International journal of


EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN:2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
line decor

 Volume 5, Issue 7 (July 2018), Pages: 8-14


 Original Research Paper

 Title: The adaptation of the Big Five Inventory in measuring Malaysian youths’ personality traits

 Author(s): Haslina Muhamad 1, *, John Roodenburg 2, Dennis W. Moore 2


 1Department of Anthropology and Sociology, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 2Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

 Full Text - PDF          XML


Personality refers to a person’s typical patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving. Personality can be measured using several instruments such as the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and the Big Five Inventory (BFI), to name a few. The comprehensiveness of the NEO-PI-R in measuring the Big Five personality dimensions is well-documented, however, some researchers argue that it is rather lengthy and may not be practical in many research settings. In situations where time and cost is premium, a briefer measure such as the BFI is preferable. However, in contrast to NEO-PI-R, no study focusing on the validation of the Malay version of the BFI has been reported. This study sought to investigate the reliability and validity of the Malay version of BFI in Malaysia. The English version of the BFI was translated into Malay Language and administered to a calibration sample of 236 Malaysian young adults, with the final model of the BFI cross-validated using a replication sample of 201 Malaysian young adults. The Malay version of the BFI showed good internal consistency. Structural equation modeling analyses indicated that the Malay-translated BFI has good convergent and discriminant validity. The x2 difference tests supported the five factor structure of personality in the Malaysian context. The brief Malay-translated BFI offers satisfactory psychometric properties and thus can be sufficiently used to measure the personality of the Malaysians. 

 © 2018 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (

 Keywords: Big five inventory, Personality, Reliability, Validity, Malaysian young adults

 Article History: Received 8 December 2017, Received in revised form 19 March 2018, Accepted 20 April 2018

 Digital Object Identifier:


 Muhamad H, Roodenburg J, and Moore DW (2018). The adaptation of the Big Five Inventory in measuring Malaysian youths’ personality traits. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 5(7): 8-14

 Permanent Link:


 References (33) 

  1. Benet-Martínez V and John OP (1998). Los cinco grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the big five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3): 729-750.   [Google Scholar]  PMid:9781409 
  2. Berry HL and Shipley M (2009). Longing to belong: personal social capital and psychological distress in an Australian coastal region (Social policy research paper No. 39). Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Australian Government, Australia.   
  3. Brislin RW (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 1(3): 185-216.   [Google Scholar] 
  4. Brislin RW (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In: Triandis HC and Berry JW (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Methodology: 389-444. Allyn and Bacon, Inc, Boston, USA.   [Google Scholar]     
  5. Byrne BM (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge, Abingdon, UK.   [Google Scholar]     
  6. Census (2010). Basic population characteristics by administrative districts. Department of Statistics Malaysia, Malaysia. Available online at:   [Google Scholar]     
  7. Cha ES, Kim KH, and Erlen JA (2007). Translation of scales in cross-cultural research: Issues and techniques. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(4): 386-395.   [Google Scholar]  PMid:17442038 
  8. Costa Jr PT and McCrae RR (1992). Neo personality inventory–revised (neo-pi-r) and neo five-factor inventory (neo-ffi) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, USA.   [Google Scholar]     
  9. Denissen JJA, Geenen R, van Aken MAG, Gosling SD, and Potter J (2008). Development and validation of a dutch translation of the big five inventory (BFI). Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(2): 152-157.   [Google Scholar]  PMid:18444109 
  10. DeVellis RF (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. 3rd Edition, Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, California, USA.   [Google Scholar] PMid:14558062  
  11. Fossati A, Borroni S, Marchione D, and Maffei C (2011). The big five inventory (BFI): Reliability and validity of its Italian translation in three independent nonclinical samples. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(1): 50-58.   [Google Scholar] 
  12. Gignac GE, Bates TC, and Jang KL (2007). Implications relevant to CFA model misfit, reliability, and the five-factor model as measured by the NEO-FFI. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5): 1051-1062.   [Google Scholar] 
  13. Goddard C (2000). "Cultural scripts" and communicative style in Malay ("Bahasa Melayu"). Anthropological Linguistics, 42(1): 81-106.   [Google Scholar]   
  14. Goldberg LR (1990). An alternative description of personality: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6): 1216-1229.   [Google Scholar]  PMid:2283588 
  15. Hahn E, Gottschling J, and Spinath FM (2012). Short measurements of personality–Validity and reliability of the GSOEP Big Five Inventory (BFI-S). Journal of Research in Personality, 46(3): 355-359.   [Google Scholar] 
  16. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, and Anderson RE (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.   [Google Scholar]     
  17. Holmes-Smith P (2011). Advanced structural equation modelling using AMOS (Workshop material provided at the ACSPRI 2011 Spring program). School Research Evaluation and Measurement Services, Melbourne, Australia.   [Google Scholar] PMid:22213636    
  18. Holmes-Smith P and Rowe KJ (1994). The development and use of congeneric measurement models in school effectiveness research: Improving the reliability and validity of composite and latent variables for fitting multilevel and structural equation models. In the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, The World Congress Centre, Melbourne, Australia: 3-6.   [Google Scholar]  
  19. John OP, Donahue EM, and Kentle RL (1991). The big five inventory: Versions 4a and 54, institute of personality and social research. University of California, Berkeley, USA.   [Google Scholar]    
  20. John OP, Naumann LP, and Soto CJ (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 3(2): 114-158.   [Google Scholar]   
  21. Joreskog KG (1971). Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika, 36(2): 109-33.   [Google Scholar] 
  22. Leung DY, Wong EM, Chan SS, and Lam T (2012). Psychometric properties of the Big Five Inventory in a Chinese sample of smokers receiving cessation treatment: A validation study. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 3(6): 1-10.   [Google Scholar] 
  23. Mastor KA, Jin P, and Cooper ML (2000). Malay culture and personality: A big five perspective. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(1): 95-111.   [Google Scholar] 
  24. Matthews G, Deary IJ, and Whiteman MC (2009). Personality traits. In: Corr PJ and Matthews G (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology: 748-763. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, USA. 
  25. McCrae RR (2009). The Five-Factor Model of personality traits: consensus and controversy. In: Corr PJ and Matthews G (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology: 148-161. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar] 
  26. McCrae RR and John OP (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2): 175-215.   [Google Scholar] PMid:1635039     
  27. McCrae RR and Terracciano A (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer's perspective: Data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3): 547-561.   [Google Scholar]  PMid:15740445 
  28. Muhamad H (2006). The applicability of big five inventory to the Malays. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
  29. Nintachan P and Moon MW (2007). Modification and translation of the Thai version of the youth risk behavior survey. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 18(2): 127-134.   [Google Scholar]  PMid:17416714 
  30. Schmitt DP, Allik J, McCrae RR, and Benet-Martinez V (2007). The geographic distribution of big five personality traits: Patterns and profiles of human self-description across 56 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2): 173-212.   [Google Scholar] 
  31. Soto CJ and John OP (2009). Ten facet scales for the Big Five Inventory: Convergence with NEO PI-R facets, self-peer agreement, and discriminant validity. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(1): 84-90.   [Google Scholar] 
  32. Soto CJ and John OP (2017). Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS. Journal of Research in Personality, 68: 69-81.   [Google Scholar] 
  33. Yap SF (2009). The relationships between social cognitive constructs, personality factors and exercise behaviour: An integrated model. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.   [Google Scholar]