This article was downloaded by: [University of Sussex Library] On: 10 February 2015, At: 17:45 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Personality Assessment Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjpa20
Form E of the 16PF and Adults With Mental Retardation: Internal Consistency and Validity Charles L. Spirrison Published online: 10 Jun 2010.
To cite this article: Charles L. Spirrison (1992) Form E of the 16PF and Adults With Mental Retardation: Internal Consistency and Validity, Journal of Personality Assessment, 58:3, 525-536, DOI: 10.1207/ s15327752jpa5803_8 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5803_8
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
Form E of the l6PF and Adults With Mental Retardation : internal Consistency and Validity
Form E of the Sixteen Fersmaiiri; Factors Questionnaire (: 6PF-E! uras administered to 7L' adujts (4.; men and 25 womer,) a h a resided :n 2 p251ic facili:v foz .men:dy retarded perssns. Alpha coeff~cienrc uere ccmputec for each of !6 primary :rait scaies. The in:el!:gence Bi, Egc krength LC!, Dnminance iE!: Superego Strength tG\, Parmia (Hi. Protension (t;,Au:ia (%I!. _Cb.readness (K.;!. Guilt Preneness (C'i: and Se5Sentirnent iQi! scales ex5ibireci low internal consistency, whereas Premsia (3and Srii-SnSciencv (Qr! evidenced rsiat:\.ei:. highe: levels Persona!ity traits of sabjects were also assesses by s a g ratings. Ra:ir~gs were compare3 tc ISPF-E pr:mary and secondary rrait scores vie correiatior: co&cien:s. Resalrs pra~.idedvirtualiv n r sr;pporr for the valiciitv o i t h e IhPF-E primarv scaies and the Exvia? Ansiecy, a;>d Cortertia second~rrfactor5 as applied :o t h e suhjecr pop~iation.txmted supper: for :he vaiiditv ilf :he independence seconiiarv facror was found.
AIrRough personality assessments are often conducted wi:h rnentaiiy retarded individuals ~ a s o b s o nS: r k k e r m z n , 19891: appropriate evaluations of peisor~aairy is d~fficultwi:h this pogulation. Because of Jefici:s in abstract reascr,ing and verbal skills, such persons are &en mcapable oi m e e t c g t h e task requirements of most widely used personaiity assessment techniques iGuthrie? Butier, & G o r h : , i961; Rosec Sr Weisz, i981). T h e Rorschach, alrhough confirming restricted verbai a n d m a g n a l capacines. rvp~ca:!~p r o v d e s Irtt:e d~sc:m:native
mforn;arion when applied co retarded ~nd~vlduas 15enron, i%4: Use oi rhe Thematic Apperceptron Test w t h mental!p retarded persons h a s beer, largelv met w:th poor resuits ie.g., Jordan Sr Decharms. 1959. Kazdln, Matson, & Senacore, 1953;. Because t h e I \ h n e s o t a hfuit:phaslc Personal~t\Inventory a n d the C a h f o r x a Psvchologicai Inventorv ~mpiiatlvrne2s.m read:ng s k r k , voca'b-
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
ularp, and personality characterisdcs, they are often inappropriate for use with m e n t d y retarded individuais gordan, 1966; Rosen 61. Kivitz, 1976). Form E of the Sixteen Personality Factor Ques:ionnaire il6PF-E; Eber & Caae3, 1985) was specificaEly designed for use with low literacy popuiatisns. It was written at the 3 2 reading grade level. As suc:h, the limited Iten complexity and vocabulary demands of the I WF-E suggest that it is of potential value in the scudy of personaiiry characteris~icsof mentally rerarded persons. Eber and Cattell (1985) stated that the i6PF-E is ". . . well ssited for assessment wich mentally and cognitively impaired groups . . . [and] . . . especially promising for use with ment-ail-?retarded popuiatisns" (p. 22). The ISPF-E has been used with mentally retarded popdations in a few studies (e.g., Carter, 1983; Muhiern, i975; Muiiins &. Hsyes, 1980). None of these inveaigacions, however, addressed the psychome~sic characteristics of the ISPF-E as applied :n rerarded respondents. The Furpose of my investigatior: was to evaluate the reliability and vaiidity of :he I.6PF-E responses of mentally retarded aduIts.
METHOD Subjects Subjects were 76 aduks (4.5 men and 25 women: whs, resided in a large state-operated, sheltereri commcnity setting fjr arnhularory mentally retarded aduits, A11 s u b p z ha6 resided in :he faciliry for a: ;east 12 ionsecurive months ?rim t3 data coliection. S ~ b j e c tranged s from 22 to 63 years of age (M-- 37.46, SD = l3.69). Withi3 5 years prior to the 16PF-E administration, aiI s&jects had been tested with rhe Wechsier Aduit intelligence Scale, Wechsier Adult Incelligence Scale-Revised, Wechsler Inteiligence Scale for Chlidrern-Revised, or Stanford-Binet (Form L-M). Q scores oi subjects ranged h o n ZCi t.o 84 (M = 49.41,SD = I4.89). The iargest proportion of IQ scores fell in the range sf miid mental retardation (severe mecta! retardation, n = 1 !; noderate mental retarciatior,, r, = 15, miid mental rerardation, n = 34; borderiine intellectual functioning, r: = 4). '9
Procedure Subjects were tested ~ndlvidually In a private sec:ing. Because pilot testing rndicated that similar subjects had difficdty keeping up wrch the arld~otape version of the I6PF-E and frecyuently x a d e errors; while marking therr own answer sheets, the exam:ner read the !6PF-E nnstructlons and questions aloud to each subject and recorded responses. When subjects exhibited diff~cukvunderstanding a test :tern (other than
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
those assessing in~elligencej~ :he examiner restate6 :he questior~In a simpiez form. For example, i i a subject exhibited dif5culr)- w:th the questior. "Do you iike to dance- or- d o vou not like to do that?,":he examiner asked, "Do yo:i iike to dance-or-do you not iike to dance?" Subjects responded by d?rec:ly stacing their answer; that is, instead of responding "A?"9," "the :st one yo2 said," 2"the second one," subjects proikleci answers which mp'!ied thar :hev understood the question ie.g.: "I iike to dance" or "I don't Like to dance").
Instruments
I6PF-E.
The 16PF-E ionslsts of 22': forced-choice elher-i?r Items. tse malo-rtr of the items ask respmdents ro srate a preference berweeri tmc self-descriptions or activities. Eight items are designed to assess intefi:gence and have correct and incorrect atternatives. The ISPF-E 1s desrgned to meascre norrnai var~atior:in personality frrnc:ioning. Aitt~oilghForm E is different 5 o m the other :6PF forms (i.e., A, B, C , and Dl with respec: ra response forma: and item complexity, it was consrructed :c! measilre the same yerscrsal~t~ factors (Eber S1 Cattell, 19S5!. 16PF-E responses were scored via standard procedures. The 16 primary trai: s:en scores oisnbjecrs were derived through use of the separate aduk femsie and adult male norm tables that are suppiied in the I6PF-E manual E b e r & Catteii, 19851. Four secondary trait sceres PTC item. "!ndicates thac the ?TC irem war reversed prior to scaring. Adjective anchors on these items are presenred in reverse order. For all items, B positxt. T vaiue it cangraent wi:h the predicred direction ofthe reiacionship. 9 < 2 5 . onc-:ailed.
1'6PF-E secmdary scores rand PTC ~lifirngs. Subject responses were also scored for four i 6PF secondary factors: Exvia. Anx!et\r, Cortertia. and Independence. The relationships between each of these scores and the PTC ratings were assessed with correlation coefficients. Again, rhree datn groups (i.e., aii subjects, miidhorderline only, and severei'moderate oniv) were cozsidered, Of the 258 correiacion coefficients cornpted between PTC ratings and Exvia (i.e,, introversion !is. extraversionj and Acxiety and Corcertia (i.e., sensitivity and emotionaiism vs. tough poise), six were statis:icaliy significant. For mild/ borderline subjects, Exvia scores were inverseiy related with PTC kern 2O (i.e., iresirant vs. ~~ninkibted), ~(23)= - .42, p < .05, rwo-tailed, sach that high Exvia scores were related ro hesitax For severei'mocierate scrbjects, FTC Item 5 (i.e., ~ J O U Po~ientedvs. sei,h&cier.t.) was inversely correiated with Exvia scores, ~(12) = - 3 6 , $ < 2 5 , twwaiied, such t h t high Exvia were associated with
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
group-oriented. Anxiery scores of ss-ere/rnoderare subjects were carrelared with PPC Item 32 &e., prac:ml i7s. imaginative), 7 i I S ) i = '46, p < J 5 . t w o - d e d . Cortertia scores of the mild."scrderline-sfiierei~~oderatecornhized group were related with PTC Item 25 (i.e., sitepicctl vs. c i c e p t i q condiriocs?, 7r%! = .29, p
Journal of Personality Assessment Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjpa20
Form E of the 16PF and Adults With Mental Retardation: Internal Consistency and Validity Charles L. Spirrison Published online: 10 Jun 2010.
To cite this article: Charles L. Spirrison (1992) Form E of the 16PF and Adults With Mental Retardation: Internal Consistency and Validity, Journal of Personality Assessment, 58:3, 525-536, DOI: 10.1207/ s15327752jpa5803_8 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5803_8
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
Form E of the l6PF and Adults With Mental Retardation : internal Consistency and Validity
Form E of the Sixteen Fersmaiiri; Factors Questionnaire (: 6PF-E! uras administered to 7L' adujts (4.; men and 25 womer,) a h a resided :n 2 p251ic facili:v foz .men:dy retarded perssns. Alpha coeff~cienrc uere ccmputec for each of !6 primary :rait scaies. The in:el!:gence Bi, Egc krength LC!, Dnminance iE!: Superego Strength tG\, Parmia (Hi. Protension (t;,Au:ia (%I!. _Cb.readness (K.;!. Guilt Preneness (C'i: and Se5Sentirnent iQi! scales ex5ibireci low internal consistency, whereas Premsia (3and Srii-SnSciencv (Qr! evidenced rsiat:\.ei:. highe: levels Persona!ity traits of sabjects were also assesses by s a g ratings. Ra:ir~gs were compare3 tc ISPF-E pr:mary and secondary rrait scores vie correiatior: co&cien:s. Resalrs pra~.idedvirtualiv n r sr;pporr for the valiciitv o i t h e IhPF-E primarv scaies and the Exvia? Ansiecy, a;>d Cortertia second~rrfactor5 as applied :o t h e suhjecr pop~iation.txmted supper: for :he vaiiditv ilf :he independence seconiiarv facror was found.
AIrRough personality assessments are often conducted wi:h rnentaiiy retarded individuals ~ a s o b s o nS: r k k e r m z n , 19891: appropriate evaluations of peisor~aairy is d~fficultwi:h this pogulation. Because of Jefici:s in abstract reascr,ing and verbal skills, such persons are &en mcapable oi m e e t c g t h e task requirements of most widely used personaiity assessment techniques iGuthrie? Butier, & G o r h : , i961; Rosec Sr Weisz, i981). T h e Rorschach, alrhough confirming restricted verbai a n d m a g n a l capacines. rvp~ca:!~p r o v d e s Irtt:e d~sc:m:native
mforn;arion when applied co retarded ~nd~vlduas 15enron, i%4: Use oi rhe Thematic Apperceptron Test w t h mental!p retarded persons h a s beer, largelv met w:th poor resuits ie.g., Jordan Sr Decharms. 1959. Kazdln, Matson, & Senacore, 1953;. Because t h e I \ h n e s o t a hfuit:phaslc Personal~t\Inventory a n d the C a h f o r x a Psvchologicai Inventorv ~mpiiatlvrne2s.m read:ng s k r k , voca'b-
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
ularp, and personality characterisdcs, they are often inappropriate for use with m e n t d y retarded individuais gordan, 1966; Rosen 61. Kivitz, 1976). Form E of the Sixteen Personality Factor Ques:ionnaire il6PF-E; Eber & Caae3, 1985) was specificaEly designed for use with low literacy popuiatisns. It was written at the 3 2 reading grade level. As suc:h, the limited Iten complexity and vocabulary demands of the I WF-E suggest that it is of potential value in the scudy of personaiiry characteris~icsof mentally rerarded persons. Eber and Cattell (1985) stated that the i6PF-E is ". . . well ssited for assessment wich mentally and cognitively impaired groups . . . [and] . . . especially promising for use with ment-ail-?retarded popuiatisns" (p. 22). The ISPF-E has been used with mentally retarded popdations in a few studies (e.g., Carter, 1983; Muhiern, i975; Muiiins &. Hsyes, 1980). None of these inveaigacions, however, addressed the psychome~sic characteristics of the ISPF-E as applied :n rerarded respondents. The Furpose of my investigatior: was to evaluate the reliability and vaiidity of :he I.6PF-E responses of mentally retarded aduIts.
METHOD Subjects Subjects were 76 aduks (4.5 men and 25 women: whs, resided in a large state-operated, sheltereri commcnity setting fjr arnhularory mentally retarded aduits, A11 s u b p z ha6 resided in :he faciliry for a: ;east 12 ionsecurive months ?rim t3 data coliection. S ~ b j e c tranged s from 22 to 63 years of age (M-- 37.46, SD = l3.69). Withi3 5 years prior to the 16PF-E administration, aiI s&jects had been tested with rhe Wechsier Aduit intelligence Scale, Wechsier Adult Incelligence Scale-Revised, Wechsler Inteiligence Scale for Chlidrern-Revised, or Stanford-Binet (Form L-M). Q scores oi subjects ranged h o n ZCi t.o 84 (M = 49.41,SD = I4.89). The iargest proportion of IQ scores fell in the range sf miid mental retardation (severe mecta! retardation, n = 1 !; noderate mental retarciatior,, r, = 15, miid mental rerardation, n = 34; borderiine intellectual functioning, r: = 4). '9
Procedure Subjects were tested ~ndlvidually In a private sec:ing. Because pilot testing rndicated that similar subjects had difficdty keeping up wrch the arld~otape version of the I6PF-E and frecyuently x a d e errors; while marking therr own answer sheets, the exam:ner read the !6PF-E nnstructlons and questions aloud to each subject and recorded responses. When subjects exhibited diff~cukvunderstanding a test :tern (other than
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
those assessing in~elligencej~ :he examiner restate6 :he questior~In a simpiez form. For example, i i a subject exhibited dif5culr)- w:th the questior. "Do you iike to dance- or- d o vou not like to do that?,":he examiner asked, "Do yo:i iike to dance-or-do you not iike to dance?" Subjects responded by d?rec:ly stacing their answer; that is, instead of responding "A?"9," "the :st one yo2 said," 2"the second one," subjects proikleci answers which mp'!ied thar :hev understood the question ie.g.: "I iike to dance" or "I don't Like to dance").
Instruments
I6PF-E.
The 16PF-E ionslsts of 22': forced-choice elher-i?r Items. tse malo-rtr of the items ask respmdents ro srate a preference berweeri tmc self-descriptions or activities. Eight items are designed to assess intefi:gence and have correct and incorrect atternatives. The ISPF-E 1s desrgned to meascre norrnai var~atior:in personality frrnc:ioning. Aitt~oilghForm E is different 5 o m the other :6PF forms (i.e., A, B, C , and Dl with respec: ra response forma: and item complexity, it was consrructed :c! measilre the same yerscrsal~t~ factors (Eber S1 Cattell, 19S5!. 16PF-E responses were scored via standard procedures. The 16 primary trai: s:en scores oisnbjecrs were derived through use of the separate aduk femsie and adult male norm tables that are suppiied in the I6PF-E manual E b e r & Catteii, 19851. Four secondary trait sceres PTC item. "!ndicates thac the ?TC irem war reversed prior to scaring. Adjective anchors on these items are presenred in reverse order. For all items, B positxt. T vaiue it cangraent wi:h the predicred direction ofthe reiacionship. 9 < 2 5 . onc-:ailed.
1'6PF-E secmdary scores rand PTC ~lifirngs. Subject responses were also scored for four i 6PF secondary factors: Exvia. Anx!et\r, Cortertia. and Independence. The relationships between each of these scores and the PTC ratings were assessed with correlation coefficients. Again, rhree datn groups (i.e., aii subjects, miidhorderline only, and severei'moderate oniv) were cozsidered, Of the 258 correiacion coefficients cornpted between PTC ratings and Exvia (i.e,, introversion !is. extraversionj and Acxiety and Corcertia (i.e., sensitivity and emotionaiism vs. tough poise), six were statis:icaliy significant. For mild/ borderline subjects, Exvia scores were inverseiy related with PTC kern 2O (i.e., iresirant vs. ~~ninkibted), ~(23)= - .42, p < .05, rwo-tailed, sach that high Exvia scores were related ro hesitax For severei'mocierate scrbjects, FTC Item 5 (i.e., ~ J O U Po~ientedvs. sei,h&cier.t.) was inversely correiated with Exvia scores, ~(12) = - 3 6 , $ < 2 5 , twwaiied, such t h t high Exvia were associated with
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 17:45 10 February 2015
group-oriented. Anxiery scores of ss-ere/rnoderare subjects were carrelared with PPC Item 32 &e., prac:ml i7s. imaginative), 7 i I S ) i = '46, p < J 5 . t w o - d e d . Cortertia scores of the mild."scrderline-sfiierei~~oderatecornhized group were related with PTC Item 25 (i.e., sitepicctl vs. c i c e p t i q condiriocs?, 7r%! = .29, p
