Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T19:35:40.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dimensional Assessment of Personality Psychopathology Basic Questionnaire: Shortened Versions Item Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2015

Anton Aluja ,
Àngel Blanch ,
Eduardo Blanco ,
Maite Martí-Guiu  and
Ferran Balada
Anton Aluja*
Affiliation:
Universitat de Lleida (Spain)
Àngel Blanch
Affiliation:
Universitat de Lleida (Spain)
Eduardo Blanco
Affiliation:
Universitat de Lleida (Spain)
Maite Martí-Guiu
Affiliation:
Universitat de Lleida (Spain)
Ferran Balada
Affiliation:
Universitat de Lleida (Spain)
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Anton Aluja. Departament de Psicologia. Universitat de Lleida. Avda. Estudi General, 4. 26001. Lleida (Spain). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study has been designed to evaluate and replicate the psychometric properties of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Psychopathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ) and the DAPP-BQ short form (DAPP-SF) in a large Spanish general population sample. Additionally, we have generated a reduced form called DAPP-90, using a strategy based on a structural equation modeling (SEM) methodology in two independent samples, a calibration and a validation sample. The DAPP-90 scales obtained a more satisfactory fit on SEM adjustment values (average: TLI > .97 and RMSEA < .04) respect to full DAPP-BQ and the 136-item version. According to the factorial congruency coefficients, the DAPP-90 obtains a similar structure to the DAPP-BQ and the DAPP-SF. The DAPP-90 internal consistency is acceptable, with a Cronbach’s alpha mean of .75. We did not find any differences in the pattern of relations between the two DAPP-BQ shortened versions and the SCL-90-R factors. The new 90-items version is especially useful when it is difficult to use the long version for diverse reasons, such as the assessment of patients in hospital consultation or in brief psychological assessments.

Keywords

DAPP-BQDAPP-SFDAPP-90SCL-90-Rdimensional personality assessment
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 17 , 2014 , E102
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aluja, A., & Blanch, A. (2007). Comparison of impulsiveness, venturesomeness and empathy (I –7) structure in English and Spanish samples: Analysis of different structural equation models. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 2294–2305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.019 Google Scholar
Aluja, A., & Blanch, A. (2011). Neuropsychological Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS) and Behavioral Approach System (BAS) assessment: A shortened Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire version (SPSRQ-20). Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 628–636. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2011.608760 Google Scholar
Aluja, A., Cuevas, L., García, L. F., & García, O. (2007). Zuckerman’s personality model predicts MCMI-III personality disorders. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1311–1321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.009 Google Scholar
Aluja, A., Del Barrio, V., & Garcia, L. F. (2006). Comparison of several shortened versions of the EMBU: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47, 23–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00489.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aluja, A., Garcia, O., & Garcia, L. F. (2003a). A psychometric analysis of the revised Eysenck personality questionnaire short scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 449–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00206-4 Google Scholar
Aluja, A., Garcia, O., & Garcia, L. F. (2003b). Psychometric properties of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionnaire (ZKPQ-III-R): A study of a shortened form. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1083–1097. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00097-1 Google Scholar
Arbuckle, J. L. (1999). Amos for Windows: Analysis of moment structures (Version 4.01). Chicago, IL: SmallWaters.Google Scholar
Bagge, C. L., & Trull, T. J. (2003). DAPP-BQ: Factor structure and relations to personality disorder symptoms in a non-clinical sample. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17, 19–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.17.1.19.24055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 Google Scholar
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 Google Scholar
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables: New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Blanch, A., & Aluja, A. (2009). Work, family and personality: A study of work–family conflict. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 520–524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.12.004 Google Scholar
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen, K. A. K. A. & Long, J. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162): Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (1991). The Maslach Burnout Inventory - validating factorial structure and invariance across intermediate, secondary, and university educators. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 583–605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2604_2 Google Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (1993). The Maslach Burnout Inventory - Testing for factorial validity and invariance across elementary, intermediate and secondary teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 197–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1993.tb00532.x Google Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral-sciences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 1007–1007.Google Scholar
Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance-structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 147–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1802_2 Google Scholar
de Beurs, E., Rinne, T., van Kampen, D., Verheul, R., & Andrea, H. (2009). Reliability and validity of the Dutch Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form (DAPP-SF), a shortened version of the DAPP-Basic Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Disorders, 23, 308–326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2009.23.3.308 Google Scholar
de Beurs, E., Rinne, T., van Kampen, D., Verheul, R., & Andrea, H. (2010). Criterion-related validity of the DAPP-SF and its utility as a screener for personality disorders in outpatient care. Personality and Mental Health, 4, 271–283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/Pmh.139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
del Barrio, V., Aluja, A., & Spielberger, C. (2004). Anger assessment with the STAXI-CA: Psychometric properties of a new instrument for children and adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 227–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2003.08.014 Google Scholar
Derogatis, L. R. (1975a). The Brief Symptom Inventory: Baltimore, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.Google Scholar
Derogatis, L. R. (1975b). The Symptom Checklist-90-R: Baltimore, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.Google Scholar
Derogatis, L. R. (1994). SCL-90-R. Symptom Checklist-90-R: Administration, scoring and procedures manual: Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems.Google Scholar
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/Bf03193146 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutierrez-Zotes, J. A., Gutierrez, F., Valero, J., Gallego, E., Bailles, E., Torres, X., … Livesley, W. J. (2008). Structure of personality pathology in normal and clinical samples: Spanish validation of the DAPP-BQ. Journal of Personality Disorders, 22, 389–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2008.22.4.389 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling-a Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 Google Scholar
Kushner, S. C., Quilty, L. C., Tackett, J. L., & Bagby, R. M. (2011). The hierarchical structure of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP-BQ). Journal of Personality Disorders, 25, 504–516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2011.25.4.504 Google Scholar
Larstone, R. M., Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., Vernon, P. A., & Wolf, H. (2002). The relationship between Eysenck's P-E-N model of personality, the five-factor model of personality, and traits delineating personality dysfunction. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 25–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00132-5 Google Scholar
Levy, P. (1967). The correction for spurious correlation in evaluation of short-form tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 84–86. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1097-4679%28196701%2923:1%3C84::AID-JCLP2270230123%3E3.0.CO;2-2/abstract 3.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livesley, W. J., & Jackson, D. N. (2002). Manual for the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ): Port Huron, MI: Sigma Press.Google Scholar
Livesley, W. J., & Jackson, D. N. (2009). Manual for the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire: Port Huron, MI: Sigma Press.Google Scholar
Livesley, W. J., Jackson, D. N., & Schroeder, M. L. (1989). A study of the factorial structure of personality pathology. Journal of Personality Disorders, 3, 292–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1989.3.4.292 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livesley, W. J., Jackson, D. N., & Schroeder, M. L. (1992). Factorial structure of traits delineating personality-disorders in clinical and general-population samples. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 101, 432–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0021-843x.101.3.432 Google Scholar
Livesley, W. J., Jang, K. L., Jackson, D. N., & Vernon, P. A. (1993). Genetic and environmental contributions to dimensions of personality-disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 1826–1831.Google Scholar
Livesley, W. J., Jang, K. L., & Vernon, P. A. (1998). Phenotypic and genetic structure of traits delineating personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 55, 941–948. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.55.10.941 Google Scholar
Maruta, T., Yamate, T., Iimori, M., Kato, M., & Livesley, W. J. (2006). Factor structure of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire and its relationship with the revised NEO Personality Inventory in a Japanese sample. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 47, 528–533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2006.03.006 Google Scholar
O'Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers, 32, 396–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807 Google Scholar
Pukrop, R., Gentil, I., Steinbring, I., & Steinmeyer, E. (2001). Factorial structure of the German version of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire in clinical and nonclinical samples. Journal of Personality Disorders, 15, 450–456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.15.5.450.19195 Google Scholar
Simonsen, S., & Simonsen, E. (2009). The Danish DAPP-BQ: Reliability, factor structure, and convergence with SCID-II and LIP-C. Journal of Personality Disorders, 23, 629–646.Google Scholar
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification - an interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4 Google Scholar
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). Reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor-analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/Bf02291170 Google Scholar
van Kampen, D. (2002). The DAPP-BQ in the Netherlands: Factor structure and relationship with basic personality dimensions. Journal of Personality Disorders, 16, 235–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.16.3.235.22536 Google Scholar
van Kampen, D. (2006). The Dutch DAPP-BQ: Improvements, lower- and higher-order dimensions, and reiationship with the 5DPT. Journal of Personality Disorders, 20, 81–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2006.20.1.81 Google Scholar
van Kampen, D., de Beurs, E., & Andrea, H. (2008). A short form of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ): The DAPP-SF. Psychiatry Research, 160, 115–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2007.05.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W., Du, W., Wang, Y., Livesley, W. J., & Jang, K. L. (2004). The relationship between the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire and traits delineating personality pathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 155–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00075-8 Google Scholar
Yadama, G. N., & Drake, B. (1995). Confirmatory factor-analysis of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Social Work Research, 19, 184–192.Google Scholar
Zheng, W., Wang, W., Huang, Z., Sun, C., Zhu, J., & Livesley, W. J. (2002). The structure of traits delineating personality disorder in a Chinese sample. Journal of Personality Disorders, 16, 477–486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.16.5.477.22126 Google Scholar