Short Forms Do Not Fall Short A Comparison of Three (Extra-)Short Forms of the Big Five

Researchers wishing to assess personality in research settings with severe time limitations typically use short-scale measures of the Big Five. Over the last decade, several such measures have been developed. To guide researchers in choosing the one best suited to their needs, we conducted the present study. Based on a large-scale sample representative of the adult population in Germany, we compared the psychometric properties of three short-scale versions assessing the Big Five: the 10-item BEI-10, the 15-item BFI-2-XS, and the 30-item BFI-2-S. To assess the psychometric quality of these measures, we investigated and compared the descriptive statistics and reliabilities of the scale scores as well as the patterns of factor loadings and the model fit of the instruments as indicators of their factorial validity. As the typical research settings in which these short measures are administered are heterogeneous population samples, we investigated to what degree the resulting Big Five estimates were comparable across major sociodemographic groups (age, gender, and educational strata). Finally, we compared the validity of the three measures for a set of external criteria. Results indicate that the latent Big Five domains can be assessed adequately with all three measures, which were found to have high psychometric quality, with coefficients of mostly comparable size.

Automated summary

Researchers often use short-scale measures to assess personality traits with severe time limitations. This study compared three short-scale versions assessing the Big Five, finding that all three measures had high psychometric quality and comparable validity across different demographic groups.