically sound instrument of potential value in studying the construct of perfectionism.

Perfectionism and the gifted

This article is an examination of the theoretical views of perfectionism, some of the instruments available to measure the construct, and the empirical evidence related to perfectionism in both the general and gifted populations. Areas of needed research are addressed. Particular emphasis is given to the multidimensional nature of the construct of perfectionism.

Healthy Perfectionism in the Gifted.

The results of a series of empirical studies on perfectionism in the gifted are reviewed. Contrary to common beliefs, results indicate that perfectionism is not greater in the gifted. Perfectionism has a hierarchical structure with both healthy and unhealthy forms. These two forms are separate constructs rather than extreme ends of a single continuum. High personal standards, often a source of concern for parents and educators of the gifted, are associated with the healthy form of perfectionism. While parents have an impact on perfectionism in their children, evidence to date suggests that parental impact is quite modest.

The Five-Factor Model of Personality in South African College Students:

The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) was administered to 408 South African college students. When the instrument was factor analyzed at the facet level with varimax rotation, the structure of the five-factor model was well reproduced for the entire sample as well as the White and Black subgroups. Parallel analysis indicated the appropriateness of the five-factor solution. Whereas the structure of personality was highly similar across race, there were statistically significant differences in mean scores of some domains and facets by race. The greatest difference was in Openness to Experience, particularly in the Openness to Feelings facet, with the White subgroup scoring relatively high, the Black subgroup scoring relatively low, and the Indian subgroup scoring in an intermediate range. The authors speculate that these differences are primarily the result of social, economic, and cultural differences between the races rather than the direct product of race itself.