Support has shown that the Big Five model can be applied across observers and cultures. “Cross-cultural evidence for the existence of the Big Five factors has come from studies from a number of different countries using a number of different languages, such as German and Dutch (Goldberg, & Ostendorf, 1997), Spanish (Benet-Martínez & John, 1998), Italian (Caprara & Perugini, 1993) as well as Asian languages like Chinese (Trull & Geary, 1997)” (Scholte & De Bruyn 2003). The most widely used measure of the big five is the revised NEO Personality Inventory (Neo-pi-r; Costa & McCrae, 1992) “This instrument has received extensive empirical support and is based on a hierarchical structure of personality. On a higher order level the NEO-PI-R assesses the big five domains…for each of these domains there are six corresponding lower order facets” (Cox, Borger et al 1999)
Even though the Big Five model is probably the most widely used in personality assessment research to date, it is recognised that the model has limitations and it has been suggested that the model is not fully developed. (Almagor, Tellegen, & Waller, 1995) suggested that in fact there are seven traits defining personality. Five of the factors were the same as the five-point model but the other two were “evaluative or valence factors” (Scholte & De Bruyn 2003). Some studies have put in doubt the cross-cultural ability of the model. In a number of Italian studies on the Big Five factors, some factors with slightly different meanings tended to emerge, even if the same samples and variable selection procedures were used as in other studies. For example, in studies by (Caprara & Perugini, 1994) and (Di Blas & Forzi, 1998) a Big Five factor structure emerged in which Emotional Stability was only marginally represented. Perugini and Ercolani (1998) reported that the fifth factor in their study was better characterised as Autonomy than as Openness
A point where the Big Five model falls down is when it comes to complex human behaviours such as; alcohol consumption, grade point average, and self-perceived level of physical attractiveness, dating behaviour, tobacco consumption and participation in sports etc. The behaviours are considered complex in the sense that they probably have multiple factors affecting them, including genetic factors and environmental influences. A good measure of personality should predict these behaviours. Unfortunately the Big Five model doesn’t. Predictions about the development of personality traits stem from theories about what personality traits are. McCrae and Costa (1996) five-factor theory asserts that personality traits arise exclusively from biological causes (i.e. genes). By contrast some perspectives argue that traits are multiply determined, and that one important influence on traits is the individuals social environment (Hann, Millsap, & Hartka 1986; Helson, Jones & Kwan, 2002)
Psychologists describe peoples personality using information from four main sources (Ozer, 1999) “life outcomes (such as level of education, income, or marital status), situational tests (laboratory measurements of behavioural emotional and physiological reactions to conflict, frustration and the like), observer ratings (judgements about a person made by family or friends) and self-reports (response to interviews and personality tests)”. Studies have shown that about 20% to 55% of the total variation in personality comes from genetic sources. (Jang, McCrae, Angleitner). The same studies also show that a substantial amount of variation is due to non-genetic factors. Some studies have shown that the role of genetic factors in shaping personality has been overestimated and the role of environment underestimated (Funder 2001). This would affect the validity of the Big Five as this relies on traits a genetically based attribute.
At the moment it seems that the Big Five model works well and is widely used in the effort to further understand and predict personality. However the Five Factor model of personality only takes into account traits which are genetic attributes and so can not be seen as a full account for personality. To get a true perspective of ones personality, all four areas as described by Ozer 1999, life outcomes, situational tests, observer ratings and self reports must be analysed. It has been stated that only 20% to 55% of the variation in personality comes from genetic factors this view is supported by a number of psychologists and it is a major factor in the validity of the Big Five model. If this view is correct then the model can only ever be a maximum of 55% accurate which is not nearly good enough.
References
Walker & Gorsuch (2000), Forgiveness within the Big Five personality model, Journal of Personality and Individual Differences , May 2002, Pages 1127-1137
Scholte & De Bruyn (2003), Comparison of the Giant Three and the Big Five in early adolescents, Journal of , April 2004, Pages 1353-1371
Cox , Borger, Taylor, Fuentes & Ross (1999). Anxiety Sensitivity and the five factor model of personality, Journal of
, July 1999, Pages 633-641
Korotkov & Hannah (2001), The Five-Factor Model of Personality: strengths and limitations in predicting health status, sick-role and illness behaviour, Journal of , January 2004, Pages 187-199
Toomela (2003), Relationship Between Personality Structure, Structure of Word Meaning, and Cognitive ability: A study of Cultural Mechanisms of Personality, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003 Vol. 85, No. 4 723-735
Ozer, D.J. (1999) Four principles of personality assessment. In L. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 671-689). New York: Guildford
Bernstein, Penner, Clarke-Stewart & Roy (2003), Psychology (Sixth Edition). New
York; Houghton Mifflin Company
Gross (2001), Psychology, The Science Of Mind And Behaviour (Fourth Edition). London; Hodder & Staughton
Gleitman, Fridlung & Reisberg (1999), Psychology (Fifth Edition), New York; W. W.
Norton
Paunonen & Jackson (2000), What Is Beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of
Personality, October 2000, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 821-835(15)
Saucier and Goldberg (1998), What Is Beyond the Big Five? Journal of Personality,
August 1998, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 495-524(30)
McCrae, Jang, Livesly, Riemann & Angleitner, (1998), Sources Of Structure:
Genetic, Enviriomental And Artifactual Influences On The Covariation Of
Personality Traits, Journal of Personality, August 2001, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 511-
535(25)