Abstract

We sought to determine the applicability and structural equivalence of a personality instrument developed in western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic (WEIRD) contexts in non-WEIRD environments. The data for this study came from interviews conducted during the sixth wave of the World Values Survey in the Netherlands (N = 1902), Germany (N = 2046), Rwanda (N = 1527), and South Africa (N = 3531). We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to assess structural validity and measurement invariance. The findings from the Big Five Inventory 10 (BFI-10) instrument did not support a perfect five-factor model as theorised by the Big Five Personality model across all countries, even though Germany and the Netherlands obtained better As a result, the findings do not support structural validity and do not demonstrate measurement invariance between WEIRD and non-WEIRD countries. The findings indicate that while the concise BFI-10 instrument partially replicates the structure of the B5P model in WEIRD countries, it falls short in non-WEIRD countries. Users of the instrument should therefore proceed with caution in both WEIRD and non-WEIRD contexts, bearing in mind the instrument’s structural flaws.

摘要

我们试图确定在西方、受过教育、工业化、富裕和民主 (WEIRD) 环境中开发的人格工具在非 WEIRD 环境中的适用性和结构等效性。本研究的数据来自荷兰（N = 1902）、德国（N = 2046）、卢旺达（N = 1527）和南非（N = 3531）的第六波世界价值观调查期间进行的采访。我们进行了探索性和验证性因素分析，以评估结构有效性和测量不变性。Big Five Inventory 10 (BFI-10) 工具的结果并不支持所有国家的大五人格模型所理论化的完美五因素模型，尽管德国和荷兰获得了更好的结果，研究结果不支持结构有效性，也没有证明 WEIRD 和非 WEIRD 国家之间的测量不变性。研究结果表明，虽然简洁的 BFI-10 工具部分复制了 WEIRD 国家的 B5P 模型的结构，但在非 WEIRD 国家却存在不足。因此，仪器的用户在 WEIRD 和非 WEIRD 环境中都应谨慎行事，并牢记仪器的结构缺陷。