alternatives. Multigroup modeling does not replace the value of a pilot test or focus groups to identify culture-
relevant markers of constructs.
In this chapter, we review the largest, most popular multidimensional personality instruments used in cross-
cultural comparisons of adults. We consider countries to represent cultures (despite cultural subsamples within
countries). We have not included studies examining only immigrant or different groups within countries, where
issues of acculturation and multiculturalism would require additional attention (e.g., Suzuki & Ponterotto, 2008 ).
Except for the widely used Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) and Myers /C0Briggs Type
Indicator (MBTI), and the recently developed HEXACO Personality Inventory, all publications included contain
direct information about the structural and measurement equivalence across cultures as assessed in exploratory
(EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and analyses of item bias or differential item functioning (DIF).
We categorized publications with respect to: the model on which the instrument is based; the title of the
instrument; references to publications in cross-cultural comparisons and to a manual or other publication contain-
ing the scales or psychometric information about the scales; whether the instrument is available in the public
domain, whether the target publication uses self-reports, peer-reports, or both; the number of items, scales, and
subscales in the instrument; the format of the response scale; the number of cultures involved in comparisons
(including the reference sample); the culture of the reference sample; level of analysis (individual or mixed indi-
vidual and culture-level); sample characteristics; information on translation and adaptation procedures; reliability
coefficients; congruence coefficients testing structure equivalence in an EFA framework as well as outcomes from
CFA and/or DIF analyses.
Many of the major personality instruments were developed initially for monocultural use, and since previous
reviews have dealt extensively with their psychometric properties (e.g., see the Buros Mental Measurements
Yearbooks ; and Test Critiques ), the present review focuses solely on evidence from cross-cultural studies (see
Table 26.1 ).
MEASURES REVIEWED HERE
The measures are organized alphabetically, starting from inventories based on factor-analytic studies or other-
wise empirically derived and progressing toward inventories based on theoretical models; it is acknowledged
that this distinction is somewhat fluid as evident, for example, in the Big Five model and inventories, where the-
ory has progressed alongside empirical findings. The inventories are as follows:
Inventories Derived Empirically
1.Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, 5th Edition ( Cattell, Cattell, & Cattell, 1993 )
2.California Psychological Inventory ( Gough, 1987 )
3.Comrey Personality Scales ( Comrey, 1970, 2008 )
4.Jackson Personality Inventory ( Jackson, 1976, 1994 )
5.Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, 2nd Edn. ( Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, &
Kaemmer, 1989 )
6.Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire ( Tellegen, 1982; Tellegen & Waller, 2008 ).
Inventories Based on Theoretical Models
1.Big Five Inventory ( John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991 )
2.Big Five Questionnaire ( Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Perugini, 1993 )
3.Five-Factor Personality Inventory ( Hendriks, Hofstee, & De Raad, 1999 )
4.NEO Five-Factor Inventory ( Costa & McCrae, 1992 )
5.NEO Personality Inventory, Revised ( Costa & McCrae, 1992 )
6.Eysenck Personality Questionnaire ( Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975 )
7.HEXACO Personality Inventory ( Ashton & Lee, 2008; Lee & Ashton, 2006 )
8.Myers/C0Briggs Type Indicator ( Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998 )
9.Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire ( Paunonen, Jackson, & Keinonen, 1990 )
10.Personality Research Form ( Jackson, 1984, 1994 )756 26. MEASURES OF PERSONALITY ACROSS CULTURES
VI. SOCIOCULTURAL INTERACTION AND CONFLICT