项目表述效应对句子式大五人格量表的影响
The Influence of Item Wording Effect on the Sentence Big Five Personality Inventory
摘要: 由正、反向题所带来的项目表述效应会引起研究结果的偏倚，而在国内自编的句子式大五人格量表中尚缺乏对该效应的检验、控制。采用相关特质相关法(CTCM)对句子式中国大五人格量表简版CBF-PI-B进行项目表述效应检验，评估该效应对其测量模型的影响，并分析了特质乐观与正、反向题方法因素的关系。结果显示：CBF-PI-B中同时存在正、反向题项目表述效应，其对宜人性、严谨性、外向性、开放性维度的因素载荷均有影响，但对神经质维度影响不大。并且，该效应既可能使五维度间相关系数降低，也可能使其相关系数膨胀并出现虚假相关，未来使用该量表应同时纳入正、反向题方法因素。另外，特质乐观可正向预测CBF-PI-B的正、反向题表述效应。
Abstract: The item wording effect brought by positively or negatively worded items will cause the bias of results. The domestic self-compiled sentence Big Five Personality scale, nevertheless, still lacks the test and control of such effect. Taking the sentence Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory Brief version (CBF-PI-B) as an example, the current research aimed to examine the item wording effect by the correlated trait-correlated method (CTCM) and evaluate the influence of item wording effect on its measurement model. Further, the relationship between dispositional optimism and the positively and negatively worded method factors were explored. The results showed that positively and negatively worded effects were both non-ignorable in CBF-PI-B, which had an effect on the factor loadings of agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion and openness, but had little effect on the neuroticism dimension. Moreover, item wording effect could not only reduce the correlation coefficients among the five dimensions, but also make the correlation coefficients expand and appear false correlations, indicating that method factors of both positively and negatively worded items should be taken into consideration in future studies. In addition, dispositional optimism positively predicted the positively and negatively worded effect on CBF-PI-B.
文章引用：唐长江, 林彤, 孙世月, 蔡伯行, 魏丽丽 (2021). 项目表述效应对句子式大五人格量表的影响. 心理学进展, 11(9), 2026-2037. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2021.119229

参考文献

[1] 顾红磊, 王才康(2012). 项目表述效应的统计控制: 以中文版生活定向测验为例. 心理科学, 35(5), 1247-1253.
[2] 郭庆科, 韩丹, 王昭, 时勘(2006). 人格测验中题目正反向陈述的效应. 心理学报, (4), 626-632.
[3] 郝亚楠, 宋勃东, 王岩, 张钦, 郎越(2016). 气质性乐观的正性偏向及其神经生理研究证据. 心理科学进展, 24(6), 946-957.
[4] 黎志华, 尹霞云, 蔡太生, 朱翠英(2013). 特质乐观的结构: 传统因素模型与双因素模型. 中国临床心理学杂志, 21(1), 45-47.
[5] 罗杰, 戴晓阳(2011). “大五”人格测验在我国使用情况的元分析. 中国临床心理学杂志, 19(6), 740-742.
[6] 罗杰, 周瑗, 陈维, 潘运, 赵守盈(2016). 大五人格测验在中国应用的信度概化分析. 心理发展与教育, 32(1), 121-128.
[7] 麦玉娇, 温忠麟(2013). 探索性结构方程建模(ESEM): EFA和CFA的整合. 心理科学进展, 21(5), 934-939.
[8] 彭台光, 高月慈, 林鉦棽(2006). 管理研究中的共同方法變異: 問題本質、影響、測試和補救. 管理學報, 23(1), 77-98.
[9] 王济川, 王小倩, 姜宝法(2011). 结构方程模型: 方法与应用. 北京: 高等教育出版社.
[10] 王孟成, 戴晓阳, 姚树桥(2011). 中国大五人格问卷的初步编制Ⅲ: 简式版的制定及信效度检验. 中国临床心理学杂志, 19(4), 454-457.
[11] 吴永泽, 王文绢(2010). 不同应答等级对likert式量表特性的影响. 中国慢性病预防与控制, 18(2), 215-217.
[12] 袁立新, 林娜, 江晓娜(2007). 乐观主义-悲观主义量表的编制及信效度研究. 广东教育学院学报, (1), 55-59.
[13] 朱徽, 闫巩固(2015). 一般人格因素: 虚妄的杜撰还是真实的存在. 心理科学进展, 23(4), 643-653.
[14] Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Fagnani, C., Bentler, P. M., Barbaranelli, C., Medda, E., Nisticò, L., Stazi, M. A., & Caprara, G. V. (2010). Much More than Model Fitting? Evidence for the Heritability of Method Effect Associated with Positively Worded Items of the Life Orientation Test Revised. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 17, 642-653.[CrossRef] 
[15] Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Tisak, J., & Barbaranelli, C. (2011). Investigating the Nature of Method Factors through Multiple Informants: Evidence for a Specific Factor? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 625-642.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Arias, V. B., Jenaro, C., & Ponce, F. P. (2018). Testing the Generality of the General Factor of Personality: An Exploratory Bifactor Approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 17-23.[CrossRef] 
[17] Bert, W., Elke, C., & Niels, S. (2010). The Effect of Rating Scale Format on Response Styles: The Number of Response Categories and Response Category Labels. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27, 236-247.[CrossRef] 
[18] Biderman, M. D., Nguyen, N. T., Cunningham, C. J. L., & Ghorbani, N. (2011). The Ubiquity of Common Method Variance: The Case of the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 417-429.[CrossRef] 
[19] Chester, A. S., & Kenneth, D. H. (1981). Controlling Acquiescence Response Bias by Item Reversals: The Effect on Questionnaire Validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 1101-1114.[CrossRef] 
[20] Conway, J. M., Lievens, F., Scullen, S. E., & Lance, C. E. (2004). Bias in the Correlated Uniqueness Model for MTMM Data. Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11, 535-559.[CrossRef] 
[21] Curran, P. G. (2016). Methods for the Detection of Carelessly Invalid Responses in Survey Data. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 4-19.[CrossRef] 
[22] DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). High-er-Order Factors of the Big Five Predict Conformity: Are There Neuroses of Health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533-552.[CrossRef] 
[23] DiStefano, C., &Motl, R. W. (2009). Personality Correlates of Method Effects Due to Negatively Worded Items on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 309-313.[CrossRef] 
[24] Gilljam, M., &Granberg, D. (1993). Should We Take Don’t Know for an Answer? Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 348-357.[CrossRef] 
[25] Gu, H., Wen, Z., & Fan, X. (2017). Examining and Controlling for Wording Effect in a Self-Report Measure: A Monte Carlo Simulation Study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24, 545-555.[CrossRef] 
[26] Huang, J. L., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2012). Detecting and Deterring Insufficient Effort Responding to Surveys. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 99-114.[CrossRef] 
[27] Johnson, J. M., Bristow, D. N., & Schneider, K. C. (2011). Did You Not Understand the Question or Not? An Investigation of Negatively Worded Questions in Survey Research. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 20, 75-86.[CrossRef] 
[28] Maraz, A., Nagy, T., & Ziegler, M. (2021). When Bad Gets Worse: Negative Wording Amplifies Negative Recall in Persons with the Borderline Personality Trait. Applied Cognitive Psy-chology, 35, 274-285.[CrossRef] 
[29] Marsh, H. W. (1996). Positive and Negative Global Self-Esteem: A Substantively Meaningful Distinction or Artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 810-819.[CrossRef] 
[30] Marsh, H. W., & Parducci, A. (1978). Natural Anchoring at the Neutral Point of Category Rating Scales. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 193-204.[CrossRef] 
[31] Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2010). A New Look at the Big Five Factor Structure through Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471-491.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[32] Marsh, H. W., Scalas, L. F., & Nagengast, B. (2010). Longitudinal Tests of Competing Factor Structures for the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: Traits, Ephemeral Artifacts, and Stable Response Styles. Psychological Assessment, 22, 366-381.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[33] Martínez-Molina, A., & Arias, V. B. (2018). Balanced and Positively Worded Personality Short-Forms: Mini-IPIP Validity and Cross-Cultural Invariance. PeerJ, 6, e5542.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[34] Mayo, R., Schul, Y., & Burnstein, E. (2004). “I Am Not Guilty” vs “I Am Innocent”: Successful Negation May Depend on the Schema Used for Its Encoding. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 433-449.[CrossRef] 
[35] Michaelides, M. P., Zenger, M., Koutsogiorgi, C., Brähler, E., Stöbel-Richter, Y., & Berth, H. (2016). Personality Correlates and Gender Invariance of Wording Effects in the German Version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 13-18.[CrossRef] 
[36] Musek, J. (2007). A General Factor of Personality: Evidence for the Big One in the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1213-1233.[CrossRef] 
[37] Quilty, L. C., Oakman, J. M., & Risko, E. (2006). Correlates of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale Method Effects. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13, 99-117.[CrossRef] 
[38] Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111-163.[CrossRef] 
[39] Riordan, A. O. (2021). Negative Item Response Bias in Education-Based Surveys—A Factor Modelling Approach. Working Papers, 04/2021, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics. https://ideas.repec.org/p/sza/wpaper/wpapers364.html
[40] Schriesheim, C. A., Eisenbach, R. J., & Hill, K. D. (1991). The Effect of Negation and Polar Opposite Item Reversals on Questionnaire Reliability and Validity: An Experimental Investigation. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 51, 67-78.[CrossRef] 
[41] Shulruf, B., Hattie, J., & Dixon, R. (2008). Factors Affecting Responses to Likert Type Questionnaires: Introduction of the ImpExp, a New Comprehensive Model. Social Psychology of Education, 11, 59-78.[CrossRef] 
[42] Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The Next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and Assessing a Hierarchical Model with 15 Facets to Enhance Bandwidth, Fidelity, and Predictive Power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 117-143.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[43] Swain, S. D., Weathers, D., & Niedrich, R. W. (2008). Assessing Three Sources of Misresponse to Reversed Likert Items. Journal of Marketing Research, 45, 116-131.[CrossRef] 
[44] Tourangeau, R., & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Cognitive Processes Underlying Context Effects in Attitude Measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 299-314.[CrossRef] 
[45] Urbán, R., Szigeti, R., Kökönyei, G., & Demetrovics, Z. (2014). Global Self-Esteem and Method Effects: Competing Factor Structures, Longitudinal Invariance, and Response Styles in Adolescents. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 488-498.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[46] Wang, Y., Kong, F., Huang, L., & Liu, J. (2016). Neural Correlates of Biased Responses: The Negative Method Effect in the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale Is Associated with Right Amygdala Volume. Journal of Personality, 84, 623-632.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[47] Weijters, B., Baumgartner, H., & Schillewaert, N. (2013). Reversed Item Bias: An Integrative Model. Psychological Methods, 18, 320-334.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[48] Weijters, B., Geuens, M., & Schillewaert, N. (2009). The Proximity Effect: The Role of Inter-Item Distance on Reverse-Item Bias. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26, 2-12.[CrossRef] 
[49] Wong, C., Peng, K. Z., Shi, J., & Mao, Y. (2011). Differences between Odd Number and Even Number Response Formats: Evidence from Mainland Chinese Respondents. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28, 379-399.[CrossRef] 
[50] Zhang, B., Li, Y. M., Li, J., Luo, J., Ye, Y., Yin, L., Chen, Z., Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2021). The Big Five Inventory-2 in China: A Comprehensive Psychometric Evaluation in Four Diverse Samples. Assessment.[CrossRef] [PubMed]