Advertisement

Applications of the Russian NEO-PI-R

  • Thomas A. Martin
  • Paul T. CostaJr.
  • Valery E. Oryol
  • Alexey A. Rukavishnikov
  • Ivan G. Senin
Part of the International and Cultural Psychology Series book series (ICUP)

Abstract

This chapter reviews the development, revision, and use of the Russian-language version of the NEO-PI-R. Particular attention is given to items and facets that have proved least adaptable to the Russian context. Potential explanations for these difficulties are identified in Russian culture and in the current atmosphere of social, economic and political flux. Data on factor structure, cross-language equivalence, cross-observer validity, and one-year stability are reported.

Keywords

Test development factor structure bilingual studies retest stability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Birman, D. (1997). The adjustment of Russian students at Pikesville High School, Pikesville, MD. Refugee Mental Health Program, Center for Mental Health Services, Substance and Mental Health Services Administration, Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
  2. Brushlinskiy, A.B. (Ed.). (1997). Психологическая наука в России XX века: Проблемы теории и истории [Psychological science in Russia of the twentieth century: Problems of theory and history]. Moscow: Psychological Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  3. Burlachuk, L. F., & Morozov, S. A. (1989). Словарь-справочник no психодиагностике [Reference dictionary in psychodiagnostics]. Kiev: Naukova Dumka.Google Scholar
  4. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  5. Costa, P. T., Jr., McCrae, R. R., Martin, T. A., Oryol, V. E., Senin, I. G., Rukavishnikov, A. A., Shimonaka, Y., Nakazato, K., Gondo, Y., Takayama, M., Allik, J., Kallasmaa, T., & Realo, A. (2000). Personality development from adolescence through adulthood: Further cross-cultural comparisons of age differences. In V. J. Molfese & D. Molfese (Eds.), Temperament and personality development across the lifespan (pp. 235–252). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  6. Digman, J.M. & Shmelyov, A. (1996). The structure of temperament and personality in Russian children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 341–351PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Draguns, J. G., Krilova, A. V., Oryol, V. E., Rukavishnikov, A. A., & Martin, T. A. (2000). Personality characteristics of the Nentsy in the Russian arctic: A comparison with ethnic Russians by means of NEO-PI-R and POI. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 126–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gindis, B. (1992). Soviet psychology on the path of perestroika. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 23, 114–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Konstabel, K. (1999). A bilingual retest study of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: A comparison of Estonian and Russian versions. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Tartu, Estonia.Google Scholar
  11. Kozulin, A. (1994). Psychology in utopia: Toward a social history of Soviet psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lynn, R., & Martin, T. (1995). National differences for thirty-seven nations in Extraversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism, and economic, demographic, and other correlates. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 403–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Martin, T. A., Draguns, J. G., Oryol, V. E., Senin, I. G., Rukavishnikov, A. A., & Klotz, M. L. (1997, August). Development of a Russian-language NEO-PI-R. Poster session presented at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  14. McCrae, R. R. (1993). Agreement of personality profiles across observers. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McCrae, R. R. (2000). Trait psychology and the revival of personality and culture studies. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 10–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Melnikov V., & Yampolskiy, L. (1985). Введение в экспериментальную психологию личности [Introduction to experimental psychology of personality]. Moscow: Prosveschenie.Google Scholar
  17. Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Paunonen, S. V., Keinonen, M., Trzebinski, J., Forsterling, F., Grishenko-Roze, N., Kouznetsova, L., Chan, D. W. (1996). The structure of personality in six cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 339–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Petrovskiy, A. V. (1967). История советской психологии [History of Soviet psychology]. Moscow: Prosveschenie.Google Scholar
  20. Simakhodskaya, Z. (2000, August). Russian revised NEO-PI-R: Concordant validity and relationship to acculturation. Poster session presented at the 108th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas A. Martin
    • 1
  • Paul T. CostaJr.
    • 2
  • Valery E. Oryol
    • 3
  • Alexey A. Rukavishnikov
    • 3
  • Ivan G. Senin
    • 3
  1. 1.Susquehanna UniversityUSA
  2. 2.National Institute on AgingNIHUSA
  3. 3.Yaroslavl State UniversityRussia

Personalised recommendations