Catalan and Hungarian validation of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ)

  1. Surány, Zsuzsanna
  2. Aluja Fabregat, Antón
Revista:
The Spanish Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 1138-7416

Año de publicación: 2014

Volumen: 17

Páginas: 1-9

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1017/SJP.2014.25 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: The Spanish Journal of Psychology

Resumen

The goal of this study was to examine the cross-cultural validity and reliability of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) � a recently published instrument for assessing the Zuckerman�s Alternative Five Factor Personality Model � in Catalan and Hungarian speaking populations. The samples consisted of 1,564 subjects from Catalonia and 1,647 from Hungary. Results showed a clear five-factor structure and acceptable alpha reliabilities of the ZKA-PQ in both countries. Facets alpha average was 80.35 and 74.10 for Catalans and Hungarians respectively. The factorial congruency coefficients indicated that both structures were equivalent, with a global value of .97. However, the robust structure obtained with EFA yielded poor fit indices in the subsequent CFA. Altogether, the psychometric findings were similar to those obtained in the original validation study carried out in Spanish and English populations. Main country differences were found only in Neuroticism factor, with Hungarians scoring significantly lower that Catalans. Nevertheless, country, sex and age explained only 18.6 % of Neuroticism variance (adjusted R squared = .186). Country differences had only medium effect size [F(1, 3188) = 292, p < .001, ?2 = .084 1 ].

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Aluja A., Ballesté J., & Torrubia R. (1999). Self-reported personality and school achievement as predictors of teachers' perceptions of their students'. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 743-753. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00276-1
  • Aluja A., & García L. F. (2005). Sensation seeking, sexual curiosity and testosterone in inmates. Neuropsychobiology. 51, 28-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000082852
  • Aluja A., García O., & García L. F. (2 002). A comparative study of Zuckerman's three structural models for personality through the NEO-PI-R, ZKPQ-III-R, EPQ-RS and Goldberg's 50-bipolar adjectives. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 713-725. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00186-6
  • Aluja A., García O., & García L. F. (2004). Replicability of the three, four and five Zuckerman's personality superfactors: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the EPQ-RS, ZKPQ and NEO-PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1093-1108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00203-4
  • Aluja A., Kuhlman M., & Zuckerman M. (2010). De velopment of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ): A factor/facet version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ). Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 416-431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.497406
  • Aluja A., Rossier J., García L. F., Angleitner A., Kuhlman M., & Zuckerman M. (2006). A cross-cultural shortened form of the ZKPQ (ZKPQ-50-CC) adapted to English, French, German, and Span ish languages. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 619-628. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.001
  • Bentler P. M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 419-456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev. ps.31.020180.002223
  • Bentler P. M., & Bonett D. G. (1980) Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
  • Bollen K. A., & Long J. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. New York, NY: Sage.
  • Buss A. H., & Perry M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452-459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452
  • Cohen J. (1988). Statis tical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Caseras F. X., Fullana M. A., Riba J., Barbanoj M. J., Aluja A., & Torrubia R. (2006). Influence of individual differences in th e Behavioral Inhibition System and stimulus content (fear vs. blood-disgust) on affective startle reflex modulation. Biological Psychology, 72, 251-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2005.10.009
  • Daly J. A., Richmond V. P., & Leth S. (1979). Social communicate anxiety and the personnel selection process. Testing the similarity effect in selection decisions. Human Communication Research, 6, 18-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1979.tb00288.x
  • De Pascalis V., & Russo P. M. (2003). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire: Preliminary results of the Italian version. Psychological Reports, 92, 965-974. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2003.92.3.965
  • Gomá-i-Freixanet M., Wismeijer A. J., & Valero S. (2005). Consensual validity of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionnaire: Evidence from self-reports and spouse reports. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 279-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8403-07
  • Gomá-i-Freixanet M., Valero S., Puntí J., & Zuckerman M. (2004). Psychometric Properties of the Zuckerman-Kuhlm an Personality Questionnaire in a Spanish Sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20, 134-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.20.2.134
  • Herrero M., Viña C., González M., Ibáñez I., & Peñate W. (2001). El cuestionario de Personalidad Zuckerman-Kuhlman-III (ZKPQ-III): Versi ón española [The Zuckeerman-Kuhlman-III Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ-III)]. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 33, 269-287.
  • Johnson W., Krueger R. F., Bouchard T. J., & McGue M. (2002). The personality of twins: Just ordinary folks. Twin Research, 5, 125-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1375/1369052022992
  • Joireman J., & Kuhlman D. M. (2004). The Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire: Origin, development, and validity of a measure to assess an alternative Five-Factor Model of personality. In R. M. Stelmack (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 49-64). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
  • Lynam D. R., Smith G. T., Whiteside S. P., & Cyders M. A. (2006). The UPPS-P: Assessing five personality pathways to impulsive behavior (Technical Report). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
  • McCrae R. R. 2001 Trait psychology and culture: Exploring intercultural comparisons Journal of Personality 69 819-846, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.696166
  • McCrae R. R. (2002). NEO-PI-R data from 36 cultures. In R. R. McCrae & J. Allik (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 105-125). New York, NY: Kluwe r Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0763-5
  • McCrae R. R., & Allik J. (2002). The five-factor model of personality across cultures. (Eds.), New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Publisher. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0763-5
  • McCrae R. R., Z onderman A. B., Costa P. T., Bond M. H., & Paunonen S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the revised NEO personality inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality a nd Social Psychology, 70, 552-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.552
  • Muñiz J., García-Cueto E., & Lozano L. M. (2005). Item format and the psychometric properties of the Eysenck Personality Q uestionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 61-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.03.021
  • O'Connor B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel an alysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instrumentation, and Computers, 32, 396-402. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807
  • Ostendorf F., & Angleitner A. (1994). A comparison of different instruments proposed to measure the big-five. European Review of Applied Psychology, 44, 45-53.
  • Roberti J. W. (2004). A review of behavioral and biological correlates of sensation seeking. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 256-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00067-9
  • Rolland J. P. (2002). The cross-cultural generalizability of the five-factor model of personality. In R. R. McCrae & J.Allik (Eds.). The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 7-28). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0763-5
  • Romero E., Luengo M. A., Gómez-Fraguela J. A., & Sobral J. (2002). La estructura de los rasgos de personalidad en adolescentes: El modelo de cinco factores y los cinco alternativos [The structure of personality traits on adolescents: The big-five and the alternative five models]. Psicothema, 14, 134-143.
  • Rosenblitt J. C., Soler H., Johnson S. E., & Quadagno D. M. (2001). Sensation seeking and hormones in men and women: Exploring the link. Hormones and Behavior, 40, 396-402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/hbeh.2001.1704
  • Rossier J., Hansenne M., Baudin N., & Morizot J. (2012). Zuckerman's revised alternative Five-Factor Model: Validation of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire in Four French Speaking Countries. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 358-365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2012.657024
  • Shiomi K., Kuhlman D. M., Zuckerman M., Joreiman J. A., Sa to M., & Yata S. (1996). Examining the validity of a Japanese version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ). Hyago University of Teacher Education Journal, 2, 1-13.
  • Steiger J. H. (19 90). Structural model evaluation and modification. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2502-4
  • Terracciano A., Abdel-Khalek A. M., Adám N., Adamovová L., Ahn C. K., Ahn H. N., ⋯ & McCrae R. R. (2005). National character does not reflect mean personality trait levels in 49 cultures. Science, 310, 96-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1117199
  • Tucker L.R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies (Personnel Research Section Report No. 984). Washington, DC: Department of the Army.
  • Tucker L. R., & Lewis C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analyses. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
  • Van Hemert D. A., Van de Vi jver F. J. R., Poortinga Y. H., & Georgas J. (2002). Structural and functional equivalence of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire within and between countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1229-1249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00007-7
  • Wu Y.-X., Wang W., Du W.-Y., Li J., Jiang X.-F., & Wang Y.-H. (2000). Development of a Chinese version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionn aire: Reliabilities and gender/age effects. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 241-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2000.28.3.241
  • Zuckerman M., Kuhlman D. M., Joireman J., Teta P., & Kraft M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The big three, the big five, and the alternative five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757-768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.757
  • Zuckerman M. (2002). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ): An alternative five-factorial model. In B. de Raad & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five Assessment (pp. 377-396). Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber .
  • Zuckerman M. 2005). Psychobiology of Personality, (2nd Ed.), revised and updated. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  • Zuckerman M. (2008). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ): An operational definition of the alternative Five factorial model of personality. In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment: Vol. 2. Personality measurement and testing (pp. 2 19-238). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet