Selection of a Survey Research Instrument: Impediments of Personality Inventory in Non-English Speaking Countries like Pakistan.

Abstract

This paper aims to share the experiences of using two empirically-related yet conceptually distinct instruments i.e., Goldberg’s IP-IP and Costa and McCrae’s NEO-PI-R to measure the respondent’s personality factors and facets. This research paper presents findings on six methodological issues i.e., sampling, validity, reliability, data collection, screening confirmatory factor analyses. For validity concerns both instruments reached to obsolescence as these were developed ages ago and not updated with pace of human development. For replication in non-English countries Goldberg’s IP-IP has edge over Costa & McCrae’s NEO-PI-R for three counts; (a) it has less words and relatively simple syntax made it really easy for participant with linguistic barriers; (b) shows no sign of US cultural specificity in terms of places, slang or implicit meanings made it closer to participants in a non-English speaking country like Pakistan and (c) it takes less than half time to complete the survey. For reliability issues NEO-PI-R represented better results. For both instruments consistency might be compromised while replicating these instruments in non English speaking country. IP-IP does not provide any guideline for data screening while NEO-PI-R provides a very detailed data screening process. During factor analyses it was revealed both instruments replicated five factor model at both levels i.e., first order factor analyses resulting in facets and second order factor analyses provided the factors but during the NEO-PI-R factor analyses it was observed that a large number of items were dropped out from the analyses that raised the question of item validity in non-English speaking countries.

Keywords: Goldberg’s IP-IP, Costa & McCrae’s NEO-PI-R, Research Instrument, personality Inventory.