See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/235294728

The OPQ and the big five

Article in Journal of Managerial Psychology · December 1991

DOI: 10.1108/02683949110140750

CITATIONS READS

3 243

4 authors, including:

Neville A Stanton
University of Southampton
570 PUBLICATIONS 10,700 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Human Interaction: Designing Autonomy in Vehicles (HI:DAVe) View project

Future Flight Deck View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Neville A Stanton on 17 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Managerial Psychology
THE OPQ AND THE BIG FIVE
N.A. Stanton G. Mathews N.C. Graham C. Brimelow
Article information:
To cite this document:
N.A. Stanton G. Mathews N.C. Graham C. Brimelow, (1991),"THE OPQ AND THE BIG FIVE", Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 6 Iss 1 pp. 25 - 27
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683949110140750
Downloaded on: 16 March 2016, At: 07:28 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 522 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Nikos Bozionelos, (2004),"The big five of personality and work involvement", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19 Iss 1
pp. 69-81 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940410520664
Downloaded by University of Southampton At 07:28 16 March 2016 (PT)

Hans-Georg Wolff, Sowon Kim, (2012),"The relationship between networking behaviors and the Big Five personality
dimensions", Career Development International, Vol. 17 Iss 1 pp. 43-66 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13620431211201328
Yongduk Choi, Dongseop Lee, (2014),"Psychological capital, Big Five traits, and employee outcomes", Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 29 Iss 2 pp. 122-140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMP-06-2012-0193

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:380670 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 VOLUME 6 NUMBER 1
1991

THE OPQ AND THE

BIG FIVE
N.A. Stanton, G. Mathews, N.C. Graham and C. Brimelow

Saville and Holdsworth[l] claim several general level of correlation is low enough to
advantages for their Occupational Personality indicate that the scales are sufficiently indepen-
Questionnaire (OPQ). It is reported to be dent. However, the OPQ version used (Concept
Downloaded by University of Southampton At 07:28 16 March 2016 (PT)

based on a conceptual model providing a 4) is ipsatively scored. This method of scoring is

comprehensive coverage of personality, and likely to create an illusion of independence
to be psychometrically sound. However, the because of the artefactual influences on
OPQ manual[l] and subsequent updates to intercorrelations of ipsative scores [3].
the manual issued by Saville and Holdsworth In summary, SHL have not presented
Ltd (SHL), provide insufficient evidence to adequate evidence that any of their
assess the psychometric status of the OPQ. dimensional models has a satisfactory basis,
The most comprehensive versions of the and their data purporting to show scale
OPQ measure 30 scales derived from a con- independence are clearly spurious. Evidence
ceptual model based on existing personality of the predictive validity of the OPQ is also
inventories, repertory grid studies and criteria very limited [4].
for occupational success, with an additional
social desirability scale. However it is far from STUDY
clear that the scales actually measure different
constructs. Two studies are described briefly The study included 94 undergraduates with a
in the manual, but both are technically flawed mean age of 20.9 years. The use of a student
as a basis for establishing factorial sample can be justified on two counts. First,
independence. This is primarily because the one of the stated aims of the OPQ is for use
number of factors extracted was determined in graduate selection of personnel. Second,
using the Kaiser-Guttman test which has been although SHL's data show some differences in
thoroughly discredited by Zwick and Velicer[2] scale means between graduate applicants and
who report that "the procedure is very likely white-collar workers, these differences are
to provide a grossly wrong answer". relatively small. SHL supplied a version of
the OPQ Concept 5 for use in this study. The
The Kaiser-Guttman criterion in fact seems OPQ was administered using standard
to have indicated a 19-factor solution for the procedure on two occasions, five weeks apart.
questionnaire. Following further analyses
(which are not presented in the manual) SHL
added three higher-order dimensional models RESULTS
to the 30-scale Concept model. These are; the The results confirmed high levels of reliability
Factorial model (14 scales), the Octagon on most of the scales from the retest study
model (8 scales) and the Pentagon model (5 within a five-week interim period. This
scales). In arriving at these models SHL finding is comparable to those reported by
appear to have disregarded their own, SHL[1]. Inspection of the interscale
admittedly inaccurate, criterion for the correlation matrix reveals some unexpectedly
number of factors. They claim that the large correlations (see Table I). Table I
Factorial model is the most "technically compares the findings of the present study
sound" OPQ solution, but they do not report with those reported by SHL[5]. The difference
using any number of factor criteria of more in the distribution of the magnitudes of
validity than the Kaiser-Guttman rule, or correlation coefficients across the two
conducting any factor analysis of inter-scale
correlations. It is further claimed that the
We would like to thank Saville and Holdsworth Ltd for
supplying the OPQ test materials and compiling the raw
Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 1, 1991, pp. 25-27, © MCB University Press, data. We are also grateful to Peter Biczo for assistance
0268-3946 with the data collection.

25
 JOURNAL OF
MANAGERIAL
PSYCHOLOGY

studies confirms that SHL's[5] use of ipsative

SHL[5] Present scores artifactually reduced the magnitude of
study
inter-scale correlations.
00-09 170 124 The number of factors to be extracted was
determined by parallel analysis [6], a highly
10-19 127 130
accurate criterion for number-of-factors[2].
20-29 83 99 This indicated that five factors should be
30-39 40 51 extracted. The rotated factor pattern matrix
40-49 12 14 accounted for 50 per cent of the variance.
50-59 3 10 (Further details of the factor analysis and
60-69 0 6
other aspects of this study can be sought
from[7].) Correlations between the factors
70-79 0 1 were low. Table II summarises interpretations
of the five factors obtained.
TABLE I.
Frequency Distributions of Coefficient Magnitudes for 0PQ One relevant comparison is with SHL's
Scale Interpretation Matrices Found by SHL[5], and in the five-factor Pentagon model. Another
Downloaded by University of Southampton At 07:28 16 March 2016 (PT)

Present Study comparison is with the Big Five model of

Five factor model SHL Pentagon model Big Five and related
— major loadings — defining scales personality dimensions

Factor 1 Extroversion Extroversion

Outgoing Persuasive Energy
Affiliative Controlling Sociability
Socially confident Independent
Controlling Socially confident
Emotional control (—) Modest (—)
Democratic (—)
Caring (—)
Outgoing
Affiliative
Factor 2 Vigorous (?) Agreeableness
Competitive (—) Competitive Will (—)
Caring Achieving Independence(—)
Democratic Active Dominance (—)
Achieving (—) Decisive
Critical (—)
Modest
Independent (—)
Factor 3 Methodical Conscientiousness
Detail conscious Data rational Conscience control
Forward planning Forward planning Super-ego strength
Conscientious Practical Obsessionality
Socially desirable Detail conscious Socialisation
Conscientious
Factor 4 Emotional stability Neuroticism
Relaxed (—) Relaxed (—) Emotionality
Worrying Worrying Anxiety
Tough-minded (—) Tough-minded (—)
Optimistic ( - ) Emotional control (—)
Optimistic (—)
Critical
Factor 5 Abstract Openness
Innovative Artistic Affection
Artistic Behavioural Conservatism (—)
Behavioural Conceptual
Independent Innovative
Traditional (—)
Change-oriented

TABLE II.
Correspondences between the Five Factor Model, the SHL Pentagon Model, and the Big Five and Related Personality
Dimensions

26
 VOLUME 6 NUMBER 1
1991

personality structure[8,9]. There is a growing Determination of the primary factor structure

consensus among personality psychologists of the OPQ is an important goal for future
that the Big Five factors — Extroversion, research.
Will, Emotionality, Conscience and Affection
— account for much of the variability in □
human personality[10]. Factor 1 References
corresponds to Brand's[8] Extroversion
dimension and, to some extent, with the SHL 1. Saville and Holdsworth Ltd, Occupational
Extroversion dimension. Factor 2 is similar to Personality Questionnaires Manual, Saville and
Brand's[8] Will dimension but, in terms of Holdsworth Ltd, Esher, Surrey, 1984.
the Pentagon model, it is a mixture of 2. Zwick, W.R. and Velicer, W.F., "Comparison of
Vigorous and the more antisocial elements of Five Rules for Determining the Number of
Extraversion. Factor 3 can be identified with Components to Retain", Psychological Bulletin,
Brand's[8] Conscience, and also with the Vol. 99, 1986, pp. 432-42.
SHL Methodical dimension. Factor 4 seems 3. Johnson, C.E., Wood, R. and Blinkhorn, S.F.,
Downloaded by University of Southampton At 07:28 16 March 2016 (PT)

close to Neuroticism[8] and Emotional "Spuriouser and Spuriouser: The Use of

Stability (SHL, Pentagon). Factor 5 is similar Ipsative Personality Tests", Journal of
to the Pentagon Abstract dimension [1] and is Occupational Psychology, Vol. 61, 1988, pp.
linked to Brand's[8] Affection. 153-62.
There are two practical implications of this 4. Cook, M., Personnel Selection and
research. First, some of the distinctions made Productivity, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester,
by the Concept model between different 1988.
aspects of personality may be invalid and 5. Saville and Holdsworth Ltd, OPQ Update
misleading. Therefore the profiling of a Number 1, Saville and Holdsworth Ltd, Esher,
candidate along the 30 scales must be called Surrey, May 1985.
into question. If some of these 30 scales 6. Horn, J.L. "Rationale and Test for the Number
cannot be regarded as separate, then it may of Factors in Factor Analysis", Psychometrica,
be inappropriate to use them as the basis for Vol. 30, 1965, pp. 179-85.
selection and assessment. Second, it follows 7. Mathews, G., Stanton, N.A., Graham, N.C., and
that the OPQ could be more economical in Brimelow, C., "A Factor Analysis of the Scales
terms of length and duration for completion. of the Occupational Personality Questionnaire",
A considerably shorter questionnaire could Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 11
be used to measure the five factors only. No. 6, 1990, pp. 591-6.
Rather than consisting of 300 items and 8. Brand, C.R. "Personality Dimensions: An
taking 1.5 hours to complete, the OPQ could, Overview of Modern Trait Psychology", in
in practice at least, consist of 50 items and Nicholson, J. and Beloff, H. (Eds), Psychology
take 15-20 minutes to complete. This would Survey 5, British Psychological Society,
contribute a major saving in terms of Leicester, 1984.
administration and scoring time, and could
9. McRae, R.R. and Costa, P.T., "Validation of the
make the candidate more predisposed to
Five-factor Model of Personality across
answer the questionnaire.
Instruments and Observers", Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 52,
1987, pp. 81-90.
CONCLUSIONS 10. Brand, C.R. and Egan, V., "The 'Big Five'
The present study shows that the "Big Five" Dimensions of Personality? Evidence from
Ipsative, Adjectival Self-attributions",
personality factors[8,9] can be identified in
Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 10
the five higher-order factors of the OPQ. The No. 11, 1990, pp. 1165-72.
five-factor solution provides some
justification for the use of the SHL Pentagon
model, but the present data provide no N.A. Stanton, N.C. Graham and C.
support for the other SHL higher-order Brimelow are based at Aston University,
models. Use of the Concept model scales Birmingham, and G. Mathews is in the
cannot be recommended until Department of Psychology at the University
psychometrically sound item analyses have of Dundee.
demonstrated their factorial independence.

27
 This article has been cited by:

1. References 365-454. [CrossRef]

2. Jeffrey M. Cucina, Pat M. Caputo, Henry F. Thibodeaux, Charles N. MacLane, Julia M. Bayless. 2013. Scoring Biodata:
Is it rational to be quasi-rational?. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 21:10.1111/ijsa.2013.21.issue-2, 226-232.
[CrossRef]
3. References 419-486. [CrossRef]
4. Neville Stanton, Gerald Matthews. 1995. Twenty‐one traits of personality. Journal of Management Development 14:7, 66-75.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by University of Southampton At 07:28 16 March 2016 (PT)

View publication stats