Test-retest reliability of the HEXACO-100—And the value of multiple measurements for assessing reliability

19Citations
Citations of this article
61Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Despite the widespread use of the HEXACO model as a descriptive taxonomy of personality traits, there remains limited information on the test-retest reliability of its commonly-used inventories. Studies typically report internal consistency estimates, such as alpha or omega, but there are good reasons to believe that these do not accurately assess reliability. We report 13-day test-retest correlations of the 100- and 60-item English HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised (HEXACO-100 and HEXACO-60) domains, facets, and items. In order to test the validity of test-retest reliability, we then compare these estimates to correlations between self- and informant-reports (i.e., cross-rater agreement), a widely-used validity criterion. Median estimates of test-retest reliability were .88, .81, and .65 (N = 416) for domains, facets, and items, respectively. Facets’ and items’ test-retest reliabilities were highly correlated with their cross-rater agreement estimates, whereas internal consistencies were not. Overall, the HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised demonstrates test-retest reliability similar to other contemporary measures. We recommend that short-term retest reliability should be routinely calculated to assess reliability.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Henry, S., Thielmann, I., Booth, T., & Mõttus, R. (2022). Test-retest reliability of the HEXACO-100—And the value of multiple measurements for assessing reliability. PLoS ONE, 17(1 January). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262465

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free