한국판 성격평가질문지 재표준화 연구: 기존 표준화 집단과의 비교
Restandardization of the Korean Personality Assessment Inventory: Comparisons with the Original Korean Version
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
Objectives This study examined the results of the restandardization of the Korean Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). The Korean PAI was first standardized in 2001 and then restandardized in 2019 to establish new normative data. On the other hand, differences may exist in the results of the restandardized version considering the time interval, which may include cultural and social differences. Thus, differences between the results of the Korean PAI administered in 2001 and 2019 must be examined to confirm its new normative data followed by restandardization. Methods Data from 2212 adults who administered the original Korean PAI in 2001 and 1263 adults who administered the Korean PAI in 2019 were collected. The study compared the reliability and mean scores. In addition, the mean scores of the Korean PAI administered in 2019 were converted to T-scores adapted to the normative data of 2001. The collected data was analyzed using a t-test and comparing the T-scores. Results The internal consistency reliability showed a similar pattern in both versions, but the differences among the mean scores and T-scores appeared to be significant. Conclusion The significant differences between the scores of the Korean PAI administered in 2001 and 2019 reflect the result of the restandardization. Therefore, the restandardized version of the Korean PAI may bring more precise information that can be adapted to the contemporary era.
Abstract
Objectives This study examined the results of the restandardization of the Korean Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). The Korean PAI was first standardized in 2001 and then restandardized in 2019 to establish new normative data. On the other hand, differences may exist in the results of the restandardized version considering the time interval, which may include cultural and social differences. Thus, differences between the results of the Korean PAI administered in 2001 and 2019 must be examined to confirm its new normative data followed by restandardization. Methods Data from 2212 adults who administered the original Korean PAI in 2001 and 1263 adults who administered the Korean PAI in 2019 were collected. The study compared the reliability and mean scores. In addition, the mean scores of the Korean PAI administered in 2019 were converted to T-scores adapted to the normative data of 2001. The collected data was analyzed using a t-test and comparing the T-scores. Results The internal consistency reliability showed a similar pattern in both versions, but the differences among the mean scores and T-scores appeared to be significant. Conclusion The significant differences between the scores of the Korean PAI administered in 2001 and 2019 reflect the result of the restandardization. Therefore, the restandardized version of the Korean PAI may bring more precise information that can be adapted to the contemporary era.
참고문헌 (34)
- Holden RR, "Handbook of cross-cultural and multicultural personality assessment", pp.267~302 (2000), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers
- Piotrowski C, "Internship training in psychological assessment:has managed care had an impact?", Assessment, 6, pp.381~390 (1999)
- Morey LC, "The Personality Assessment Inventory Professional Manual" (1991), Psychological Assessment Resources
- Gardner BO, "Personality Assessment Inventory scores as predictors of misconduct, recidivism, and violence: a meta-analytic review", Psychol Assess, 27, pp.534~544 (2015)
- Reidy TJ, "Testing the predictive validity of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) in relation to inmate misconduct and violence", Psychol Assess, 28, pp.871~884 (2016)
- Hathaway SR, "Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory" (1943), The Psychological Corporation
- Butcher JN, "MMPI-2: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2" (2001), University of Minnesota Press
- Ruiz MA, "Predictive validity of the personality assessment inventory (PAI) for identifying criminal reoffending following completion of an in-jail addiction treatment program", Psychol Assess, 26, pp.673~678 (2014)
- Walters GD, "What is the latent structure of alcohol use disorders? A taxometric analysis of the Personality Assessment Inventory Alcohol Problems Scale in male and female prison inmates", Psychol Addict Behav, 24, pp.26~37 (2010)
- Kim YH, "Standardization study of Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI): reliability and validity", Kor J Clin Psychol, 20, pp.311~329 (2001)
- Groves JA, "The German Adaptation and Standardization of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI)", J Pers Assess, 88, pp.49~56 (2007)
- Lyrakos DG, "The development of the Greek Personality Assessment Inventory", Psychology, 2, pp.797~803 (2011)
- Cheung FM, "Clinical validation of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory", Psychol Assess, 15, pp.89~100 (2003)
- Pignolo C, "Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI)", Psychol Assess, 30, pp.1226~1236 (2018)
- Kim YH, "Manual for the Korean Personality Assessment Inventory" (2019), Inpsyt
- Cohen J, "Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences" (1988), Lawrence Erlbaum Association
- Edens JF, "On the validity of validity scales: the importance of defensive responding in the prediction of institutional misconduct", Psychol Assess, 18, pp.220~224 (2006)
- Lilienfeld SO, "Handbook of psychopathy", pp.107~132 (2016), the Guilford Press
- Morey LC, "Casebook for the Personality Assessment Inventory: a structural summary approach" (2007), Psychological Assessment Resources
- 유성경, "한국 대학생의 상담, 심리치료, 정신치료에 대한 태도", 한국심리학회지: 상담 및 심리치료, 17(3), pp.617~632 (2005), 한국상담심리학회
- Escorial S, "Is individual reliability responsible for the differences in personality differentiation across ability levels?", Pers Individ Dif, 138, pp.331~336 (2019)
- Helmes E, "A perspective on developments in assessing psychopathology:a critical review of the MMPI and MMPI-2", Psychological Bulletin, 113, pp.453~471 (1993)
- Long KA, "Socioeconomic status and MMPI-2 interpretation", Meas Eval Couns Dev, 27, pp.158~177 (1994)
- Navarro-González D, "Is general intelligence responsible for differences in individual reliability in personality measures?", Pers Individ Dif, 130, pp.1~5 (2018)
- Benning SD, "Factor structure of the psychopathic personality inventory: validity and implications for clinical assessment", Psychol Assess, 15, pp.340~350 (2003)
- Claes L, "Validation of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory among psychiatric inpatients: sociodemographic, cognitive and personality correlates", J Pers Disord, 23, pp.477~493 (2009)
- Brand C, "Current topics in human intelligence, volume 4: theories of intelligence" (1994), Ablex Publishing Corporation
- McLarnon MJ, "The personality differentiation by intelligence hypothesis: a measurement invariance investigation", Pers Individ Dif, 54, pp.557~561 (2013)
- Harris JA, "Testing the differentiation of personality by intelligence hypothesis", Pers Individ Dif, 38, pp.277~286 (2005)
- Austin EJ, "Relationships between ability and personality: does intelligence contribute positively to personal and social adjustment?", Pers Individ Dif, 32, pp.1391~1411 (2002)
- Deisinger JA, "Exploring the Factor Structure of the Personality Assessment Inventory", Assessment, 2, pp.173~179 (1995)
- Boyle GJ, "Personality Assessment Inventory: a confirmatory factor analysis", Percept Mot Skills, 79, pp.1441~1442 (1994)
- Karlin BE, "The Personality Assessment Inventory with chronic pain patients:psychometric properties and clinical utility", J Clin Psychol, 61, pp.1571~1585 (2005)
- Hoelzle JB, "The invariant component structure of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) full scales", J Pers Assess, 91, pp.175~186 (2009)