Paper detail

Characteristic Characteristics

While five-factor models of personality are widespread, there is still not universal agreement on this as a structural framework. Part of the reason for the lingering debate is its dependence on factor analysis. In particular, derivation or refutation of the model via other statistical means is a worthwhile project. In this paper we use the methodology of spectral clustering to articulate the structure in the dataset of responses of 20,993 subjects on a 300-item item version of the IPIP NEO personality questionnaire, and we compare our results to those obtained from a factor analytic solution. We found support for five- and six-cluster solutions. The five-cluster solution was similar to a conventional five-factor solution, but the six-cluster and six-factor solutions differed significantly, and only the six-cluster solution was readily interpretable: it gave a model similar to the HEXACO model. We suggest that spectral clustering provides a robust alternative view of personality data.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.