Running head: EXTRAVERSION SURVEY 1

Test for Extraversion Survey (TES)

“I have abided by the Spelman Academic Integrity Policy on this assignment”

Ashley Harrington

Spelman College

Dr. Blankson

4/27/16

EXTRAVERSION 2

Abstract

This project examined one of the big five personality traits known as extroversion.

Extroversion is the extent to which an individual is sociable, aggressive and impulsive. The

Personality Test for Extroversion (PTE) was created to analyze this trait. The survey responses

used were taken from a sample of 25 Spelman College students aged at least 18 years. When

analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, it was determined that 100 % of the

participants were both female and black. The internal consistency value, coefficient alpha, was

used to assess both the validity and the reliability of the TES. The coefficient alpha value was

found to be r s=.92, indicating a high degree reliability and construct validity. Discriminant

validity was found between the extraversion, shyness, and antisocial behavior with r=-.203 and

r=-.044 respectively. Further research will have to be done on this test in order to determine its

psychometric quality.

EXTRAVERSION 3

Test for Extraversion Survey (TES)

For the psychometrics test construction project, a test that was intended to measure the

big five personality trait extraversion was developed. Extraversion is a personality trait that was

derived from the modern personality theory known as the five factor model (FFM). It seeks to

contrast individuals that are talkative, sociable, outgoing and caring at the high end of the scale,

with those who are introverted, with a tendency to be shy, reserved, quiet and withdrawn, at the

low end of the scale (Huffman, 2011; Kim & Chung, 2014; Otonari et al., 2012). Impulsivity is

also a trait that is associated with individuals who score high on extraversion (Tiwari, Singh &

Singh, 2009). People who score high on extraversion may also be described using adjectives

such as energetic and self-assured (King, George & Hebl, 2005) According to Carl Jung, those

who score high on in extraversion are believed to align their energy to the exterior world. These

people are thought to be absorbed in what is occurring in the world around them (Carlyn, 1977;

Harbough, 2010).

This test is needed because there is a paucity of research that has been conducted on

people of color, as most research until present date has focused on Caucasians. Therefore, some

of the findings of previous research may not translate to other demographics. This test will fill a

void caused by a lack of diversity in research.

There are four principle uses of objective personality tests. One such use is in the

selection of personnel by employers. Some organizations may seek to identify those that possess

certain personality traits that may be indicators of predictive success in a particular profession

(Hogan, 2015).

EXTRAVERSION 4

The five factor model personality traits appear to be valid predictors of a range of

variables concerning work performance. For example, both neuroticism and conscientiousness

are considered to be predictors of motivation and performance at work. Other traits such as

extraversion, openness and agreeableness are thought to predict a person’s performance and

abilities in specific professions (Dentrick & Chibnall, 2013; Hogan, 2015). Extroversion has

been found to be predictive of ability in areas like management, sales and nursing, but not in

areas like engineering for example (Barrick & Mount, 1991). The big five personality traits may

come together and interact to influences the actions and circumstances of a person, which in turn

may influence job performance and satisfaction (Zhai, Willis, O’Shea, Zhai & Yang, 2013).

Extroverted people are also more likely to report higher levels of job satisfaction because they

are more likely to engage in social interactions with their coworkers (Kim & Chung, 2013).

There are a variety of tests available to measure the construct of extraversion, one such

test is the NEO Personality inventory or NEO-PI. The NEO-PI is a factor-analytically based test

that is intended to measure personality. It identifies five personality factors known as the “Big

Five” personality traits. These traits include openness, conscientiousness, extraversion,

agreeableness, and neuroticism. The most recent version of the NEO-PI is the NEO-PI-3, of

which there are 2 different versions, each with 240 items. Form S, the most popular version, is a

self-report inventory where the subject rates his or herself. Form R of the NEO-PI-3 is a version

of the test that is used for reporting the results of another person. There are also alternate forms

of the NEO-PI-3 form R based on the gender of the respondent. In addition, there is an

abbreviated version of the NEO-PI-3 known as the NEO-FFI-3 which reduces the number of

items from 240 to 60 (Hogan, 2015).

EXTRAVERSION 5

The NEO-PI-3 differs from the previous version, NEO-PI-R, by altering 37 of the 240

existing items. This was done mostly to simplify the reading sections of the test in order to make

the test more applicable to younger populations. It has five domain scales, each corresponding to

the five personality traits found in the Big Five personality model. Each of the five personality

domains contains six facet scores, resulting in a total of 30 facet scores. Each of these 30 facets

is assessed by eight items, resulting in 240 items (Hogan, 2015).

The Myers-Briggs Type indicator (MBTI) personality inventory is a self-report, factor-

analytically based test that is utilized in the assessment of personality types. First described by

Carl G. Jung, the test consists of four domains: Extraversion-Introversion (E-I), Sensation-

Intuition (S-N), Thinking-Feeling (T-F) and Judgement-Perception (J-P). There are currently

four explicit forms of the MBTI inventory, each of which is used in different situations and

scored accordingly. Form M consists of 93 items and is the most common form of the MBTI

inventory. It is typically graded using computer-scoring. Form M-self scorable also has 93

items and is intended to be scored by either the respondent or a professional. There is also the

MBTI Step II Form Q which has 144 items. This version of the test breaks down each of the

four personality domain into five facets in order to provide the test taker with more detail. The

final version of the of the MBTI is the Step III which has 222 items in total. This version of the

test is tailored solely for use in counseling and coaching frameworks where the test taker is most

likely to meet with a professional face-to-face (Myers-Briggs).

Additional tests that measure the construct of personality include the Eysenck Personality

Questionnaire, which seeks to measure neuroticism, extraversion, psychoticism, and lying, and

the Hogan Personality Inventory (Tiwari, Singh & Singh, 2009). The Hogan personality

inventory is an instrument that is meant to describe the more positive aspects of personality and

EXTRAVERSION 6

how they influence an individual’s interpersonal relationships (Salgado, Moscoso & Alonso,

2013).

The target audience of this of the TES includes black, female, young adults enrolled in a

college or university. This is because a test for extroversion is considered a specific domain test,

which tend to have very clear-cut audiences and uses with few exceptions (Hogan, 2015).

Because the TES is a specific domain test, it will most likely have a limited standardization

sample, or norm group. It is even a possibility that there will be no norm group (Hogan, 2015).

A good sample size would consist of at least 30 participants in order to be able to generalize the

results to the population.

Methods

Participants

The sample obtained from the Spring 2016 Psychometric Instruments class consisted of

25 young adult participants. This sample was taken from a larger population of students

attending Spelman college in Atlanta, Ga. The study consisted entirely of female participants of

African American descent, aged at least 18 years.

After the participants were selected to take part in the study, the respondents took the test

home in order to complete it. The tests were then returned to the researcher for scoring. No

compensation was provided as incentive to participate. A total of 20 surveys were recovered, the

remaining 5 were excluded due to incompletion.

Materials

The materials used for this study include the Test for Extraversion Survey or TES, which

is a pencil-and-paper test that was constructed by the author of this paper, Ashley Harrington.

The purpose of the TES is to collect data concerning one of the five factor model personality

EXTRAVERSION 7

traits, extraversion. The final test included 20 items pulled from the original 60 items that were

found on the draft version of the test.

Items concerning level of extroversion were answered by asking questions such as “I am

quick to get involved in social activities at my new job or school” and “I enjoy being the center

of attention.” The responses were given on a five-point Likert Scale: Strongly disagree,

Disagree, Neutral, Agree Strongly agree for both statements. Verbal responses were then

converted to numerical form with assigned values of 1, 2, 3,4, and 5 respectively. The

directionality of some of the negatively-keyed items such as “I do not like being the center of

attention” and “I am slow to get involved in social activities at my new job or school”, was

reversed in order to maintain the consistency of the item scores Item analysis was conducted in

order to elect the items that correlated most with the total score. A final score was then

constructed based on the results of the item analysis.

The Likert scale, often called the method of summated ratings, is a selected response

format that typically employs a five point, three-point, or nine-point scale for each response. It

was chosen as the response format of this test because it allows a respondent to express their

feelings or attitudes, while maintaining the scoring reliability that is typically absent in

constructed response items. The summation of all the responses provide a comprehensive

response to the target construct (Hogan, 2015).

Multiple choice is also a type of selected response format that is also known as multiple

response or forced response items. This format typically uses at least four or five options for

each item, much like with the Likert scale. This format differs from that of the Likert scale in

EXTRAVERSION 8

that the Likert scale can often be adapted into the graphic rating scale to be used by younger

populations who are unable to read, while multiple choice items cannot (Hogan, 2015).

True/false response items are a special type of multiple choice response format that only

has two options: True or False. This differentiates it from both traditional multiple choice

format and Likert format, both of which typically have at least 3 options to choose from. In

addition, much like with traditional multiple choice formats, this response method cannot usually

be adapted for use with those who are unable to read, unlike the Likert scale (Hogan, 2015).

Other measures include Chasity Jackson’s Survey for Antisocial Behavior, which is a 25

item, multiple choice, pencil-and-paper instrument designed to investigate the incidence of anti-

social behavior in school-aged children and adolescents. High scores on this measure indicate

more antisocial behavior problems within the school system, while low scores indicate fewer

behavioral problems. This measure was used in order to assess the criterion related validity of

the TES.

In addition, Maria Reynolds’s Survey of Shyness was also utilized. The Survey of

shyness is a 20 item, pencil-and-paper instrument that seeks to measure an individual’s level of

shyness. The Survey of shyness makes use of the five-point Likert scale with responses ranging

from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree, with assigned values ranging from 5 to 1 respectively.

High scores on the measure indicate that the person exhibits a high level of shyness behavior,

while low scores indicate that an individual displays a lower level of shyness behavior. This

measure was also used to assess the criterion related validity of the TES.

Procedures

EXTRAVERSION 9

The surveys employed in this study were composed of a set of responses from students

attending Spelman College in Atlanta, Ga. Responses were a sample collected from a larger

population of all students, freshmen to seniors, who were enrolled at the college. The class that

was selected to participate in the study was a convenience sample. After the 25 participants were

selected to take part in the study, they were given the survey to be completed by hand and

returned to the researcher. The TES was used to measure the Big Five personality trait of

extraversion. The surveys that were collected at the college were done in March of 2016.

Results

Item analysis was conducted via the use of statistical analysis in order to select which

survey items should be included in the final test. By doing this, it became possible to control the

characteristics of the test (Hogan, 2015). Analysis began with the informal tryout phase in which

seven individuals, all of whom were very similar to the target audience, were asked to provide

constructive criticisms about the survey items and instructions. Any items with vague or

ambiguous wording were then removed, while the best items were preserved. Next, came the

formal tryout stage in which a revised version of the test, now containing 20 items, was

administered to the sample of 25 test-takers. Scores were then collected and analyzed using

SPSS computer software.

Since this is a measure that is designed to assess an individual’s level of extraversion, it is

important that this test be able to differentiate between those that possess this characteristic, and

those that do not. Item discrimination refers to an item’s ability to discern between groups of

participants (Hogan, 2015). In this case, groups are differentiated based on a trait that is internal

to the test. The goal is to create groups based on who has more or less of the characteristic being

investigated. Only the items that were found to discriminate best between extraverts and non-

EXTRAVERSION 10

extraverts were chosen. As a result, “high” and “low” groups were created and defined as the

top and bottom halves of the distribution of total scores. Table 1 in Appendix A contains a table

that illustrates the items that were initially written, as well as the final set of items that were

selected.

The reliability of a test is a reference to how consistent a particular measure or study is.

In order for a study to be reliable, it must generate identical or very comparable results when

replicated. Various methods can be employed in order to assess the reliability of a measure

including: test re-test reliability, alternate forms reliability, internal consistency reliability, and

inter-rater reliability (Hogan, 2015).

Test re-test reliability is a form of reliability in which the coefficient is generated by

delivering an identical test on more than one occasion. The correlation between the initial and

follow-up test is the reliability coefficient. The purpose of test re-test reliability is to

approximate any adjustment in the personal conditions of the participants. However, in some

cases, it does not account for variation in test administration, nor does it address any variation

due to inter-rater reliability (Hogan, 2015). Because the test was only administered on a single

occasion, it would be impossible to determine the test-retest reliability coefficient value for this

survey.

Another form of reliability is alternate forms reliability. This is a method for assessing

reliability which necessitates that there be two analogous forms of the same measure, which are

taken under identical conditions. The reliability coefficient is the correlation between the two

scores obtained on the different forms of the test (Hogan, 2015). As a result of there only being

EXTRAVERSION 11

a single form of the TES that was only administered a single time, it was not possible to obtain

the alternate forms reliability coefficient for this survey.

Internal consistency reliability is another method of assessing the reliability of a measure.

This form of reliability can be appraised in a variety of ways: split-half, Kuder-Richardson, and

coefficient alpha (Hogan, 2015).

Split-half reliability, a form of internal consistency reliability, is obtained when a test is

split into two sections and administered in succession. The two sections are then correlated in

order to generate the split half reliability coefficient (Hogan, 2015). A split-half reliability

coefficient was computed for the TES in order to determine the correlation between the two

halves of the test. Findings indicate that the split half reliability coefficient of TES was .81.

Reliability that falls within the range of .80-.89 is considered to be good, however further

information should be used to supplement the test score (Hogan, 2015). Split half reliability only

provides the reliability of half the test, as a result, adjustments were made in order to assess the

reliability of the entire test. This amendment was made through the use of the Spearman-Brown

correction. Spearman-Brown makes the assumption that all of the items that are added to or

removed from the measure are comparable to all of the other items on the test. Based on the

results of this study, the measure was only adequately reliable at assessing the personality trait of

extraversion in test-takers, r s=.79 , p< .05.Although reliability in the range of .70-.79 is

considered to be satisfactory, the usage of this test must be undertaken with discretion and must

be supplemented with information from other sources (Hogan, 2015).

Kuder-Richardson 20, or KR-20, is another measure of internal consistency reliability. It

provides the sum of all the possible split halves for a measure, however it is only useful for

EXTRAVERSION 12

instruments that are scored dichotomously. Therefore, KR-20 could not be used with the TES

which utilized a multiple choice, Likert scale. Coefficient alpha, also known as Cronbach’s

alpha, is an alternate form of internal consistency reliability that would be much more

appropriate for use with the TES because it can be used with any item that possess a continuous

score, such as a Likert scale (Hogan, 2015). The TES generated a coefficient alpha value of .92,

which is considered to be excellent. No additional information would be required to supplement

this test.

Inter-rater reliability, also known as inter-scorer reliability, refers to variations in test

scores due to differences between who scores the test. In order to obtain inter-rater reliability,

the test must be administered to the sample a single time and scored twice by two different

judges independently of one another. The correlation between these two scores in the inter-rater

reliability coefficient. It is imperative that the judges work separately while rating the

instruments in order to avoid one influencing the other’s scores (Hogan, 2015). Inter rater

reliability was not secured for this test because it was only scored by a single judge.

The validity of a test alludes to the extent to which a test measures the construct or trait

that it is intended to. Much like with reliability, there are many different forms of validity such

as content, criterion-related, and construct validity (Hogan, 2015).

Content validity considers the relationship between a test’s content and some behavior or

trait that the test intends to measure. In order for a test to have good content validity, the test

content and the trait that is being investigated must correlate (Hogan, 2015). Content validity is

appropriate for use with the TES because it is important to ensure that an instrument that seeks to

measure a trait such as extroversion, accomplishes this feat. However, certain very specific

EXTRAVERSION 13

forms of content validity such as instructional validity, are not appropriate for this type of test

because personality is an innate characteristic of an individual, and not something that is entirely

taught (Hogan, 2015).

Another form of validity is criterion-related validity. This type of validity establishes a

relationship between an individual’s performance on the measure and some other criterion that is

considered to be important to the construct that is being measured. Criterion-related validity can

take the form of predictive validity or concurrent validity. A test with predictive validity is one

that seeks to measure criterion that will be obtained sometime in the future. In contrast, a test

with concurrent validity would be one that measures the current status of a variable, the TES

would be an example of a test with this form of criterion related validity (Hogan, 2015).

When discussing criterion related validity, it is important to keep convergent and

discriminant validity in mind. A test that displays a high degree of convergent validity is one

that has a relatively high correlation between the measure and the criterion that is assumed to

measure the same construct as that measure. The opposite is true for a test with discriminant

validity. Discriminant validity means that the test and the criterion are not very strongly

correlated with one another (Hogan, 2015). A Pearson correlation was computed in order to

assess the criterion related validity of the TES using the Shyness Survey and the Test for

Antisocial Behavior. It was found that the Test for Extraversion Survey and the Test for

Antisocial Behavior were negatively correlated (r=-.044). There was also a negative correlation

between the Test for Extraversion and the Shyness Survey (r=-.203). These findings indicate

that there is discriminant validity between extraversion, antisocial behavior, and Shyness.

EXTRAVERSION 14

The final form of validity that will be discussed in this paper is construct validity.

Construct validity is demonstrated when a test is found to measure its intended construct. A high

degree of internal consistency is usually an indicator of a high degree of content validity (Hogan,

2015). In order to assess the construct validity of the Test for extraversion, SPSS was used to

conduct a factor analysis. Internal consistency was indicated by a coefficient alpha value of .92,

indicating that there is a possibility that this test would also have a high degree of validity.

However, a high internal consistency is only an indication that a construct is being measured,

other information would be needed in order to determine if the correct construct is being

measured (Hogan, 2015).

Discussion

The final version of the Test for Extraversion Survey or TES, consisted of 20 item that

were designed to measure one of the Five Factor Analysis model traits, extroversion. Responses

were given on the Likert scale with feedback ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree.

Verbal responses were converted to numerical form with assigned values distributed from 1 to 5

respectively. Negatively keyed items such as “I find it difficult to open up to new people” were

reverse scored in order to maintain the consistency of the item scores. Scores were entered into

SPSS for analysis and a total scores were generated for each test taker. The high and low groups

for extraversion scores were defined as the top and bottom halves of the distribution of total

scores correspondingly. High scores correlated with a higher level of extraversion, while low

scores correlate with lower levels of extraversion.

Typically, norms groups for objective personality tests like TES would consist of a

sample that is intended to be representative of the demographic composition of the population

EXTRAVERSION 15

being investigated. This sample would ideally be achieved through random sampling and

assignment which is not possible in this case. As a result, tests like the one presented in this

research do not often have norm groups.

The TES is considered to be a qualification level A test. This means that there are no

special qualifications needed to purchase or use these materials.

Initially, a reliability value of approximately .95 was expected. This was because special

care was taken in order to ensure that all of the items on the measure were interconnected. A

reliability value at this level is an indication of excellent reliability and the ability of a test to

contribute to weighty decisions. A test with a reliability value this high could stand on its own

with no need to supplement the test score with additional material (Hogan, 2015). The

coefficient alpha value that was actually obtained for this test was .916. This value, although not

as high as it was expected to be, is still an indication of excellent reliability, and a test that could

stand on its own. In the future, reliability could be increased by incorporating standardized

procedures for the administration of the test to the sample. Instead of allowing the respondents

to take the test home, the test would be administered at a set date and time in a prearranged

room.

A Pearson correlation was computed in order to determine the criterion related validity

for the Test for Extraversion and the Shyness Survey. A negative correlation was found between

extraversion and Antisocial behavior (r=-.044). A negative correlation was also found between

extraversion and shyness (r=-.203). These findings indicated that there was discriminant validity

between extraversion, shyness, and antisocial behavior. This means that there is relatively little

correlation between these three constructs.

EXTRAVERSION 16

Construct validity was examined using the coefficient alpha value that was calculated to

determine the internal consistency of the measure. The coefficient alpha value that was obtained

was r s=.92. This score is an indication of not only a high degree of reliability, but also the

possibility that the measure has a high degree of validity as well. More information would be

needed in order to determine whether or not the test is actually valid however.

Implications

Some of the limitations of this study include the small sample size of only 25 people

which makes it impossible to generalize the results to the entire population of black females on

this construct. Further research will need to be done with a larger sample size in order to garner

better results.

Although this test was found to have both excellent reliability, and a high degree of

construct validity, there is no way to really know whether or not the test is actually measuring

what it intends to measure. These values only indicate that some construct is being measured in

a reliable and valid manner, but does not provide information about whether or not it is

measuring the correct construct. Further information would be needed to actually draw

conclusions on this test, hopefully, this is something that can be explored in the future.

EXTRAVERSION 17

References

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job

performance: A meta-analysis. Retrieved April 28, 2016, from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x/abstract

Carlyn, M. (1977). An assessment of the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Journal Of Personality

Assessment, 41(5), 461.

Dentrick, P., & Chibnall, J. T. (2013). Revised NEO personality inventory normative data for

police officer selection (4th ed., Vol. 10). St. Louis, MO: American Psychological

Association. doi:10.1037/a0031800

Harbough, E. R. (2010). The effect of personality styles (Level of Introversion ... Retrieved

April 27, 2016, from

http://www.elon.edu/docs/e

-web/academics/communications/research/vol1no2/06HarbaughEJFall10.pdf

Hogan, T. P. (2015). Psychological testing: A practical introduction (3rd ed.).

Danvers, MA: Wiley & Sons.

Huffman, K. (2011). Psychology in Action (10th ed.). Danvers, MA: John Wiley & Sons.

Kim, H., & Chung, Y. W. (2014). The use of social networking services and their relationship

with the big five personality model and job satisfaction in Korea. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, And Social Networking, 17(10), 658-663. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0109

King, E. B., George, J. M., & Hebl, M. R. (2005). Linking personality to helping behaviors at

EXTRAVERSION 18

work: An interactional perspective. Journal Of Personality, 73(3), 585-608.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00322.x

The Myers & Briggs Foundation - MBTI® Basics. (n.d.). Retrieved April 26, 2016, from

http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/

Otonari, J., Nagano, J., Morita, M., Budhathoki, S., Tashiro, N., Toyomura, K., & ... Takayanagi,

R. (2012). Neuroticism and extraversion personality traits, health behaviours, and

subjective well-being: the Fukuoka Study (Japan). Quality Of Life Research, 21(10),

1847-1855. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0098-y

Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S., & Alonso, P. (2013). Subdimensional structure of the Hogan

personality inventory. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 21(3), 277-285.

doi:10.1111/ijsa.12037

Tiwari, T., Singh, A. L., & Singh, I. L. (2009, January). The short-form revised Eysenck

personality questionnaire: A Hindi edition (EPQRS-H). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3016694/

Zhai, Q., Willis, M., O’Shea, B., Zhai, Y., & Yang, Y. (2013). Big Five personality traits, job

satisfaction and subjective wellbeing in China. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.auctr.edu:2051/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

sid=b8488d0a-841d-4a66-b79d-a8cbaa43867b@sessionmgr4004&vid=1&hid=4114

EXTRAVERSION 19

Appendix A

Charts/tables

Items initially written Was the item used in the final survey?

I find it difficult to introduce myself to other people

Yes

I do not like being the center of attention Yes

I am quick to get involved in social activities at my new job or school

Yes

I do not find it difficult to introduce myself to other people

Yes

I enjoy meeting new people Yes

I enjoy being the center of attention Yes

I do not find it difficult to open up to new people

Yes

A good book or video is more interesting than a social event

Yes

I consider myself to be reserved Yes

I find it easy to relax when talking in front of other people

Yes

I like to take the lead in social situations Yes

I find small talk gets the conversation going Yes

I like to get to know as many people as possible

Yes

Being around large groups of people makes me comfortable

yes

I feel drained after being around large groups of people

Yes

I do not consider myself to be reserved Yes

I find small talk to be uncomfortable Yes

EXTRAVERSION 20

I feel comfortable around large groups of people

Yes

I find it difficult to open up to new people Yes

I am slow to get involved in social activities at my new job or school

yes

Table 1. Illustrates the number of items that were initially written, as well as the final set of items that were selcted

EXTRAVERSION 21

Appendix B

Data layout

EXTRAVERSION 22

SPSS Syntax/Output

Statistics

Item analysis for the 20 extraversion items

GET FILE='E:\psychometrics\test for extroversion data set.sav'.DATASET NAME DataSet1 WINDOW=FRONT.DATASET ACTIVATE DataSet1.SAVE OUTFILE='E:\psychometrics\test for extroversion data set.sav' /COMPRESSED.CORRELATIONS /VARIABLES=extroversion_1 extroversion_2 extroversion_3 extroversion_4 extroversion_5 extroversion_6 extroversion_7 extroversion_8 extroversion_9 extroversion_10 extroversion_11 extroversion_12 extroversion_13 extroversion_14 extroversion_15extroversion_16 extroversion_17 extroversion_18 extroversion_19 extroversion_20 /PRINT=TWOTAIL NOSIG /STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES XPROD /MISSING=PAIRWISE.

Descriptive StatisticsMean Std.

DeviationN

extroversion_1 3.30 1.174 20extroversion_2 2.95 1.050 20extroversion_3 3.00 .918 20extroversion_4 3.35 1.182 20extroversion_5 4.00 .858 20extroversion_6 2.85 1.040 20extroversion_7 2.95 .999 20extroversion_8 3.40 .995 20extroversion_9 2.70 1.218 20extroversion_10

3.00 1.170 20

extroversion_11

2.85 1.089 20

extroversion_12

3.65 .933 20

EXTRAVERSION 23

extroversion_13

3.50 .889 20

extroversion_14

3.50 .889 20

extroversion_15

2.95 1.276 20

extroversion_16

2.70 1.081 20

extroversion_17

3.30 1.174 20

extroversion_18

3.15 1.089 20

extroversion_19

2.90 1.071 20

extroversion_20

2.85 1.268 20

Internal consistency reliability: Split half (first half/second half) with Spearman Brown

[DataSet1] E:\psychometrics\test for extroversion data set.sav

EXTRAVERSION 24

[DataSet1] E:\psychometrics\test for extroversion data set.sav

NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=firsthalftest secondhalftest /PRINT=SPEARMAN TWOTAIL NOSIG /MISSING=PAIRWISE.

EXTRAVERSION 25

Internal consistency reliability: Split half (odd/even) with Spearman Brown

Internal consistency reliability: coefficient alpha

EXTRAVERSION 26

[DataSet1] E:\psychometrics\test for extroversion data set.sav

Item StatisticsMean Std.

DeviationN

extroversion_1 3.30 1.174 20extroversion_2 2.95 1.050 20extroversion_3 3.00 .918 20extroversion_4 3.35 1.182 20extroversion_5 4.00 .858 20extroversion_6 2.85 1.040 20extroversion_7 2.95 .999 20extroversion_8 3.40 .995 20extroversion_9 2.70 1.218 20extroversion_10

3.00 1.170 20

extroversion_11

2.85 1.089 20

extroversion_12

3.65 .933 20

extroversion_13

3.50 .889 20

EXTRAVERSION 27

extroversion_14

3.50 .889 20

extroversion_15

2.95 1.276 20

extroversion_16

2.70 1.081 20

extroversion_17

3.30 1.174 20

extroversion_18

3.15 1.089 20

extroversion_19

2.90 1.071 20

extroversion_20

2.85 1.268 20

EXTRAVERSION 28

EXTRAVERSION 29

Criterion-related validity: convergent/discriminant

[DataSet1] E:\psychometrics\merged data set with peers for validity.sav

Extraversion and shyness

Antisocial behavior and extraversion

[DataSet1] E:\psychometrics\merged data set with peers for validity.sav

EXTRAVERSION 30

EXTRAVERSION 31