IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0317144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

State-trace analysis meets personality measurement: Why the Big Five tests are not based on five latent dimensions and how to fix them

Author

Listed:
  • Johannes Titz

Abstract

Unidimensionality is a fundamental yet often overlooked prerequisite for measurement. In the context of psychological measurement, the central question is whether a set of items can be logically reduced to a single latent factor. This study advocates for the application of state-trace analysis, an underutilized method from mathematical psychology, as a decisive tool to address this question. State-trace analysis provides a simple, general, and rigorous criterion for unidimensionality: monotonicity between item pairs. Identifying items within a factor that violate this criterion is straightforward, offering a practical approach to evaluating unidimensionality. This paper demonstrates the utility of state-trace analysis through exemplary applications within the framework of the five-factor model, analyzing data from the International Personality Item Pool-NEO-120 (N = 618, 000) and the NEO Personality Inventory–Revised (N1 = 857, N2 = 500). The findings reveal that maintaining the five-factor model requires significant revisions to numerous items, highlighting the potential of state-trace analysis to enhance personality measurement beyond existing methodologies. The paper concludes by discussing strategies to promote broader adoption of this method and how future designs in personality research can be tailored to effectively incorporate state-trace analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Johannes Titz, 2025. "State-trace analysis meets personality measurement: Why the Big Five tests are not based on five latent dimensions and how to fix them," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-35, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0317144
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0317144
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0317144&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0317144?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suzanne Slocum-Gori & Bruno Zumbo, 2011. "Assessing the Unidimensionality of Psychological Scales: Using Multiple Criteria from Factor Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 443-461, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Satish Kumar & Filomena Maggino & Raj V. Mahto & Riya Sureka & Leonardo Salvatore Alaimo & Weng Marc Lim, 2022. "Social Indicators Research: A Retrospective Using Bibliometric Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 413-448, July.
    2. Michael Joseph D’Italia & Adam Okulicz-Kozaryn, 2025. "Constructing General Human Agency Indicators (GHAIs) and a General Personal Agency Scale (GPAS)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 337-411, January.
    3. Farinaz Havaei & V. Susan Dahinten, 2017. "How Well Does the CWEQ II Measure Structural Empowerment? Findings from Applying Item Response Theory," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-20, May.
    4. César Merino-Soto & Arturo Juárez-García & Guillermo Salinas Escudero & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Parametric and Nonparametric Analysis of the Internal Structure of the Psychosocial Work Processes Questionnaire (PROPSIT) as Applied to Workers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-23, June.
    5. Moustapha Touré & Christian R. C. Kouakou & Thomas G. Poder, 2021. "Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-22, April.
    6. Nathan D. Roberson, 2022. "Multicultural Integration Policy as an Explanatory Factor of Immigrant Social Belonging: Multilevel Evidence for a Multilevel Construct," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 267-284, March.
    7. Pillai N., Vijayamohanan & A., Rjumohan, 2020. "Reliability, Validity and Uni-Dimensionality: A Primer," MPRA Paper 101714, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Michael W. Brunt & Henrik Kreiberg & Marina A. G. von Keyserlingk, 2022. "Invertebrate research without ethical or regulatory oversight reduces public confidence and trust," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    9. Cristian Molla Esparza & Pablo Nájera & Emelina López-González & Josep-Maria Losilla, 2020. "Development and Validation of the Adolescent Sexting Scale (A-SextS) with a Spanish Sample," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-22, October.
    10. Katherine N Cotter & Rebekah M Rodriguez-Boerwinkle & Alexander P Christensen & Anna Fekete & Jeffrey K Smith & Lisa F Smith & Pablo P L Tinio & Paul J Silvia, 2023. "Updating the Aesthetic Fluency Scale: Revised long and short forms for research in the psychology of the arts," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(2), pages 1-21, February.
    11. Ishor Sharma & M Karen Campbell & Marnin J Heisel & Yun-Hee Choi & Isaac N Luginaah & Jason Mulimba Were & Juan Camilo Vargas Gonzalez & Saverio Stranges, 2023. "Construction and validation of the area level deprivation index for health research: A methodological study based on Nepal Demographic and Health Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(11), pages 1-10, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0317144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.