The

NEO PI-R one of the most prestigious instruments for evaluation of the
normal personality. The structure of the five greats factors of the
The personality captured in the NEO has become one of the most
sustained and used.

It consists of
240 elements to those who are answered on a five-point Likert scale
options and allows for the evaluation of five main factors: Neuroticism,
Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Each factor is broken down into
six facets, which allows for a more refined analysis of personality, obtaining 35
different scores.

Includescurrent, varied and representative, with more than 12,000

cases, divided into three groups: general population, security forces, and adults
young people.
Correction y obtaining of report interpretative online by means of
[Link].

Available online application on [Link].

There is areduced version , called NEO-FFIthat collects the 60 best
elements and allows evaluating the five factors in 15 minutes but without the breakdown in
facets.
The NEO-FFI is presented in format of self-correcting sample.

Application: Individual and collective.

Time: Approximately 40 minutes for the NEO PI-R and 15 minutes for the NEO-FFI.

Adults in the NEO-PI-R. Starting from 16 years in the NEO-FFI.

Available rates:

o Spain
o Colombia
o Costa Rica
o Guatemala

Costa and McCrae's Personality Questionnaire (NEO-PI-R). Costa and McCrae, following the
lexical approach, they develop a first instrument to evaluate these five factors in
general population known as NEO-PI (Costa and McCrae; 1985).

This first instrument only evaluated facets for three of the dimensions: Neuroticism,
Extraversion and Openness to Experience, not evaluating any facet, although evaluating the factors.
principles of Responsibility and Kindness. It was a self-administered questionnaire.
of 181 items distributed among the five dimensions to be evaluated. There are studies on samples
Spanish women who reproduced the factorial structure of the studied facets, showing a
good behavior of the instrument (Silva, Avia, Sanz, Martínez-Arias, Graña and Sánchez
Bernados, 1994.
It is not until the revised version, the NEO-PI-R (Costa and McCrae, 1992), that they add the facets.
of Kindness and Responsibility, thus improving the measure of the taxonomy of the
five grandes. The NEO-PI-R was designed (Costa and McCrae, 1992) specifically to assess
broadly the model of the Big Five, including the facets of each and every one, of
the five factors or dimensions, totaling 30 facets, 6 for each of the dimensions.

Table 1.11 presents the five measured factors along with their respective facets. Table 1.11.
Facets of the NEO-PI-R for each dimension.

NEUROTICISM (N)

EXTROVERSION (E)

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE (O)

KINDNESS (A)

RESPONSIBILITY (C)

Ansiedad Cordialidad Fantasía Confianza Competencia Agresión Hostilidad Gregarismo Estética

Franqueza Orden Depresión Asertividad Sentimientos Altruismo Sentido del deber Ansiedad
Social
Emotions
Sensitivity to the
Let’s briefly comment on what each of the facets refers to (Table 1.11).
measures by the NEO-PI-R to better understand the concepts evaluated by this questionnaire
within each of the dimensions:

Neuroticism:

N1 (Anxiety): It encompasses tension, nervousness, a tendency to worry and

to experience fear.

N2 (Aggression-Hostility): Tendency to experience anger, irritation.

N3 (Depression): Feelings of guilt, sadness, loneliness.

N4 (Social anxiety): Feelings of shame, sensitivity to ridicule.

N5 (Impulsivity): Difficulty in controlling impulses and needs.

N6 (Stress Vulnerability): Difficulty controlling stress and tendency to

dependency in interpreted emergency situations.

Openness to Experience:

O1 (Fantasy): Scores low for people who prefer to deal with what they have at hand.

O2 (Aesthetics): Appreciation of art and beauty.

O3 (Feelings): Involves receptivity to one's own feelings and emotions, which

they value as important in life

O4 (Actions): Interest in different activities, going to new places, eating things

unusual. • O5 (Ideas): Open-mindedness to new things and unconventional ideas,
enjoy philosophical arguments.

O6 (Values): Tendency to reexamine social, religious, political values.

Cordially

A1 (Trust): Tendency to attribute good intentions to others.

A2 (Frankness): It refers to frank, sincere, and naive individuals.

A3 (Altruism): Active concern for others, generosity, consideration towards others

others. • A4 (Conciliatory attitude): It refers to the reactions to conflicts, scoring high.
the cooperative ones, not resentful, who forgive offenses.

A5 (Modesty): It is an aspect of self-concept, those who score high prefer to pass

unnoticed.

A6 (Sensitivity to others): Sympathy and concern for others.

Responsibility:
C1 (Competence): It is the feeling of believing oneself capable, effective, and decisive in dealing with
the aspects of life.

C2 (Order): Clean, tidy, and well-organized people.

C3 (Sense of duty): Tendency to strictly adhere to one's ethical principles and

fulfill their obligations.

C4 (Need for achievement): High levels of aspiration and a tendency to work hard to
achieve your goal.

C5 (Self-discipline): Ability to start tasks and carry them out despite boredom
or any distraction.

C6 (Deliberation): Tendency to think carefully before acting.

THE FIVE FACTOR MODEL OF PERSONALITY Description of the five factors

The term big five refers to the five major personality factors identified by McCrae and Costa.
(1986) and Costa and McCrae (1992, 1999) have been studying, in various works, mainly
during the last decades.

Neuroticism (N). In this factor, already studied in Eysenck's PEN model, there are contrasts.
the adjustment and emotional stability to emotional misalignment or neuroticism. The tendency
general to experience negative feelings (such as fear, melancholy, shame, anger,
guilt and disgust) is at the core of the neuroticism factor. High scores
in this factor they indicate that subjects who score this way are more prone to have less ideas
rational individuals are less capable than others of controlling their impulses and facing
stress. Despite this, the neuroticism scale measures a normal dimension of personality,
and cannot be considered a measure of psychopathology.

Extraversion (E). Extraverted people are sociable, with sociability being just one of
the traits of the factor. Extraverted individuals tend to be with people and have
preference for groups and meetings; they are also assertive, active, and talkative. They like the
excitement and stimulation and tend to be cheerful in nature. They are lively, energetic and
optimists.

Openness to experience (O). Open people are interested in both the world
exterior as well as interior, achieving that their lives are enriched with experience. This is
This is because they wish to take into account new ideas and unconventional values. The scores
in opening they have a moderate association with the level of education and measures of
intelligence. Just as 13 also associates the factor of openness with creativity, it does not want to.
in no way say that Openness is equivalent to intelligence.
Kindness (A). It is the most involved factor in interpersonal relationships. Those who are kind...
is fundamentally altruistic, sympathizes with others and is willing to help. In a sense
On the contrary, unkind or unpleasant people are unfriendly and self-centered.
showing suspicion regarding the intentions of others; they are people more than
collaborators, opponents.
Responsibility (C). For some authors, this factor is called achievement motivation, as it
Those who score high in responsibility are willful, tenacious, and determined subjects. Although
high scores in responsibility are associated with academic performance or
professional, it may also happen that a bothersome critical sense arises, to excessive
perfectionism and even workaholism.

In any case, self-control is central to the active process of planning.

organization and execution of tasks. The approaches that are typological, or that are
people-centered, unlike dimensional approaches, aim to
develop a taxonomy not of personality variables but of types of the same.
people-centered approaches are proposed to study the overall structure of the
dimensions or factors of personality within individuals.

Personality and coping

About the scope of personality and its influence on coping styles.

individuals, some more adaptive and others more dysfunctional, have shown particular interest in
Researchers for some time now (e.g., Costa, Somerfield, and McCrae, 1996). As the
personality traits do not change easily (McCrae and Costa, 1986), the strategies of
coping more linked to personality factors would have to resist change to
despite being maladaptive.

In this regard, we can also advance that the dispositional strategies of

coping will be more closely linked to the dimensions or factors of the
personality that situational strategies. According to Costa et al. (1996), there are authors who have
defined the field of study on stress and coping in functional terms,
examining all those reactions and processes that are thought to help solve the
problems and reduce discomfort.

The predominant methodology for studying stress and its coping is based on these
assumptions. One of the conceptual distinctions that has shaped the field of stress and
coping has to do with the difference between coping and adaptation, just as it
It is highlighted in Lazarus and Folkman (1986). There it is stated that there is an emerging consensus.
about the fact that coping and adaptation can be distinguished. For its part, the
adaptation is a broader concept that includes routine, and even automatic, ways,
to keep moving forward, while coping always involves some kind of stress.
In the interaction with the environment, which is actually what adaptation consists of, almost all is covered.
psychology (perception, learning, motivation, and emotion). Stress researchers and
confrontation has been limited, on the other hand, to those adaptation demands that were
particularly problematic, as they require new responses or special efforts that to
they can disturb emotional reactions.

Coping

Coping has been considered a special category of adaptation, elicited in

normal individuals due to circumstances that represent an unusual burden for those individuals.
It is implicitly assumed that coping is a response to environmental stimuli.
an emotional response to an objective problem. For all this, it is accepted that the
coping is considered a "normal" process that occurs in individuals
psychiatrically healthy. These individuals can respond to a potentially
causing stress in various ways. All those ways are functionally similar,
for how long they allow handling stress and are considered mechanisms or strategies of
confrontation. The method used in most studies is the one that relies on a
questionnaire, with the goal of the research being to understand what coping strategies
choose people when faced with different stressors, and which are more effective for
promote health or well-being (Costa et al., 1996). Lazarus and Folkman (1986) defined the
coping as the efforts of an individual, cognitive and behavioral, with which
aims to control the demands that arise during a specific stressful situation.
Recently, in light of controversial and sometimes contradictory results among the
authors, it has been Lazarus himself (2006) who has suggested the advisability of abandoning the
distinction between problem-focused strategies and emotion-focused strategies,
precisely because it does not help in the search for properly adaptive strategies
compared to other dysfunctional ones.

In this attempt, Lazarus (2006) proposed to change the way of researching on strategies of
confrontation, showing their preference for the person-centered approach over
the most commonly used is the variable-centered approach. The
Researchers will gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of
confrontation identifying subgroups of individuals and characterizing their profiles of
confrontation. This is what Faulk, Gloria, and Steinhardt (2013) have recently researched,
differentiating adaptive coping profiles from other non-adaptive ones,
corresponding adaptive profiles to groups of people with better health and the
dysfunctional to the groups with the worst health.

Some studies (Jenaro, Flores, and González, 2007) highlight the existence of
significant associations between the use of coping strategies and a high
personal fulfillment. Among the instruments to measure coping is the Inventory
COPE (Carver, Scheier and Weintraub, 1989), from which four important things need to be done
considerations: (1) its adaptation to Spanish in a sample of university students
(Crespo and Cruzado, 1997); (2) the abbreviated version by Carver (1997) as Brief COPE; (3) the
Translation of the COPE Brief to Spanish (Morán, 2009) and its psychometric validation (Morán,
Landero and González, 2010); (4) the psychometric study by Lyne and Roger (2000), in which the
authors concluded that the factorial structure of the COPE Inventory by Carver et al. (1989)
it revealed, according to the data analyzed by items and by scales, three factors
(rational, emotional, and avoidance coping). This factorial structure was similar to
the other coping scales.

Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa and McCrae, 1992, validated in
Spanish population by Cordero, Pamos and Seisdedos, TEA Ediciones based on a version
modified inventory translated by María Dolores Avia Aranda, 1999, 2002) As in the
previous instrument, since we used it in our study, we will first present the
theoretical formulation by Costa and McCrae (1985), which led to the NEO-PI-R inventory, and then
We will describe the diagnostic assessment instrument. There has been an attempt for a long time.
to reduce the number of personality factors, which only in the eighties could
being promoted as a research stream, the precursor of this stream was McDougall
(1932).
This author suggests that there are five distinct factors that explain the correlate of the
personality, and even goes on to name these five components: Intellect, Character,
Temperament, Disposition, and Temperance. Next, Thurstone in 1934 from a
different perspective, make an attempt to group the elements that could explain the
personality, analyzing 60 qualifying adjectives that were reduced to five factors
independent. Other later researchers like Cattell (1947, 1965) following the line
Thurstone concluded that five higher-order factorial solutions could be defined.
to represent the 16 basic factors investigated, achieving the same results
other authors such as Fiske (1949) and Tupes and Cristal (1961).

Although the most well-known work was that of Norman with the first designation of the 'Five
"Greats" (also known as the "Norman Five"). It started from a selection of terms.
referring to personal characteristics, the non-redundant ones were selected, and after an analysis
Factorial presented five factors under which 30 to 40 adjectives are grouped.

On the other hand, the same results were achieved, but with different sources, for example
Borgatta (1964) also found the 'big five' in the factor analysis of the EPI of
Eysenck, in Jackson's PRF and in Myers and McCauley's MBTY (McCrae and
Costa, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989). Goldberg (1990, 1992) argues that they have identified the
dimensions of fundamental traits that characterize personality and its disorders.

The Five Factor Model by Costa and McCrae is derived from research based on
lexical hypothesis. This hypothesis assumes that individual differences are represented
in natural language through qualifying adjectives. Studies of different natural languages
they demonstrated that the five factors, the so-called big five, are sufficient to provide
variance calculation in long lists of qualifying adjectives (Goldberg 1981). These
factors are: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability
emotional (Neuroticism) and Openness to experience or curiosity (Culture and Intellect).

1. Extraversion: Refers to the willingness for interpersonal interactions,

talkative, friendly, assertive people, high degree of stimulation-seeking, with great
energy.

2. Conformity, agreeableness or kindness: It refers to people of good character,

affectionate, trusting, kind, selfless, willing to help.

3. Responsibility or meticulousness: Refers to people with a high degree of

organized, meticulous, competent, responsible, persistent, and ambitious.

4. Neuroticism: Refers to people with high levels of anxiety, great instability.

emotional, susceptible to psychological discomfort and self-aware.

5. Openness to Experience: Refers to the taste for new or varied experiences.

imaginative, curious, and adventurous people.

Although the five-factor model has received significant acceptance, it is not universal.
There are researchers who do not agree on the number of factors proposed.
(Golberg, 1993, Zuckerman, et al. 1993).

Important criticisms have been received. For example, Mischel (1976) suggests that the factors
identified reflect more stereotypes and the social concepts of judges rather than the
own estimation of traits of the subjects. Subsequent research has shown that the
the model is neither artifactually nor does it present a cognitive schema bias of the judges (McCrae and
Costa, 1989).

Eysenck (1991) or Zuckerman (1991) argue that against this model, the results indicate
the existence of the 'Three Even Greater.' For Eysenck (1991) in his trifactorial model
Explain that the factors of kindness and responsibility would in turn be factors of another factor of
higher order, psychoticism, while the openness factor would be a construct that
belongs to the realm of abilities. Zuckerman (1991) presents data that corroborates that
kindness and responsibility are part of a factor characterized by the search for
sensations-impulsiveness-psychoticism.

Other authors such as Tellegen and his research group (Almagor, Tellegen, and Waller, 1995)
they also propose two more factors (positive and negative valence) and find results
empirical evidence that supports his proposal in two different cultures. Other authors like Pervin
(1994), McAdams (1992) or Westen (1995) criticize the concept of trait.

Despite these criticisms, the model is gaining traction and is notable in applied areas such as
health psychology, clinical psychology, and work psychology. This model has
proven to be very consistent across a variety of factorial solutions, it is used in
various cultures and languages, it is stable among observers and correlates well with different
non-factorial clinical measures.

The NEO-PI-R is a short version of the Five Factor Inventory (NEO), developed for
evaluate the five facets or domains of the so-called Five Factor Personality Model
(Costa and McCrae 1992). Regarding its use, it has been researched in the vocational context.
(Gottfredson, Gottfredson and Hybl, 1993), alcoholism (Martin and Sher, 1994), suicide
(Duberstein, Conwell, and Caine, 1994), post-traumatic stress disorder (Talbert et al., 1993) and
Alzheimer's disease (Strauss, Pasupathi, and Chatterjee, 1993), among others.

As a clinical evaluation tool, the NEO scales have been criticized for their inadequacy.
Ben-Porath and Waller (1992) suggest that the five factors do not provide specific information.
for clinical needs. In response to your criticism, the NEO-PI-R was proposed, in which
For each of the five domains or factors, six facets, subfactors, were provided.
they developed in an effort to provide a specific level of information needed for the
clinical (Costa and McCrae 1995). However, contradictory results were obtained, in
Regarding the validity of the hierarchical organization of the 30 facets with the five domains.
Confirmatory analysis of the 30 facets has not been consistently reproduced in the five.
domains of the NEO-PI-R (Piedmont and Weinstein 1993). Ben-Porath and Waller (1992) criticize the
absence of validity of the scales of the instrument as the main obstacle in the use of the test
in clinical evaluation.
Once the theoretical review that supports the NEO-PI-R has been completed, we can proceed to describe the
characteristics of this personality assessment instrument.

The NEO-PI-R is an inventory that evaluates personality from a dimensional approach.

through 240 items. The person responds to the inventory using a 5-point scale that
It ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The NEO-PI-R provides a profile of
the personality based on the 5 dimensions or basic factors and their respective facets. The
Factors that describe the NEO-PI-R inventory are:
Neuroticism, people who score high are prone to psychological distress. It involves
unrealistic ideas, excessive needs or difficulty tolerating frustration caused by
not meeting one's own needs, and maladaptive coping responses. The
Facets of Neuroticism are: anxiety, hostility, depression, social anxiety, impulsivity and
vulnerability.

Extraversion, people who score high tend to be social, active, talkative,

optimistic, fun-loving, and affectionate. The facets included in Extraversion are:
cordiality, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, search for emotions and positive emotions.
Openness, people who score high on this factor are curious, imaginative, and willing.
to study new ideas and unconventional values, they experience the whole range of emotions
more vividly than closed individuals. The facets included in Openness are: fantasy,
aesthetics, values, feelings, actions, and ideas.

Kindness, those who score high tend to be kind, compassionate, pleasant, trusting,
helpful, attentive, merciful, and altruistic. Excited to help others, they tend to
be sensitive and empathetic and believe that most people want to behave and act
they will behave in the same way. The facets that characterize this factor are: trust,
frankness, altruism, attitude, modesty, and sensitivity towards others.

Responsibility, this factor reflects the level of organization, persistence, control and
motivation in goal-directed behavior. Those who score high tend to be organized,
reliable, hardworking, self-controlled, punctual, meticulous, ambitious, and persevering.
The facets belonging to this factor are: competence, order, sense of duty,
need for achievement, self-discipline, and deliberation.

In addition to the factors and their respective facets, this inventory includes 3 validity scales:
acquiescence, discontent, and random responses.

Direct scores are transformed into standard scores and the inventory provides
a categorization into 5 ranges based on those scores: less than 36 would correspond to
very low; between 36 and 45 would be low; between 46 and 55 medium; between 56 and 65 would be high and a
a score higher than 65 would be interpreted as very high. The NEO-PI-R inventory manual
it gathers the numerous studies that have shown evidence of the good properties
psychometric of this instrument.

Regarding reliability, alpha coefficients range from 0.86 to 0.92; the test-reliability
retest has also been shown to be satisfactory with indices in the facets ranging from 0.69 and
0.92 and between 0.86 and 0.91 in the factors. The NEO-PI-R shows good construct validity,
convergent and discriminant. Next, we will detail only the data about
psychometric properties in the Spanish population of the main factors. Regarding the
reliability yields high internal consistency scores in Neuroticism (0.90),
Extraversion (0.84), Openness (0.82), Agreeableness (0.83) and Conscientiousness (0.88). Regarding the
construct validity the structure of the inventory was very similar to the original.
NEO PI-R Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R)

Form S Paul T. Costa Jr. and Robert R. McCrae, 1992

Spanish version by M.D. Avia, 1994, 2000

Instructions

Please read these instructions carefully before starting. Mark your answers.
on the answer sheet and write only in the place indicated. Do not write anything in
this booklet.

On the attached answer sheet, please mark your name in the designated space. Indicate
your sex by marking the corresponding box under the title "Sex". Write the date
and your identification number, if you have been given one. Mark 'Myself' in the space
where it says 'Person being assessed', since you are describing yourself, and
write your age.

This questionnaire consists of 240 statements. Read them carefully and circle the
response that best corresponds to your agreement or disagreement with it.

Mark 'TD' if the statement is completely false or you totally disagree with it.
Mark 'D' if the statement is fundamentally false or you disagree with it.
Mark 'N' if the statement is approximately the same of true or false, if you cannot
to decide, or if one considers neutral in relation to this statement.

Mark 'A' if the statement is fundamentally true or if you agree with it.
Mark 'TA' if the statement is completely true or if you completely agree with it.
she.

There are no 'correct' or 'incorrect' answers, and you don't need to be an expert to fill this out.
questionnaire. Describe yourself honestly and express your opinions in the most
as soon as possible.

Answer all items. Note that the answers are numbered on the sheet.
answers, and make sure to mark the answers in the corresponding space for the number
suitable. If you make a mistake or change your mind, DO NOT DELETE! Mark an X on the answer.
incorrect and circle the correct answer. When you have answered all 240 items,
answer the three questions A, B, and C on the answer sheet. Pass the sheet and start with the
item 1.

totally disagree
agreement

I am not a person who worries much.

Most of the people I know I find very likable.
I have a very active imagination.
I tend to be cynical and skeptical about the intentions of others.
I am known for my prudence and common sense.
I am often irritated by the way people treat me.
He flees from the crowds.
8. Aesthetic and artistic interests are not very important to me.
I am neither sly nor cunning.
I prefer to keep possibilities open rather than planning everything in advance.
I rarely feel alone or sad.
I am dominant, energetic, and I stand by my opinions.
Without strong emotions, life would lack interest for me.
Some people think I am selfish and egocentric.
I try to carry out all the tasks assigned to me diligently.
16. When dealing with others, I always fear making a fool of myself.
Both at work and in fun, I have a laid-back style.
I have some deeply rooted customs and opinions.
I would prefer to cooperate with others than to compete with them.
I don't get mad about anything, I'm a bit laid-back.
I rarely go overboard on anything.
I often long for exciting experiences.
I often enjoy playing with abstract theories or ideas.
24. I don't mind showing off my talents and achievements.
I am quite good at organizing myself to finish things on time.
26. I often feel helpless and want someone else to solve my problems.
Literally, I have never jumped for joy.
28. I believe that allowing young people to hear opinions from controversial figures
it can only confuse or mislead them.
Political leaders should be more aware of the human side of their programs.
Throughout my life, I have done some pretty stupid things.
I get scared easily.
I don't really like chatting with people.
I try to make all my thoughts realistic and not let them run wild
imagination.
I believe that most people generally have good intentions.
I don't take my civic duties, like voting, very seriously.
I am a peaceful person.
I like having a lot of people around.
Sometimes I become completely engrossed in the music I listen to.
If necessary, I am willing to manipulate people to get what I want.
I keep my things well cared for and clean.
Sometimes it seems to me that I am worth absolutely nothing.
42. Sometimes I am not able to defend my opinions as much as I should.
I rarely experience strong emotions.
I try to be polite to everyone I know.
Sometimes I am not as formal or reliable as I should be.
I rarely feel shy when I'm with people.
47. When I do things, I do them with energy.
I think it is interesting to learn and develop new hobbies.
I can be sarcastic and biting if I need to.
I have clear goals and I strive to achieve them in an orderly manner.
It's hard for me to resist my desires.
I wouldn't like to spend vacation in the gaming centers of Las Vegas.
I find philosophical discussions boring.
I prefer not to talk about myself or my successes.
I waste a lot of time until I start working.
I believe I am capable of facing most of my problems.
57. Sometimes I have experienced intense joy or ecstasy.
I believe that laws and social norms should change to reflect the
needs of a changing world.
I am tough and not very sentimental in my attitudes.
I think very carefully about things before making a decision.
I rarely feel scared or anxious.
I am known as a warm and friendly person.
I have a lot of imagination.
I believe that most people would take advantage of you if you let them.
65. I stay informed and generally make smart decisions.
I am considered temperamental and quick-witted.
In general, I prefer to do things alone.
I find watching ballet or modern dance boring.
69. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't deceive anyone.
70. I am not a very methodical person.
I rarely feel sad or depressed.
I have often been a leader in the groups I have been in.
73. My feelings about things are important to me.
Some people think of me as cold and calculating.
I pay my debts promptly and in full.
Sometimes I have been so embarrassed that I wanted to hide.
77. My work is probably slow but steady.
78. When I find the right way to do something, I cling to it.
It's hard for me to express anger, even if I am right.
80. When I start a program to improve something of mine, it is usual for me to abandon it at
the few days.
It is easy for me to resist temptation.
Sometimes I have done things for mere excitement, looking for thrills.
I enjoy solving problems or puzzles.
I am better than most people, and I know it.
I am a productive person who always finishes their work.
When I am under heavy stress, sometimes I feel like I'm going to crumble.
I am not a cheerful optimist.
I believe we should involve religious authorities in decision-making.
about moral issues.
89. Whatever we do for the poor and the elderly will never be enough.
90. Sometimes I act first and then think.
I often feel tense and restless.
Many people think that I am somewhat cold and distant.
I don't like wasting time daydreaming.
I believe that most of the people I deal with are honest and worthy.
trust.
95. Many times I do not prepare in advance what I have to do.
I am not considered a difficult person or ill-tempered.
If I am alone for a long time, I feel a strong need for people.
The shapes I find in art and nature awaken my curiosity.
99. Being absolutely honest is a bad way to do business.
I like to have everything in its place, so I know exactly where it is.
Sometimes I have felt a deep sense of guilt or evil.
In meetings, I generally prefer that others speak.
I rarely pay much attention to my feelings in the moment.
104. Generally, I try to think of others and be considerate.
105. Sometimes I cheat when I play solitaire.
I am not very embarrassed if people laugh at me and make fun of me.
I often feel like I'm overflowing with energy.
I often try new foods or foods from other countries.
If I don't like someone, I tell them.
I work hard to achieve my goals.
When I eat the foods I like the most, I tend to overeat.
112. I tend to avoid movies that are shocking or scary.
Sometimes I lose interest when people talk about very abstract issues and
theoretical.
I try to be humble.
115. I struggle to force myself to do what I have to do.
In emergency situations, I keep a cool head.
117. Sometimes I overflow with happiness.
In my opinion, the different ideas about what is right and what is wrong that they have
other societies may be valid for them.
119. The beggars do not inspire me sympathy.
120. Before taking action, I always consider its consequences.
I rarely worry about the future.
I really enjoy talking to people.
I like to focus on a fantasy or daydream and explore all its
possibilities, allowing them to grow and develop.
124. When someone is nice to me, I become suspicious.
125. I am proud of my sensibility.
I often feel aversion towards the people I have to deal with.
I prefer jobs that allow me to work alone, without being bothered by others.
128. Poetry has little or no effect on me.
I would hate for someone to think of me as a hypocrite.
130. It seems that I am never able to organize myself.
131. When something goes wrong, I tend to blame myself.
132. Others frequently rely on me to make decisions.
I experience a wide variety of emotions or feelings.
134. I am not known for my generosity.
135. When I commit to something, you can always count on me to carry it out.
term.
I often feel inferior to others.
I am not as fast or as lively as other people.
I prefer to spend time in familiar environments.
139. When I have been offended, what I try to do is forgive and forget.
140. I don't feel driven to achieve success.
I rarely give in to my impulses.
I like to be where the action is.
I like doing puzzles that make you think hard.
I have a very high opinion of myself.
145. When I start a project, I almost always finish it.
I often find it difficult to make up my mind.
I do not consider myself especially cheerful.
148. I believe that fidelity to one's own ideals and principles is more important than
have an open mind.
Human needs should always come before considerations.
economic.
I often do things impulsively.
I often worry about things that could go wrong.
152. It is easy for me to smile and be outgoing with strangers.
153. If I notice that my mind starts to wander and dream, I usually occupy myself with something and
I start to focus on an alternative task or activity.
My first reaction is to trust people.
155. It doesn't seem like they have had complete success in anything.
It's hard for me to lose my temper.
I would prefer to spend the holidays on a beach that is very crowded with people than on a...
isolated cabin in the mountains.
Certain types of music produce an unlimited fascination in me.
Sometimes I manage to use tricks to make people do what I want.
I tend to be somewhat picky or demanding.
I have a low opinion of myself.
I would rather go my own way than be the leader of others.
I rarely notice the humor or the feelings that environments produce.
different.
Most of the people I know like me.
165. I strictly adhere to my ethical principles.
166. I feel comfortable in the presence of my bosses or other figures of authority.
It usually seems like he/she is in a hurry.
Sometimes I make changes in the house just to try something different.
169. If someone starts to fight with me, I am also willing to fight.
I do everything I can to achieve the most.
Sometimes I eat so much that I get sick.
I love the thrill of roller coasters.
173. I have little interest in thinking about the nature of the universe or of the
human condition.
174. I think I am no better than others, regardless of what their
condition.
175. When a project becomes too difficult, I tend to start another one.
new.
I can manage quite well in a crisis.
spirited
I consider myself open-minded and tolerant of the lifestyles of others.
I believe that all human beings deserve respect.
I almost never make hasty decisions.
I have fewer fears than most people.
I have a strong emotional bond with my friends.
As a child, I rarely had fun pretending to be someone else (a policeman, a father, a teacher,
etc.).
I tend to think the best of people.
I am a very competent person.
186. Sometimes I have felt bitter and resentful.
187. Social gatherings are usually boring to me.
188. Sometimes, when I read poetry or contemplate a work of art, I feel a deep
emotion or excitement.
189. Sometimes I intimidate or flatter people to get them to do what I want.
190. I am not compulsive about cleanliness.
Sometimes things seem too bleak and hopeless to me.
In conversations, I tend to be the one who talks the most.
193. I find it easy to empathize, to feel what others feel.
I consider myself a charitable person.
I try to do my work carefully, so that it doesn't have to be done again.
196. If I have said or done something wrong to a person, it is very difficult for me to be able to look at them.

new to the face.

My life has a fast pace.
On vacation, I prefer to return to a familiar and reliable place.
I am stubborn and headstrong.
I strive for perfection in everything I do.
Sometimes I do things impulsively and then I regret it.
I am drawn to bright colors and ostentatious styles.
I have a lot of intellectual curiosity.
I would prefer to praise others than to be praised.
There are so many little things to do that sometimes what I do is ignore them all.
206. When it seems that everything is going wrong, I can still make good decisions.
I rarely use words like 'fantastic!' or 'sensational!' to describe my
experiences.
I think that if a person does not have clear beliefs by the age of 25, something is wrong.
they.
I feel sympathy for those who are less fortunate than I am.
210. When I go on a trip, I plan it carefully in advance.
211. Sometimes terrifying thoughts come to my mind.
I take a personal interest in the people I work with.
I would have difficulty letting my thoughts wander aimlessly or without direction.
I have much faith in human nature.
I am efficient and effective in my work.
Even the slightest discomfort can be frustrating for me.
I enjoy parties where there are a lot of people.
218. I enjoy reading poems that focus more on feelings and images than on
events.
I am proud of my cleverness in dealing with people.
I spend a lot of time looking for things I have lost.
221. Too often, when things go wrong, I feel discouraged and
point of throwing in the towel.
222. I don't find it easy to take charge of a situation.
223. Strange or unique things (like certain smells or the names of distant places)
they can evoke strong mood states.
224. I step aside from my path to help others, if I can.
I would have to be very sick to miss a day of work.
226. When someone I know acts foolishly, I feel secondhand embarrassment.
I am a very active person.
228. When I go somewhere, I always follow the same path.
229. I often get embroiled in arguments with my family and my colleagues.
I am a little addicted to work.
231. I am always able to keep my feelings under control.
I like being part of the audience at sporting events.
I have a wide variety of intellectual interests.
I am a superior person.
I have a lot of self-discipline.
I am quite emotionally stable.
I laugh easily.
I consider that the 'new morality' of permissiveness is not morality at all.
239. I would rather be known as a merciful person than as a
just person.
240. Before answering a question, I think about it twice.