Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:16:46.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Development of the South African Personality Inventory: A Cross-Cultural Design in a Non-Western Society ‒ Lessons Learned and Generalizability to Other Parts of the World

from Part 2 - Individual Differences across Cultures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2021

By
Deon Meiring ,
J. Alewyn Nel ,
Velichko H. Fetvadjiev  and
Carin Hill
Edited by
Michael Bender  and
Byron G. Adams
Michael Bender
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Tilburg, The Netherlands
Byron G. Adams
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Tilburg, The Netherlands
Get access

Summary

The usual operationalization of the psycholexical approach to personality becomes inefficient when dealing with languages with a limited lexicography or languages that are inaccessible to the investigator. These conditions, which probably hold for most of the world’s languages, call for different approaches to uncover the complexities of personality. This chapter describes the mixed-method approach in designing the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). We describe (1) the dynamics and lessons learned from the extensive qualitative research conducted in 11 languages, (2) the challenges of item development and reduction with a focus on cultural comparability and validity, and (3) the complexities in extracting and validating the SAPI factor structure across language versions. We discuss how the diversification of methods can enrich the understanding of personality in understudied contexts and inform the debate between universal models (with their lure of cross-cultural comparability) and indigenous models (with their claim to ecological validity).

Keywords

personality and cultureindigenous approachemic–etic approachdecentered approachinstrument developmenttranslation and adaptationSouth Africa
Type
Chapter
Information
Methods and Assessment in Culture and Psychology , pp. 198 - 227
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328.Google Scholar
Bangeni, B., & Kapp, R. (2007). Shifting language attitudes in a linguistically diverse learning environment. Journal of Multilingual Development, 28, 253–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.Google Scholar
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9–30.Google Scholar
Bell, C., & Njoli, N. (2016). The role of big five factors on predicting job crafting propensities amongst administrative employees in a South African tertiary institution. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 15.Google Scholar
Benet-Martínez, V., & Waller, N. G. (2002). From adorable to worthless: Implicit and self-report structure of highly evaluative personality descriptors. European Journal of Personality, 16, 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2008). What is job crafting and why does it matter? The University of Michigan, Ross School of Business, From the Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship. Retrieved from the website of Positive Organizational Scholarship on 23 March 2020.Google Scholar
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Breugelmans, S. M., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. L. (2011). Cross-Cultural Psychology: Research and Applications (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, S. X., & Au, A. K. Y. (2017). Personality and adjustment in bilingual and biculture context. In Church, A. T. (ed.). The Praeger Handbook of Personality across Cultures (pp. 247–275). Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
Cheung, F. M., & Ho, Y. W. (2018). Culturally relevant personality assessment. In Shigemasu, K., Kuwano, S., Sato, T., & Matsuzawa, T. (eds.), Diversity in Harmony – Insights from Psychology (pp. 211–229). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Cheung, F. M., Cheung, S. F., & Fan, W. (2013). From Chinese to cross-cultural personality inventory: A combined emic–etic approach to the study of personality in culture. In Gelfand, M., Chiu, C.-Y., & Hong, Y.-Y. (eds.), Advances in Culture and Psychology (vol. 3, pp. 117–179). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J., Sun, H., Gan, Y., Song, W., & Xie, D. (2001). Indigenous Chinese personality constructs: Is the Five-Factor Model complete? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Church, A. T. (2000). Culture and personality: Toward an integrated cultural trait psychology. Journal of Personality, 68, 651–703.Google Scholar
Church, A. T. (2017). Personality across cultures: Historical overview and current topics. In Church, A. T. (ed.), The Praeger Handbook of Personality across Cultures (pp. 1–45). Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
Church, A. T., & Burke, P. J. (1994). Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the Big Five and Tellegen’s three- and four-dimensional models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 93–114.Google Scholar
Claassen, N. C. W. (1997). Culture differences, politics and test bias in South Africa. European Review of Applied Psychology, 47, 297–307.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Daouk-Öyry, L., Zeinoun, P., Choueiri, L., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2016). Integrating global and local perspectives in psycholexical studies: A GloCal approach. Journal of Research in Personality, 62, 19–28.Google Scholar
Dawkins, S., Tian, A. W., Newman, A., & Martin, A. (2015). Psychological ownership: A review and research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38, 163–183.Google Scholar
De Raad, B., & Mlacic, B. (2017). Psycholexical studies of personality structures across cultures. In Church, A. T. (ed.), The Praeger Handbook of Personality across Cultures. (pp. 161–192). Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
De Souza Peres, A. J. (2018). The Personality Lexicon in Brazilian Portuguese: Studies with Natural Language. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Brasilia, Brazil.Google Scholar
Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Job crafting. In Peeters, M. C. W., de Jonge, J., & Taris, T. W. (eds.), An Introduction to Contemporary Work Psychology (pp. 414–433). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Echterhoff, W., & Quaiser-Pohl, C. M. (2018). Understanding and improving work related behaviour under transcultural conditions of W.E.I.R.D. and Ubuntu regions. Application for multinational workshops for Sub-Saharan Africa, VolkswagenStiftung.Google Scholar
Employment Equity Act (2013). Employment Equity Act, No. 47 of 2013. Republic of South Africa. Retrieved from www.labour.gov.za/docs/legislation/eea/act98-055.html.Google Scholar
Fetvadjiev, V. H., Meiring, D., Nel, J. A., Hill, C., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2017). Indigenous personality structure and measurement in South Africa. In Church, A. T. (ed.), The Praeger Handbook of Personality across Cultures (pp. 137–160). Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
Fetvadjiev, V. H., Meiring, D., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Nel, J. A., & Hill, C. (2015). The South African Personality Inventory (SAPI): A culture-informed instrument for the country’s main ethnocultural groups. Psychological Assessment. 27, 827–837.Google Scholar
Fetvadjiev, V. H., Neha, T., van de Vijver, F. J. R., McManus, M., & Meiring, D. (2018, June). Social-relational personality concepts across cultures: The South African Personality Inventory (SAPI) and family orientation in New Zealand. In V. H. Fetvadjiev (Chair), Methods in personality and culture: Insights from Africa and beyond. Invited symposium at the Tilburg Conference on Methods and Culture in Psychology, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Fouche, J. (2018). Linking the Big Five Personality Constructs to Psychological Ownership. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
Foxcroft, C. D., Paterson, H. Le Roux, N., & Herbst, D. (2004). Psychological Assessment in South Africa: A Needs Analysis. Pretoria, South Africa: Human Sciences Research Council.Google Scholar
Foxcroft, C. D., & Roodt, G. (2001). An Introduction to Psychological Assessment in South Africa. Johannesburg: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Foxcroft, C., & Roodt, G. (2013). An Introduction to Psychological Assessment in the South African Context (4th ed.). Cape Town: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, H. S., Tucker, J. S., & Reise, S. P. (1995). Personality dimensions and measures potentially relevant to health: A focus on hostility. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 17, 245–253.Google Scholar
Gaganakis, M. (1992). Language and ethnic group relations in non-racial schools. English Academy Review, 9, 46–55.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In Wheeler, L. (ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology (vol. 2, pp.141–165). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Grib, C. (2017). Differential Item Analysis of the Afrikaans Version of the South African Personality Inventory. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
Gurven, M., Von Rueden, C., Massenkoff, M., Kaplan, H., & Lero Vie, M. (2013). How universal is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of personality variation among forager–farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 354–370.Google Scholar
Hendriks, A. A., Hofstee, W. K., & De Raad, B. (1999). The Five Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI). Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 307–325.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 33, 1–75.Google Scholar
Heugh, K. (2006). Theory and practice – Language education models in Africa: Research, design, decision-making, and outcomes. In Alidou, H., Boly, A., Brock-Utne, B., Diallo, Y. S., Heugh, K., & Wolff, H. E. (eds.), Optimizing Learning and Education in Africa: The Language Factor. A Stock-Taking Research on Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education in Sub-Saharan Africa (pp. 56–84). Paris: Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA).Google Scholar
Hill, C., Nel, J. A., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Meiring, D., Valchev, V. H., Adams, B. G., & De Bruin, G. P. (2013). Developing and testing items for the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39, 1–13.Google Scholar
Hlahleni, M. (2017). Factor Structure and Construct Validity of the South African Personality Inventory – Tshivenda Version. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
International Test Commission. (2010). The ITC Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests. www.InTestCom.org.Google Scholar
International Test Commission. (2016). The ITC Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests (2nd ed.). www.InTestCom.org.Google Scholar
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2008). The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. Journal of Personality, 76, 1001–1054.Google Scholar
Legodi, L. (2017). Factor Structure and Construct Validity of the South African Personality Inventory – Sesotho Version. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
Lemos-Giráldez, S., & Fidalgo‐Aliste, A. M. (1997). Personality dispositions and health‐related habits and attitudes: A cross-sectional study. European Journal of Personality, 11, 197–209.Google Scholar
Macdonald, C. A. (1990). Crossing the Threshold into Standard Three in Black Education: The Consolidated Main Project of the Threshold Project. Pretoria, South Africa: Human Sciences Research Council.Google Scholar
Marjorie, L. (1982). Language policy and oppression in South Africa. Cultural Survival Quarterly Magazine. Retrieved 23 March from www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/language-policy-and-oppression-south-africa.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Tratwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the Big Five Factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471–491.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Morin, A. J. S., Parker, P. D., & Kaur, G. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85–110.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Allik, J. (eds.). (2002). The Five-Factor Model of Personality across Cultures. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.Google Scholar
Meiring, D. (2007). Bias and Equivalence of Psychological Measures in South Africa. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Labyrint.Google Scholar
Meiring, D., van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Rothmann, S. (2006). Bias in an adapted version of the 15FQ+ in South Africa. South African Journal of Psychology, 36, 340–356.Google Scholar
Meiring, D., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Rothmann, S., & Barrick, M. R. (2005). Construct, item, and method bias of cognitive and personality measures in South Africa. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31, 1–8.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. (2014). The Cross-Cultural Application of Social-Relational Scales of the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI) in Industry. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
Morton, N., Hill, C., & Meiring, D. (2018). Validating the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI): Examining green behaviour and job crafting within a nomological network of personality. International Journal of Personality Journal, 4, 25–38.Google Scholar
Mzangwa, S., & Septa, S. (2019). Transformation as part of evolving organisational culture in the South African higher education institutions. Cogent Social Sciences, 5, 1–13. 1638635.Google Scholar
Nel, J. A. (2008). Uncovering Personality Dimensions in Eleven Different Language Groups in South Africa: An Exploratory Study. Unpublished doctoral thesis, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, Potchefstroom, South Africa.Google Scholar
Nel, J. A., Valchev, V. H., Rothmann, S., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Meiring, D., & De Bruin, G. P. (2012). Exploring the personality structure in the 11 languages of South Africa. Journal of Personality, 80, 915–948.Google Scholar
Oh, I. S. (2009). The Five Factor Model of personality and job performance in East Asia: A cross-cultural validity generalization study. University of Iowa, Iowa City. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (3374065).Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organisational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60, 995–1027.Google Scholar
Oosthuizen, H. (2017). The South African Personality Inventory: A Psychometric Evaluation of a Setswana Version. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
Owen, K. (1991). Test bias: The validity of the Junior Aptitude Tests (JAT) for various population groups in South Africa regarding the constructs measured. South African Journal of Psychology, 21, 112–118.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (eds.), Measures of Personality and Social Psychology Attitudes (pp. 17–59). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26, 298–310.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology,7, 84–107.Google Scholar
Quaiser-Pohl, C. M., Saunders, M., Kariuki, P. W., & Arasa, J. N. (2020). Is there a Kenyan personality? – First evaluation of a Kenyan adaptation of the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
Salgado, J. F. (1998). Big Five personality dimensions and job performance in army and civil occupations: A European perspective. Human Performance, 11, 271–288.Google Scholar
Saucier, G. (2008). Measures of the personality factors found recurrently in human lexicons. In Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment (vol. 2, pp. 29–54). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., Thalmayer, A. G., & Bel-Bahar, T. S. (2014). Human attribute concepts: Relative ubiquity across twelve mutually isolated languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 199–216.Google Scholar
Saunders, M., Quaiser-Pohl, C. M., Wickord, L. Ch., & Rahe, M. (2018). Contributions of personality, social axioms and gender roles to work-life balance. University of Koblenz-Landau, Institute of Psychology, Campus Koblenz, Germany.Google Scholar
Slabbert, S., van der Berg, I., & Finlsayson, R. (2007). Jam or cheese? The challenge of the national broadcaster in a multilingual context. Language Matters, 38, 332–356.Google Scholar
Spector, P. E., & O’Connell, B. J. (1994). The contribution of personality traits, negative affectivity, locus of control and Type A to the subsequent reports of job stressors and job strains. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 1–11.Google Scholar
Statistics South Africa (2016). Community Survey 2016, Statistical release P0301 Statistics South Africa. Retrieved 23 March from http://cs2016.statssa.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/NT-30–06-2016-RELEASE-for-CS-2016-_Statistical-releas_1-July-2016.pdf.Google Scholar
Stevens, L. (2014). A Validation Study of the South African Personality Inventory. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
Strauss, M. E., & Smith, G. T. (2009). Construct validity: Advances in theory and methodology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 1–25.Google Scholar
Tóth-Király, I., Bõthe, B., Rigó, A., & Orosz, G. (2017). An illustration of the Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) framework on the passion scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ulich, E., & Wiese, B. S. (2011). Life Domain Balance: Konzepte zur Verbesserung der Lebensqualität [Life Domain Balance: Concepts fort he Improvement of Quality of Life]. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
Valchev, V. H., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Meiring, D., Nel, J. A., Hill, C., Laher, S., & Adams, B. G. (2014). Beyond agreeableness: Social-relational personality concepts from an indigenous and cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Research in Personality, 48, 17–32.Google Scholar
Valchev, V. H., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Nel, J. A., Rothmann, S., & Meiring, D. (2013). The use of traits and contextual information in free personality descriptions across ethnocultural groups in South Africa. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 1077–1091.Google Scholar
Valchev, V. H., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Nel, J. A., Rothmann, S., Meiring, D., & De Bruin, G. P. (2011). Implicit personality conceptions of the Nguni cultural-linguistic groups of South Africa. Cross-Cultural Research, 45, 235–266.Google Scholar
Van Aarde, N., Meiring, D., & Wiernik, B. M. (2017). The validity of the Big Five personality traits for job performance: Meta-analyses of South African studies. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 25, 223–239.Google Scholar
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Rothmann, S. (2004). Assessment in multi-cultural groups: The South African case. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 30, 1–7.Google Scholar
Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 439–459.Google Scholar
Vogt, L., & Laher, S. (2009). The Five Factor Model of personality and individualism/collectivism in South Africa: An exploratory study. Psychology in Society, 37, 39–54.Google Scholar
Webb, V., Lafon, M., & Pare, P. (2010). Bantu languages in education in South Africa: An overview. Language Learning Journal, 38, 273–292.Google Scholar
Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806–838.Google Scholar
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26, 179–201.Google Scholar
Zeinoun, P., Daouk-Öyry, L., Choueiri, L., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2017). A mixed-methods study of personality conceptions in the Levant: Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 453–465.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×