@article{BrandtBeckerTetzneretal.2018,
  author    = {Brandt, Naemi D. and Becker, Michael and Tetzner, Julia and Brunner, Martin and Kuhl, Poldi and Maaz, Kai},
  title     = {Personality across the lifespan exploring measurement invariance of a short Big Five Inventory from ages 11 to 84},
  series = {European journal of psychological assessment},
  volume    = {36},
  journal   = {European journal of psychological assessment},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Hogrefe},
  address   = {G{\"o}ttingen},
  issn      = {1015-5759},
  doi       = {10.1027/1015-5759/a000490},
  pages     = {162 -- 173},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Personality is a relevant predictor for important life outcomes across the entire lifespan. Although previous studies have suggested the comparability of the measurement of the Big Five personality traits across adulthood, the generalizability to childhood is largely unknown. The present study investigated the structure of the Big Five personality traits assessed with the Big Five Inventory-SOEP Version (BFI-S; SOEP = Socio-Economic Panel) across a broad age range spanning 11-84 years. We used two samples of N = 1,090 children (52\% female, M-age = 11.87) and N = 18,789 adults (53\% female, M-age = 51.09), estimating a multigroup CFA analysis across four age groups (late childhood: 11-14 years; early adulthood: 17-30 years; middle adulthood: 31-60 years; late adulthood: 61-84 years). Our results indicated the comparability of the personality trait metric in terms of general factor structure, loading patterns, and the majority of intercepts across all age groups. Therefore, the findings suggest both a reliable assessment of the Big Five personality traits with the BFI-S even in late childhood and a vastly comparable metric across age groups.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{NeuendorfJansenKuhletal.2022,
  author    = {Neuendorf, Claudia and Jansen, Matte and Kuhl, Poldi and Vock, Miriam},
  title     = {Wer ist leistungsstark?},
  series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r p{\"a}dagogische Psychologie.},
  volume    = {37},
  journal   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r p{\"a}dagogische Psychologie.},
  publisher = {Hogrefe},
  address   = {Bern},
  issn      = {1010-0652},
  doi       = {10.1024/1010-0652/a000343},
  pages     = {1 -- 19},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Who is a high achiever? Operationalisation of high achievement in empirical educational research since the year 2000 Abstract. In recent years, high-achieving students have received increased attention by researchers, policymakers and practitioners. However, the question of what exactly constitutes high academic achievement is not yet agreed upon by the research community. This paper provides a systematic review of how researchers studying high-achieving students since 2000 have operationalized high academic achievement in their research. In particular, we examined which performance indicators were used, whether achievement was conceived of as subject-specific or general, and which cut-off values and comparison standards were applied. The systematic database search yielded N = 309 articles, n = 55 of which were finally included in the analysis. The present study observed a diversity in the operationalization of performance. The most commonly used indicators of performance were grades and test scores, with cross-domain and subject-specific definitions both being common. Some of the studies' cut-off values were difficult to compare, but in instances where a population norm could be derived, the median proportion of high achievers was 10 percent. The study discusses that constraints on generalizability and comparability between different studies on high achievers can arise due to methodological differences. This paper concludes with recommendations for the operationalization of high achievement.},
  language  = {de}
}