Validity of the PAI Interpersonal Scales for Measuring the Dimensions of the Interpersonal Circumplex

Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06519, USA.
Journal of Personality Assessment (Impact Factor: 2.01). 01/2011; 93(1):33-9. DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2011.529013
Source: PubMed


Two studies evaluated the validity of the interpersonal scales, Dominance (DOM) and Warmth (WRM), from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991, 2007) to measure the 2 dimensions of the interpersonal circumplex (IPC). In Study 1, 114 college freshmen completed the PAI and the Interpersonal Adjectives Scale (IAS; Wiggins, 1995). In Study 2, 170 college students completed the PAI and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-Short Circumplex (IIP-SC; Soldz, Budman, Demby, & Merry, 1995). The results of both studies supported the convergent validity of DOM and WRM, although discriminant validity was stronger using the IIP-SC as the criterion. Circumplex projections placed DOM and WRM in the appropriate segments of both the IAS and IIP-SC. These findings provide additional support for the validity of the PAI interpersonal scales as measures of the primary dimensions of the IPC.

Download full-text


Available from: Emily B Ansell, Oct 03, 2015
107 Reads
  • Source
    • "The concept of the interpersonal circle has had significant successes in accurately examining interpersonal relating (for reviews see Hatcher & Rogers, 2009; Horowitz, Turan, Wilson, & Zolotsev, 2008) and the validity of the scales for measuring the " Dimensions of the Interpersonal circle " have been well tested across a variety of domains (Ansell, Kurtz & DeMoor, 2011). It has been replicated across a range of interpersonal dynamics including traditional relationships such as sexual partners (Markey & Markey, 2009), interpersonal values (Locke, 2000) and interpersonal problems (Horowitz, Rosenburg, & Bartholomew, 1993). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Principal component analysis of an operational field sample of 181 police interrogations with terrorist suspects identified five counter interrogation factors: passive (refusing to look at interviewers, remaining silent); passive verbal (monosyllabic response, claiming lack of memory); verbal (discussing an unrelated topic, providing well known information, providing a scripted response) with two single item components: retraction of previous statements and no comment. Analysis revealed significant differences in the use of counter interrogation tactics between terrorist groups, with paramilitary suspects using more passive, verbal and no comment tactics than right wing and international terrorists. International terrorists made significantly more use of retraction tactics than right wing and paramilitary groups.
    Personality and Individual Differences 10/2014; 68:170–175. DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.031 · 1.86 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Convergence between the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008) interpersonal scales and 2 interpersonal circumplex (IPC) measures was examined. University students (N = 405) completed the MMPI-2 and 2 IPC measures, the Interpersonal Adjectives Scales Revised Big Five Version (IASR-B5; Trapnell & Wiggins, 1990) and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems Circumplex (IIP-C; Horowitz, Alden, Wiggins, & Pincus, 2000). Internal consistency was adequate for 3 of the 6 scales investigated. The majority of scales were located in their hypothesized locations, although magnitude of correlations was somewhat weaker than anticipated, partly owing to restricted range from using a healthy sample. The expected pattern of correlations that defines a circular matrix was demonstrated, lending support for the convergent and discriminant validity of the MMPI-2-RF interpersonal scales with respect to the assessment of interpersonal traits and problems.
    Journal of Personality Assessment 10/2012; 95(2). DOI:10.1080/00223891.2012.730085 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This field observation examines 58 police interrogators’ rapport-based behaviors with terrorist suspects; specifically, whether rapport helps elicit meaningful intelligence and information. The Observing Rapport-Based Interpersonal Techniques (ORBIT; Alison, Alison, Elntib & Noone, 2012) is a coding framework with 3 elements. The first 2 measures are as follows: (i) 5 strategies adopted from the motivational interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 2009) literature in the counseling domain: autonomy, acceptance, adaptation, empathy, and evocation and (ii) an “Interpersonal Behavior Circle” (adopted from Interpersonal theories, Leary, 1957) for coding interpersonal interactions between interrogator and suspect along 2 orthogonal dimensions (authoritative-passive and challenging-cooperative); where each quadrant has an interpersonally adaptive and maladaptive variant. The third (outcome) measure of ORBIT includes a measure of evidentially useful information (the “interview yield”) and considers the extent to which suspects reveal information pertaining to capability, opportunity and motive as well as evidence relevant to people, actions, locations and times. Data included 418 video interviews (representing 288 hours of footage), with all suspects subsequently convicted for a variety of terrorist offenses. Structural equation modeling revealed that motivational interviewing was positively associated with adaptive interpersonal behavior from the suspect, which, in turn, increased interview yield. Conversely, even minimal expression of maladaptive interpersonal interrogator behavior increased maladaptive interviewee behavior as well as directly reducing yield. The study provides the first well-defined and empirically validated analysis of the benefits of a rapport-based, interpersonally skilled approach to interviewing terrorists in an operational field setting. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved)
    Psychology Public Policy and Law 11/2013; 19(4):411-431. DOI:10.1037/a0034564 · 1.93 Impact Factor
Show more