ABSTRACT
The present study was carried out in France to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Scale for Interpersonal Behavior (SIB), a multidimensional measure of difficulty and distress in assertiveness that was originally developed in The Netherlands. This appraisal was conducted with a clinical sample (N = 166) and a general population sample (N = 150). The clinical series comprised 115 patients with social phobia and 51 patients with personality disorder, 28 of whom were of the avoidant type. Support was found for internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the French SIB. Compared to controls, both social phobics and patients with an avoidant personality disorder had significantly lower mean scores on all performance scales and significantly higher ones on all distress scales, with the social phobics occupying a position in between. Findings in relation to convergent and divergent validity were quite satisfactory. Sensitivity of the French SIB for detecting change was demonstrated in a subgroup of the clinical Ss who had undergone 15 sessions of cognitive-behavioral group therapy for underassertiveness.
Subject(s)
Assertiveness , Interpersonal Relations , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Inventory/statistics & numerical data , Phobic Disorders/diagnosis , Adult , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Female , France , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Personality Disorders/psychology , Phobic Disorders/psychology , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
Vanderlinden and his collegues (1993) proposed a first european clinical scale to assess dissociative symptoms, the DIS-Q. The DIS-Q was studied in a psychiatric (n = 154) and a control (n = 65). Swiss French speaking sample. Our results reflected that The Dissociation Questionnaire (DIS-Q) has a good criterion-related validity since it discriminates between patients (Axes I and II of the DSM IV classification) and controls. Statistical comparisons indicated significant differences between three subgroups (axis I only, n = 60; axis II only, n = 24; axes I et II together, n = 70), and controls (n = 65). The total DIS-Q score was the highest for the patients with axes I and II together. About 12% of the psychiatric sample studied obtained DIS-Q score > or = 2.5, suggesting the presence of pathological dissociative symptoms. Our results seem not to be influenced by cultural factors.
Subject(s)
Dissociative Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Inventory/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Depressive Disorder/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder/psychology , Dissociative Disorders/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/psychology , Middle Aged , Neurotic Disorders/diagnosis , Neurotic Disorders/psychology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/statistics & numerical data , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
Young (1990) proposed a clinical scale to assess personality disorders. We translated and used this scale for validation purpose in pathological (n = 113) and control (n = 54) samples. Our results reflected that Young Schema Questionnaire (SQ) has a good discrimination value between patients (Axes I and II of the DSM III-R classification) and controls. Statistical comparisons indicated significant differences between three subgroups-axis I only (n = 53), axes I and II together (n = 60), and controls (n = 54). The SQ score was the highest in the patients with personality disorders, reflecting the sensitivity of the scale to Axis II pathology. Principal component analysis (unrotated factors) showed a first factor, a failure axis (eigenvalue = 7.93), and a second factor, a narcissistic one (eigenvalue = 1.30). These two principal components explained 62% of the variance.
