16PF History, Design & Validity Scales Flashcards
16PF General, History
NOT looking at pathology, just constellation of traits
Derived from factor analysis
• different methods of factor analysis, several different conclusions
Cattell always got to the same 16 factors (actually 12, +4 observational factors derived from questionnaires)
However, doesn’t tell you how many rotations are required to get 16 factors and what his correlation level was on each rotation
• sometimes he allows a lot of correlations to get his 16 factors
Theoretically, he examined his results very psychodynamically – he was in contact with Freud
His early factors were the same as Eyesenck
1 = introversion/extroversion
C= emotionality/neuroticism
B= not a personality trait, measure of intelligence, questions on analogies
• B’s influence is thought to have an effect on other traits
Cattell believe that much of intelligence can be attributed to heredity
o RO: but there is so much overlapping variability, that it may not make any difference
Hans Eyesenck Alternative Approach
Maudsley Personality Index
Required a correlation of 0 in order to consider a factor independent
Created three orthogonal factors:
Introversion/extroversion
Neuroticism (anxiety)
Psychoticism (psychosis)
Many felt this was too limited and does not give you a full picture of personality
IM “impression management”
Most closely related to K scale
24 items
20+ considered high
12- considered low
Really low level would be a plea for help or faking bad
[Previously called MD scale= “motivational distribution”]
INF – infrequency scale, (analogue of MMPI F scale)
Unusual responses
32 items, no standard protocol
Ttoo many – malingering or faking bad
16 PF is not used for faking bad – NGRI, MMPI, or Milan instead
Milan is the best instrument for diagnostic labels, but not a good picture of personality – closer to DSM than MMPI
ACQ – acquiescence scale
Tendency to answer true more often than average (similar to TRIN)
16PF Scoring
16 PF is scored in STEN (standard-ten) scores
M=5.5, SD=2.0
Interpret scores of 8-10 and 1-3
Scores of 4 and 7 are too close to average to be interpreted independently, but you can add the scores to higher scores
• e.g. 9 on C, 7 on O
Scores of 5 and 6 are average, should not be interpreted
It is possible to have an uninterpretable 16 PF with every score between 4 and 7, unless there is a suggestion of variance, e.g. 5 5 5 5 5 7
2 sets of norms – separate for male/female & combined norms the combined norms are the most commonly used
• only Warmth (A),Dominance (E), Sensitivity (I) are different on male/female sets
NOT looking for pathology, but everyone uses the 16 PF to look for pathology
o Eyesenck was designed for pathology
• This is logical, since he worked in a hospital and Cattell was an academic
Child Version of Scales
HSPQ: junior and senior high school personality questionnaire and APQ adolescent personality questionnaire
CPQ: children’s 8-12 personality questionnaire
ESPQ: children 6-8
