Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !

JACKSON PERSONALITY INVENTORY-REVISED

Research on the Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised (JPI-R)

Alex Singleton

The George Washington University

December 13, 2007

PSYC 131-10

Dr. Carla Messenger

 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !2

Abstract

The Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised (JPI-R) is a test designed to assess

personality constituencies relating to leadership. The instrument discriminates ideal leadership

candidates and promising employees from the application pool. The instrument is effective if

employed in conjunction with additional forms of performance evaluation.

 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !3

The Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised (JPI-R) is a test designed to assess

personality constituencies relating to leadership. Developed by world-renowned psychologist,

Dr. Douglas N. Jackson, and published by Sigma Assessment Systems, the JPI-R is widely

regarded and endorsed by sectors and industries the world over, including the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration, the United States Special Operations Command and the

Intel Corporation (Hoekstra, 3). Effectively, the instrument discriminates ideal leadership

candidates and promising employees from the application pool. As one of the most

“psychometrically sound measures of personality assessment available”, the JPI-R provides

administrators with measures concerning “ a variety of interpersonal, cognitive and value

orientations” responsible for individual functioning (Jackson, 2007). Recently revised, the

inventory derived elements from the “Big Five Factor Models of Personality”, appraising

candidates by the following constructs: Analytical, Extroverted, Emotional, Opportunistic and

Dependable (Jackson 2007). Ultimately, candidates answer questions representing the variables

aforementioned, then scored on respecting continuums, which collectively reveal the individual’s

ability to operate in settings involving “work, educational, or interpersonal situations” (Smither,

2005). Upon acknowledging corporate recruitment strategies, understanding the fundamental

mechanics and underlying purpose of the JPI-R, observing the psychometric properties of the

assessment, and evaluating its utility and application within the context of attending criticisms, it

is sufficient to pronounce the JPI-R as an effective assessment tool, if employed in conjunction

with supplementary performance metrics when considering prospective candidates qualifying for

a position of opportunity.
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !4

The American Corporation is becoming less of an enterprise, evolving into a more

progressive institution. The Human Resource Department (HR) of many corporations is

designing more dynamic recruiting methods to augment and enrich the applicant pool.

Accordingly, the folks in HR are charged to cultivate the qualified and cull the ill-qualified. The

arriving rank and file of a given company, such as Proctor and Gamble or Microsoft, are no

longer subject to the mere conventional interview. Investment banking firms, such as Goldman

Sachs and Morgan Stanley, request a resume complete with Scholastic Aptitude Scores (SAT)s

scores and undergraduate grade point average, in addition to conducting a routine interview, and

hosting battery of “brain teasers”, for example, “calculate the number of degrees between the

hour hand and the minute hand of a clock (non-digital) that reads 3:15”(Kane, 1995) (Weber,

2004). Although the practices referenced are atypical and narrowly endorsed, many corporations

are adopting other supplementary measures of job performance in the workplace, namely

assessments of personality. Recent studies suggest that a healthy personality and satisfaction

“might actually improve performance” (Bagozzi, 1978, 518). Concordantly, the personality of

an applicant may be worthy of consideration, regardless of the position. The Jackson Personality

Inventory-Revised provides HR administrators with a unique insight into the personality of a

prospective job candidate. Once JPI-R scores are obtained, the measure is quite constructive as a

supplement to other data defining the candidate, such as past performance and academic

achievement. Upon understanding the history in development of the JPI-R, and examination of

its mechanics, the test appears to be relevant and practical in the modern work force.

Over the years, human personality assessment has garnered attention, as the recent

development of the “Big Five” concept has “done much to renew enthusiasm and confidence in
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !5

personality measurement and research” (Pittenger, 2004, 2). Coined by personality psychologist

Lewis Goldberg, the “Big Five”, or “Five-Factor Model of Personality”, is “one of the most

widely researched topics in personality psychology” (Ashton et al, 1998, 244). Advanced by the

“Lexical Hypothesis”, the words invented for a given language describe, “individual differences

in personality are reflections of real human behaviors, and the number of words we have

invented is in direct proportion to the importance of the behavior described” (Paunonen &

Jackson, 2000, 822). The model maintains that “lower level personality traits”, or all personality

traits, can be combined into “five, orthogonal, all-inclusive, universal factors…[which] have

generally been labeled as Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism and

Openness to Experience”. (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 42). It is appropriate to briefly define the

aforementioned traits: “Extraversion” indicates the propensity to socialize; “Agreeableness”

represents flexibility and ability to compromise; “Conscientiousness” refers to personal

responsibility; “Neuroticism”, or tendencies to experience distress in demanding situations;

“Openness to Experience”, or reception of new ideas, (Messenger, 2007). Essentially, the

abovementioned constructs are best recognized as individual continuums; for example, on a 10-

point scale, 0 representing extreme introversion, and 10 representing extreme extroversion, an

individual may report traits qualified as 5.5, or somewhat extroverted, but not entirely. As an

avid proponent of psychological testing, Dr. Douglas N. Jackson, was a champion of “rational

construction strategy”- a psychometric tenet maintaining, “that using human judgment to select

items is compatible with psychometric validity” (Pittenger 2004, 2). Jackson recognized the

intrinsic value of personality testing in the institutional setting and advocated the administration

of such tests to recruiting organizations.

 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !6

Establishing Sigma Assessment Systems (SAS), Dr. Douglas N. Jackson, regarded as the

authority in psychological human assessment, sought to design and market test administration to

organizations associated with personnel selection, team-building exercises, managerial

counseling and psychological research, such as NASA, USSOCOM, AT&T, the Intel

Corporation, Daimler Chrysler, (Hoekstra, 3,7). According to SAS, personality can “determine

important characteristics like dependability, self-discipline, leadership, and the ability to make

good impressions on others”; concordantly, the Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised “provides

a measure…that reflects social, cognitive, and value orientations which affect an individual’s

functioning”- essential psychological skill-sets for the workplace (Hoekstra, 5). Jackson

developed the first “Jackson Personality Inventory” in 1976 (Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). Since

inception, the test has undergone one revision, and is the second edition available, known as the

Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised (Pittenger, 2004, 1). The JPI-R is widely regarded and

distributed, demonstrating “excellent psychometric properties” and favorably reviewed by the

Mental Measurements Yearbook (Ashton et al, 1998, 244) (Hoekstra, 5). The test is intended to

“measure normal personality functioning for use in schools, colleges, and universities…[while]

its clinical application is geared toward traditional counseling psychology settings, particularly

career counseling and personnel selection in industry” (Pittenger, 2004, 3). The JPI-R is

conveniently organized, “constructed in a manner …involving a sequential program of item

selection and test validation” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 43). Achieved by careful analysis,

SAS boasts the elaborate construction of the test, aiming to “maximize item content saturation in

relation to desirability variance; maximize scale reliabilities; minimize inter-scale

redundancies” (Hoekstra, 8).

 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !7

An objective, growth-oriented assessment, the battery consists of 300 true-false

statements, requiring approximately 45 minutes to administer (Smither, 2005). The test is

offered in English and French languages, and appropriate for ages 16 and older (Hoekstra, 6).

The reading grade level of the test is about grade 7.7- more difficult in comparison to other

personality assessments, such as the Basic Personality Inventory (BPI) and the Personality

Research Form-E (PRF-E) (Reddon & Jackson, 1989, 182). A division of SAS,

sigmatesting.com, provides a sample of questions similar to statements found on the JPI-R

featured on a “Personal Style Questionnaire Test Drive”, which require a true or false answer to

the following statements: “I am usually quite confident when learning a new game or sport; I

avoid spending my time just setting around and resting; I would avoid borrowing money for a

risky business deal” (2007-2). Each statement represents 15 scales that are:

“intended to provide a set of measures of personality reflecting a variety of interpersonal,

cognitive and value orientations that are likely to have implications for a person’s
functioning in a wide range of settings, such as those involving work, educational or
interpersonal situations” (Smither, 2005).

Modeled after the Goldberg’s “Big Five”, Jackson’s Personality Inventory-Revised represents 15

separate personality traits, identifying:

“…five major categories and their constituent components…: (a) Analytical, which
includes Complexity, Breadth of Interest, Innovation and Tolerance; (b) Emotional, which
includes Empathy, Anxiety, and Cooperativeness; (c) Extroverted, which includes
Socialability, Social Confidence, and energy level; (d) Opportunistic, which includes
Social Astuteness and Risk Taking; and (e) Dependable, which includes Organization,
Traditional Values, and Responsibility.” (Pittenger, 2004, 2)

The subdivision of 15 scales is designed to define the functions of 5 trait categories. The

inventory is cross-culturally replicable of the 5 factors (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 42). Each of

the 15 variables is attached to a “series of 20 statements that a person may use to describe him or
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !8

herself…and directed to decide whether they feel true or false about them”(Harrison et al, 2005,

1390). Respectively, the “Risk Taking” scale of the “Opportunistic” component is intended to

reveal an individual’s particular aversion to risk, ultimately leading to success or failure

(Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). Appropriately, aversion to financial risk is “the main focus of the

JPI-R, although components of ethical, physical and social risk are also measured” (Harrison et

al, 2005, 1390). The JPI-R scales are derived from “origins in the classical research literature in

personality and social psychology….as the Risk Taking scale was based on extensive,

multifaceted, theoretical and empirical research on risk taking on a personality

dimension” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 43). Specialists of personality and social psychology

also influenced the JPI-R “Self Esteem” scale, as it is “inspired by the voluminous literature on

self-esteem and self concept…particularly influenced by the theoretical work of George Kelly

and Kurt Lewin” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 43). Acknowledging the recent revisions of the

JPI-R will reveal the components of interest to organizations.

Already noted, the first JPI was created in 1976 and recently revised in a second edition,

the JPI-R. The new version features a number of revisions and updates to the previous version.

Questionnaire adjustments include the “elimination of the infrequency scale…and renaming of

the 15 content scales” (Ashton et al, 1998, 244). The “Infrequency Scale” is a “validity scale

that detects less or random responding and generally has quite restricted variance in its

scores” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 44). Additionally, SAS removed the “ coverage of extended

distributional characteristics” (Hoekstra, 9). The JPI-R includes a “reorganized scale”,

organizing 5 “conceptually integrated clusters”, providing more clarification of what the

variables represent (Pittenger, 2004, 4). Another important revision includes the removal of a
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !9

20-item “infrequency scale”, a metric detecting malingerers (Hoekstra, 9). The elimination of 20

items ultimately reduced the original test of 320 statements to 300, to “facilitate use for

employment screening” (Pittenger, 2004, 4) (Hoekstra, 9). The additional coverage of “extended

distributional characteristics”, which includes the “new norms…for blue-collar workers and

white collar executives”, enables benchmarking (Pittenger, 2004, 4). Ostensibly, the revisions

afford a much more comprehensive analysis of the assessment. Further analysis of the

psychometric properties of the JPI-R will demonstrate the precision and accuracy of the

instrument.

The JPI-R is considered to be a “psychometrically sound” assessment (Jackson, 2007).

Psychometric properties include “substantial levels of reliability, freedom from desirability and

acquiescence bias, and convergent and contrasted groups validity” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996,

43). Moreover, studies prove JPI-R scales as valid predictors of “migraine suffering, wrestling

ability, intention to immigrate...” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 43). Further examination of the

standard psychometric properties, reliability, validity, norms, readability, and scoring techniques,

render the JPI-R as a practical and accurate assessment instrument.

SAS reports reliability factors in two studies exhibiting median internal consistency

reliabilities of 0.90 and 0.93 (Bentler’s Theta) (Hoekstra, 12). Concerning the 5 JPI-R variables,

clearly the factors “emerged consistently across several data [and] are both manifestly

interpretable and highly replicable” (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 57). Measured in Cronbach’s

Alpha, a scale of a low “0” and an high of “1”, “internal consistency” is the number of similar

items found in a given test, accounting for a given question asked in a number of varying forms

(2004). Median-scale reliabilities include ranges from 0.78 to 0.82 (Smither, 2005). Coefficient
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !10

reliabilities of 0.84-0.95 have been reported for the overall scale, while other reports observe

values of 0.81-0.84 on the “Risk Taking” subscale (Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). Critics maintain

that although internal consistency measures such as Bentler’s Theta and Cronbach’s coefficient

alphas are reported, the measures “do not speak to the broader and extremely important issue of

test-retest reliability” (Pittenger, 2004, 2). Critics of the JPI-R are disappointed with the

conversion of alpha coefficients into standard errors of measurement, as it becomes “misleading

because it does not represent random variation due to the passage of time” (Pittenger, 2004, 2).

Several JPI-R studies evidence stable test validity for a number of positions and settings

(Jackson, 2007). Validity measures include analysis of “two multi-trait- multi-method matrices

employing adjective checklist, self- rating, and peer ratings”, correlating the 15 sub-scales, or 5

cluster scales, to criterion including “occupational preferences to relationships with dimensions

of executive performance”(Jackson, 2007). Critics argue that construct validity is “noticeably

absent”, failing to provide a rationale for the 15 chosen personality traits (Pittenger, 2004, 2).

However, SAS asserts the correlations of JPI-R and other personality measures provide

“convergent and discriminant validity (Jackson, 2007).

Norms are formulated by the responses of 1,107 participants, including 367 males and

740 males, representing a number of “educational institutions in North America” (Jackson,

2007). Another set of norms is derived from a total of 893 blue-collar workers, consisting of 629

males and 264 males (Jackson, 2007). A third set of norms is based on the scores of 555 senior

executives (Jackson, 2007). Although the revised edition of the JPI-R is far superior with respect

to norms, as it includes additional norms of blue-collar workers and executive populations, some
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised 11
!

critics would prefer the collection of norms for high school students (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996,

43).

On the surface, administrators consider the JPI-R easy to score (Pittenger, 2004, 2). The

300 statements offer a “carbonless scoring template” facilitating rapid scoring and quicker

turnarounds of reports (Pittenger, 2004, 2). Scoring of the JPI-R inventory entails collating

responses according to the 15 personality traits and 5 cluster traits, and each trait or variable, is

“scored, tabulated and converted to a standard T-Score”, as “the higher the T-score for each

personality variable, the greater the probability that the participant will show that particular

behavior” (Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). SAS offers instructions for hand-scoring and mail-in

scoring reports, featuring a “profile of the 15 JPI-R scale scores, descriptions of high and low

scorers for each side, a profile of the 5 JPI-R cluster scores, administrative indices and a table of

raw responses” (Jackson, 2007). The JPI-R requires a “Level B” qualifications. According to

Pearson Assessments, a test designer in compliance with standards established by the American

Psychological Association (APA) and the National Council on Measurement in Education

(NMEA), a “Level B” qualification demands a “Level 2” clearance, requiring a “User has

completed a bachelor’s degree program that included (a) coursework in the principles of

measurement and in the administration and interpretations of tests and (b) formal training in the

content area of the test (e.g. achievement, speech and language etc…” (2007).

Evidently, the JPI-R is well measured and equipped with the firm psychometric standards

of reliability, validity, normed populations, readability, accommodating an elegant and efficient

scoring process, which deliver an accurate assessment instrument. Recognizing the JPI-R
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !12

applications in the field and attending criticisms might suggest improvements to an already

“psychometrically sound” personality assessment.

The JPI-R manual clearly states that the assessment was designed for career and

vocational counseling where one “wishes to match a person’s personality with a specific job”,

not for “the assessment of persons with severe mental health disorders” (Pittenger, 2004, 2).

Essentially, the instrument is designed to reveal qualified candidates exhibiting the most

magnetic or constructive personality traits. Though the test is intended to “measure normal

personality functioning for use in schools, colleges, and universities, its clinical application is

geared toward… career counseling and personnel selection in industry”, (Pittenger, 2004, 3).

The JPI-R primarily functions as a supplementary metric to an individual’s accomplishments,

providing a unique insight to the candidate’s decision style in “what-if?” situations. For

example, a candidate pool comprised of Special Forces operators serving in the United States

military, applied for admission into an elite unit, presumably 1st Special Forces Operational

Detachment-Delta, which requires the completion of a personality assessment (Smither, 2005).

In addition to records indicating academic accomplishments, physical health and combat

abilities, the administration of the JPI-R provided additional data to consider in recommending

promising candidates to the selection board (Smither, 2005). The provided scenario of the elite

unit selection in the United States Military, demonstrates the appropriate use of the JPI-R as a

supplementary metric for consideration; it should never be utilized as the principal measure.

Similarly, other government institutions and multi-national corporations use the JPI-R in the

same fashion. Nevertheless, test critics will inevitably emerge.

 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !13

Evaluation of JPI-R relies on opinions voiced by test administrators, and application of

the instrument and its results in the field. One frequently voiced complaint from

psychometricians is the “failure to report test-retest reliabilities”, which renders Jackson’s

observation of “means and standard deviations have remained stable for 20 years” as an

inadequate substitute (Pittenger, 2004, 4). Other critics opine that the information regarding

validity would be more relevant if it could “discriminate between groups and make predictions

about specific behaviors” (Pittenger, 2004, 4). Moreover, administrators would like access or

reference to psychometric properties of the conceptually integrated 5-cluster catalogue

(Pittenger, 2004, 4). If acknowledged and considered by SAS, the JPI-R would prove to be a

much more valuable asset in personality assessment. Presumably, if SAS created a more

comprehensive report structure, offering improved accuracy in test-re-retest reliability and a

validity scale that could effectively discern between group of people and corresponding behavior,

the test would prove to be even more “psychometrically sound”.

In conclusion, the Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised, developed by Sigma

Assessment Systems, appears to be well-constructed. After acknowledging the status quo of

corporate recruitment, understanding the fundamental mechanics and underlying purpose of the

JPI-R, observing the psychometric properties of the assessment, and evaluating its utility and

application within the context of attending criticisms, it is sufficient to pronounce the JPI-R as an

effective assessment tool, if employed in conjunction with supplementary performance metrics

when considering prospective candidates qualifying for a position of opportunity. Historically,

society is somewhat slow to respond and implement measures testing performance. As

submission of SAT scores is now a requisite for application to undergraduate institution, it was
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !14

not always the case. Before the establishment of the College Entrance Examination board in

1899, scholastic aptitude testing was not considered for admission (Gregory, 2007).

Concordantly, is it fair to posit that psychological tests administered in the institutional settings

of commerce and government, like the JPI-R, will gradually become commonplace, following

the SAT in the institutes of higher-education.

Works Cited

(2004, July 25). Essentials of a Good Psychological Test. Retrieved November 19, 2007, from
Wilderdom. Web site: http://www.wilderdom.com/personality/
L3-2EssentialsGoodPsychologicalTest.html

(2007). Effective January 1, 2007 - Qualification Levels and Requirements. Retrieved November
19, 2007, from Pearson Assessments Web site: http://www.pearsonassessments.com/
catalog/qualification.htm

(2007)-2. Personal Style Questionnaire Test Drive for Alex Singleton. Retrieved November 19,
2007, from sigmatesting.com. Web site: http://sigmatesting.com/isapi/sttestdrives.dll

Ashton, M.C., Jackson, D.N., Helmes, E., & Paunonen, S.V. (1998). Joint Factor Analysis of the
Personality Research Form and the Jackson Personality Inventory: Comparisons with the
Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, Pages: 243-250.
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !15

Bagozzi, R.P. (1978). Sales Performance and Satisfaction as a Function of Individual Difference,
Interpersonal, and Situational Factors. Journal of Marketing Research. 15, Pages:
517-531.

Gregory, R. J. Psychological Testing. Fifth. Boston: Pearson Education, 2007, Page: 252.

Harrison, J.W., Young, J.M., Butow, P., Salkeld, G., & Solomon, M.J. (2005). Is it worth the
risk? A systematic review of instruments that measure risk propensity for use in the heath
setting. Social Science & Medicine. 60, Pages: 1385-1396.

Hoekstra, S. (2004). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised. Presented by Sigma Assessment

Systems Inc. Retrieved November 19, 2007 from Web site: http://
www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/assessments/jpir.asp, Slides: 3-12.

Jackson, D. N. (2007). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised. Retrieved November 19, 2007,

from Sigma Assessment Systems Web site: http://www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/
assessments/jpir.asp

Kane, K. (1995, October). The Riddle of Job Interviews. Fast Company, 1, Retrieved November
19, 2007, from http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/01/jobint.html

Messenger, C. (2007, Fall). Origins of Personality Assessment. PSYC 131: The George
Washington University. November 15, 2007.

Paunonen, S.V., & Jackson, D.N. (1996). The Jackson Personality Inventory and the Five-Factor
Model of Personality. Journal of Research in Personality. 30, Pages: 42-59.

Paunonen, S.V., & Jackson, D.N. (2000). What Is Beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of
Personality. 68, Pages: 821-835.

Pittenger, D. J. (2004). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised. Mental Measurements

Yearbook. 13. Retrieved November 19,2007, from EBSCOhost Research Database,
Pages: 1-11.

Reddon, R., & Jackson, D.N. (1989). Readability of Three Adult Personality Tests: Basic
Personality Inventory, Jackson Personality Inventory, and Personality Research Form-E.
Journal of Personality Assessment. 53, Pages: 180-183.

Smither, J.W. (2005 April). The Relationship Between Leaders' Personality and Their Reactions
to and Use of Multisource Feedback: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY. Group &
Organization Management, 30, Retrieved November 19, 2007, from http://
proxygw.wrlc.org/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/pqdweb?
did=810059371&sid=1&Fmt=4&clientld=31812&RQT=309&VName=PQD
 Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised !16

Weber, R.L. (2004, May, 18). Want A Job? Hand Over Your SAT Results. The Christian Science
Monitor, Retrieved November 19, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0518/
p13s01-legn.html