{"title":"Validity of an Inconsistency Scale for the PID-5 in Community-Dwelling Younger and Older Adults","authors":"Allyson Dubois, Martin Sellbom, Gina Rossi","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; Krueger et al., 2012 ) is a self-report questionnaire measuring pathological traits of personality disorders. Keeley and colleagues (2016) developed an Inconsistency Scale for the PID-5 (PID-5-INC) to detect random responses. We examined the ability of the PID-5-INC to detect inconsistent responders in a new linguistic context (Dutch) and age group (older adults). The Dutch PID-5 version ( van der Heijden et al., 2014 ) was administered to two Dutch community-dwelling younger (18–64 years old: N = 439) and older adults (65 years or older: N = 251). The PID-5-INC item pairs showed large interitem correlations in the younger adult sample and at least medium interitem correlations, except for one item pair, in the older adult sample. Similarly to Keeley and colleagues , a cut-off score of 17 was the optimal cut-off point for both the younger and older adult samples. However, for the younger adult sample, a cut-off score of 16 provided an even better balance between specificity and sensitivity. We concluded that our results support the use of the PID-5-INC in Dutch-speaking community-dwelling younger and older adults and point out the importance of including validity scales for self-report questionnaires.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":"1974 12","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000802","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; Krueger et al., 2012 ) is a self-report questionnaire measuring pathological traits of personality disorders. Keeley and colleagues (2016) developed an Inconsistency Scale for the PID-5 (PID-5-INC) to detect random responses. We examined the ability of the PID-5-INC to detect inconsistent responders in a new linguistic context (Dutch) and age group (older adults). The Dutch PID-5 version ( van der Heijden et al., 2014 ) was administered to two Dutch community-dwelling younger (18–64 years old: N = 439) and older adults (65 years or older: N = 251). The PID-5-INC item pairs showed large interitem correlations in the younger adult sample and at least medium interitem correlations, except for one item pair, in the older adult sample. Similarly to Keeley and colleagues , a cut-off score of 17 was the optimal cut-off point for both the younger and older adult samples. However, for the younger adult sample, a cut-off score of 16 provided an even better balance between specificity and sensitivity. We concluded that our results support the use of the PID-5-INC in Dutch-speaking community-dwelling younger and older adults and point out the importance of including validity scales for self-report questionnaires.
摘要:DSM-5人格量表(PID-5);Krueger et al., 2012)是一种测量人格障碍病理特征的自我报告问卷。Keeley及其同事(2016)为PID-5 (PID-5- inc)开发了一种不一致量表来检测随机反应。我们检测了PID-5-INC在新的语言背景(荷兰语)和年龄组(老年人)中检测不一致应答者的能力。荷兰PID-5版本(van der Heijden et al., 2014)对两名居住在荷兰社区的年轻人(18-64岁:N = 439)和老年人(65岁及以上:N = 251)进行了研究。在年轻人样本中,PID-5-INC项目对显示出较大的项目间相关性,而在老年人样本中,除了一个项目对外,至少显示出中等的项目间相关性。与基利和他的同事类似,17分是年轻人和老年人样本的最佳分界点。然而,对于较年轻的成人样本,16分的临界值在特异性和敏感性之间提供了更好的平衡。我们的结论是,我们的结果支持在讲荷兰语的社区居住的年轻人和老年人中使用PID-5-INC,并指出在自我报告问卷中加入效度量表的重要性。
期刊介绍:
The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.