Bond University. From the SelectedWorks of Gregory J. Boyle. Gregory J. Boyle, Bond University. January 2, 1986

Transcription

1 Bond University From the SelectedWorks of Gregory J. Boyle January 2, 1986 Intermodality Superfactors in the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), Eight State Battery (8SQ), and Objective Motivation Analysis Test (OAB) Gregory J. Boyle, Bond University Available at:

2 1 Intermodality Superfactors in the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), Eight State Battery (8SQ), and Objective Motivation Analysis Test (OAB) Gregory J. Boyle 1 University of Melbourne 1 Requests for reprints should be addressed to Dr G.J. Boyle, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.

3 2 Abstract The behavioural scientists Eysenck and Cattell have much in common, having investigated intrapersonal psychological structure, albeit at different levels in its hierarchical structure. Eysenck has studied the personality domain in terms of a typological model involving a small number of important superfactors. In contrast, Cattell has typically resorted to analyses of a considerably larger number of primary factors. While both approaches are complementary, nevertheless, little research has been undertaken into intermodality superfactors. The present study, therefore, examines Cattellian intermodality superfactors across the normal personality trait, mood state, and motivational dynamic domains, respectively, in the hope of elucidating broad affect dimensions additional to the broad personality trait constructs already documented by Eysenck.

4 3 Introduction Eysenck's prolific research has concentrated on a small number of intrapersonal psychological superfactors (Barratt and Kline, 1980a, b; Eysenck, 1981, 1983; Eysenck and Eysenck. 1984). According to Eysenck (1984, p. 335). The term 'superfactor' is preferable to 'higher-order' factor "because the position of a factor in a hierarchy is determined by many influences, notably the selection of items or tests correlated: in some matrices a 'second-order factor' may indeed emerge from the intercorrelations of primaries, but in another matrix it might emerge as a primary, or a third-order factor etc. In the present paper, the term superfactor is used to refer to higher-order intermodality factors which are clearly more comprehensive than single-domain higher-order factors within the Cattellian context. Numerous studies have investigated higher-order factors within Cattell's personality trait, emotional mood state and motivational dynamic spheres, resulting in replicable factors (Cattell, pp ). Within the normal personality sphere [i.e. aside from measurement within the abnormal personality domain-indexed quantitatively via the Clinical Analysis Questionnaire (CAQ; Cattell and Sells, 1974)]. Cattell, Eber and Tatsuoka (1970). Burdsal and Cattell (1974). Nesselroade and Baltes (1975), Cattell and Vogelmann (1976). Bolton ( ). Krug (1978). Krug and Laughlin (1977). Gillis and Cattell (1979). Cattell. Brackenbridge, Case, Propert and Sheehy (1980) have all made important contributions for example. Within the mood state sphere, Stewart and Stewart (1976) and Boyle (1983, 1985, 1986) have provided some prefatory evidence. While some attempts at higher-order factoring of the motivational sphere have been made (e.g. Cattell and Child, 1975; Burdsal, ; Boyle, 1983, 1985,

5 4 1986) these findings have been preliminary only. It is moreover, readily apparent that Eysenck's superfactors are represented among the second-order 16PF and 8SQ factors in the above studies (i.e. Eysenck's E and N superfactors at least, while Eysenck's P superfactor is represented in the CAQ). This leads into the question of how many additional superfactors over and above those already elucidated and investigated intensively by Eysenck, can be delineated among intermodality factors derived from higher-order factoring of the 16PF, 8SQ and MAT instruments conjointly? Gillis and Lee (1978, pp ) have reported seven 16PF/MAT intermodality superfactors. Likewise. Cattell and Birkett (1980) have elucidated a number of intermodality superfactors across the O-A Battery, I6PF and MAT instruments. So far, no research has attempted to delineate superfactors across all three domains of normal personality trait, emotional/mood state and motivational dynamics simultaneously. Given the enormity of making measurements on all Cattellian primaries, the instability of regression weights in prediction equations (cf. Eysenck, 1984, p. 333) and the concomitant interpretative complexity, it seems desirable to simplify Cattell's structural model by seeking superfactors as broad as those in Eysenck's typology. Accordingly, some rapprochement of the Cattellian and Eysenckian systems is attempted in the present study. In fact, the two structural approaches have much more in common than is superficially apparent. As Eysenck (1984, pp ) has correctly remarked, "it is unusual to discover such close correspondence between authors so distinct in their methods. procedures, evaluations and premises...the Cattell and Eysenck constructs and theories should be seen not as mutually contradictory, but as complementary and mutually

6 5 supportive." The present investigation extends Eysenckian methodology and rationale to the Cattellian multivariate model of intrapersonal psychological structure. Method Subjects The sample of Ss consisted of 135 teacher college students (21 males, 114 females) at S.C.V.- I.C.E., Melbourne, Australia. The students were predominantly in the young adult category, with the mean age of the sample being approx. 22 yr. The males averaged yr (SE = 0.68 yr), while the females had a mean age of yr (SE = 0.67 yr). Almost all Ss were Australian by birth and came from middle-class socioeconomic backgrounds. All Ss participated voluntarily in the study and appeared motivated to answer the items in the respective instruments honestly and as accurately as possible. As the instruments were administered during the Ss usual class periods, and as the investigator was their usual Lecturer, the students appeared to accept the task before them without noticeable hesitation or concern. Instruments and expected secondary factors The instruments employed were Cattell's 16PF, 8SQ and MAT. In terms of the second-order factors typically found for the 16PF, Cattell (1973, p. 112) has reported eight such factors. Using simplified terminology, these eight secondaries might be labelled: Ql. Extraversion; Qll. Neuroticism; Qlll. Cortertia; QIV. Independence; QV, Discreetness; QVI, Untamedness; QVII. Intelligence; QVIII, Superego. Clearly, the first two 16PF secondaries represent Eysenck's E and N factors, respectively. The 16PF does not measure the abnormal personality sphere

7 6 (which is indexed in the CAQ) and therefore Eysenck's P superfactor is not represented above. The 8SQ (Eight State Questionnaire; Curran and Cattell, 1976) purports to measure Anxiety, Stress, Depression, Regression, Fatigue, Guilt, Extraversion and Arousal. Higher-order 8SQ factors related to Eysenck's N and E superfactors, with the bulk of the variance involving the N superfactor specifically (see Boyle, 1985). In addition, a third but smaller secondary appears to relate to CNS activation/arousal level--a physiological dimension of emotionality. Regarding the MAT (Motivation Analysis Test; Cattell, Horn, Sweney and Radcliffe, 1964). both U (unintegrated/unconscious) and I (integrated/conscious) components relating to motives including Career, Home, Fear, Narcism, Superego, Self-sentiment, Mating, Pugnacity, Assertiveness, and Sweetheart-Spouse provide a total of 20 subscale variables. At the second-order level, the picture is still rather tentative, although Boyle (1983, 1985) has carried out recent investigations indicating at least seven higher-order MAT factors, but these analyses are clearly prefatory. In particular though, the Fear erg (both U and I components) has emerged at the second-order level, indicating the validity of this erg as measured in the MAT. Other secondaries were labelled: Family vs Self-Orientation; Caution vs Hostility; Sexual Expression vs Career Comfort; Uninhibited vs Inhibited Libido; Hostility vs Integrity; Sweetheart-Spouse vs Parental Attachment; Assertiveness vs Passivity (cf. Boyle, 1983). Procedure Since sex differences in mean subscale scores were few, the data analysis was conducted on the combined sex sample for all 44 subscale variables (16 for the 16PF, 20 for the MAT and 8 for the 8SQ). A single-occasion R-factoring of

8 7 the subscale intercorrelations was conducted across all 135 Ss. While this sample size was smaller than desirable for conducting a valid and reliable factor-analytic investigation (see Boyle, 1986), nevertheless it provided the only evidence so far on 16PF/8SQ/MAT intermodality superfactors. In accord with Cureton and D'Agostino (1983, p. 137) and Gorsuch (1983), an iterative principal factoring with SMCs as initial communality estimates was employed. Extraction of factors was based on the Scree test (Hakstian, Rogers and Cattell. 1982) with direct Oblimin rotation to simple structure using the SPSS package. A 16 second-order factor solution was selected as the most appropriate. While the Kaiser-Guttman (K-G) criterion suggested 15 second-order factors as the appropriate number to extract, the Scree test suggested that 16 factors should be extracted. As Child (1970, pp ) has indicated, when the number of variables lies between 20 and 50, both the Scree test and the K-G criterion should converge in suggesting the appropriate number of factors. Outside these limits, the K-G criterion tends to give an erroneous indication of appropriate factor number, however. The 16 x 16 intercorrelation matrix arising from these secondaries was subjected to a further iterative principal factoring to derive Cattellian intermodality superfactors. The Scree test and the K-G criterion both indicated six third-order factors which were rotated to oblique simple structure (strictly speaking, these were second-order, but third-stratum factors). As 99 iterations of the unrotated factor matrix were carried out, communality estimates were presumably stable. The ±0.10 hyperplane count for the final obliquely rotated solution was 54.17%, suggesting only a moderate degree of approximation to maximum simple structure [although it is not possible to be dogmatic about attainment of simple structure from consideration of ±0.10 hyperplane counts alone (see Boyle, 1985)].

9 8 Results and Discussion The six superfactor solution is presented in Table 1, along with the accompanying eigenvalues (unrotated) for the 16 secondaries extracted in the initial factoring above. It is evident that Superfactor I is basically Eysenck's E (Cattell's Exvia) dimension. This superfactor has consistently emerged as a higherorder 16PF entity (Cattell et al., 1970, p. 124). Superfactor II is loaded primarily Table 1 Superfactors in the 16PF, 8SQ and MAT Intermodality Superfactors Eigenvalue Secondaries II Ill lv v VI h' SQ (Mood State) Ql (Extraversion) QIV (Independence) Qlll (Cortertia) QII (Neuroticism) QV (Discreetness) MAT USw vs UHo MAT lse l MAT (U+l) Ho QVIl (Intelligence) O.O MAT UPg/As vs U/ISs MAT UCa/lNa vs UMa/ISw PF (F +G) PF H vs MAT UAs O.Q MAT!Ca vs ISs QVIII (Superego) Eigenvalue Hyperplane count (±0.10) % Variance: Note. Factor loadings are rounded to two decimal places. Significant loadings arc underlined. Secondstratum Factors 3 (QIV), 4 (QIII), 10 (QVII) and 16 (QVIII) are hybrid factors comprising both 16PF and MAT loadings. Of the eight 16PF secondaries, only QVI (Untamedness) failed to emerge here. The 8SQ primaries ail load on a single factor only (Factor 1, Superfactor III), where the relationship to Eysenck's N dimension is evident. Actually, this single 8SQ factor is at a higher-stratum level than the 16PF and MAT secondaries and tertiaries (see Cattell, p. 284).

10 9 Table 2 Superfactor Pattern Intercorrelations (N = 135) Superfactor I II III IV V VI I II 0.08 III IV V VI Note. Only the correlation between Superfactors I and VI is of practical significance. All correlations are rounded to two decimal places. by the 16PF secondary Cortertia/Tough Poise. According to Cattell (1973, p. 121), "Cortertia - hypothesized as a level of cortical alertness in contrast to hypothalamic, pathemic feeling -- is known to be advantageous in demanding situations...the advantage of quick effective response it gives in interpersonal relations may stimulate dominance during the competitive and insecure period of adolescence." Furthermore, Cattell ( 1973, pp ) has stated that the Cortertia-Pathemia dimension involves sentimentality, daydreaming, artistic expression, sensitivity of emotions, especially melancholy ones. As Cattell stated, "This trait has been called pathemia (from Greek pathos, feeling) and it has been called speculatively 'living at the hypothalamic level.' At the contrasting pole the individual is alert and realistic, with feelings cool and under control, and with practical effectiveness as the main concern...a functional predominance of

11 10 cerebral cortical action...presently known criterion associations include a strong relation of pathemia to neuroticism and a moderate one to depression." Several criterion relationships with this dimension were reported by Cattell (1973, p. 186). Superfactor II is also loaded (but negatively) by MAT integrated Superego, which concords directly with the Pathemia pole of the dimension. Superfactor III basically represents Eysenck's N (Cattell's Anxiety) dimension. Of particular note is the finding that all 8SQ mood state primaries load highly on Factor 1 in the 16-factor initial solution and that at the superfactor level it is contributing most of the variance on Superfactor III. This clearly suggests the importance of emotional lability to the N dimension. The alternative possibility that the 8SQ measures only a restricted range of mood states which just happen to lie within the N domain seems improbable as the major explanation of these findings, although it might have some validity given that positive mood states such as curiosity and joy are not measured. Correspondence of the two major Eysenckian superfactors (E and N) with Cattell's secondaries of Exvia and Anxiety was acknowledged by Eysenck (1984, p. 334) as indicating the compatibility of the Cattellian and Eysenckian structural models. Superfactor IV is loaded by MAT Assertiveness as opposed to 16PF Factor H (Sensitivity to Threat) and QVlll (Superego/Guilt Proneness). The basic picture is that of an individual who is adventurous, 'thick-skinned', socially bold and outgoing, and who is also assertive, as opposed to an individual who is shy, timid, restrained, threat-sensitive and susceptible to guilt feelings. This dimension differs from the E-I dimension in several subtle ways, as indicated in Cattell (1973). Superfactor V loads on both the U and I components of the MAT sentiment towards the Parental Home. As well, it loads on 16PF primaries F (Surgency) and

12 11 G (Superego). This orientation towards the family home combined with moral uprightness and emotional contentment appears therefore to represent a major intrapersonal psychological orientation. The sixth superfactor emerging from the present tentative analysis is less clear but suggests the incompatibility of dependency on the parental home and the greater assertiveness possible with a more independent lifestyle. Interpretation of superfactors with only a single major loading and a smaller minor loading (as with Superfactor VI) is clearly a dubious undertaking, especially since only 5.9% of the variance was accounted for in this instance. While all six superfactors in the present analysis had eigenvalues > 1.0, nevertheless, it must be frankly recognized that this analysis is rather subjective and tentative in view of the small sample size. In the case of Superfactor II, the major factor loading was extremely high (0.95) and 26.9% of the variance was associated with this superfactor, thereby justifying its extraction and interpretation. As only six superfactors were extracted at the third-stratum level, it is clear that the solution is not the result of over-extraction of factors. At the second-stratum level, 16 factors were retained for the subsequent higher-order factor analysis, rather than either 14 or 15 factors. The 16-factor solution was justified on the basis of the Scree test and it was considered safer to extract the maximum number of valid factors at the second-stratum level in order to account for as much of the variance as possible at the superfactor level -- already exhibited by the primary subscale factors of the 16PF, 8SQ and MAT instruments. Importantly, almost all 16 secondaries were loaded by several primaries (with the exception of Factor 15, which was loaded by only two such subscale variables-the loadings being 0.65 and

13 , respectively). Accordingly, the 16-factor second-stratum solution was an appropriate basis upon which to conduct the subsequent third-stratum analysis. These then are the first results from an analysis of this form. The superfactors which have emerged (apart from Superfactors I and III -- Eysenck's E and N dimensions) are nevertheless somewhat tentative, but they do provide a point of departure for future explorations of superfactors beyond those already described by Eysenck (E, N and P). The present findings do however suggest that at least four major superfactors can be added to those which Eysenck has discussed, although the exact nature of these superfactors remains somewhat unclear from the present preliminary analysis. Interestingly, the intercorrelations of the six superfactors (Table 2) are all fairly trivial which suggests the orthogonality of these superfactors (as shown in Eysenck's studies of his E, N and P dimensions). This finding also demonstrates the general applicability of oblique rotational strategies, as derived factors which are independent will reveal their orthogonality by the absence of sizeable intercorrelations, as in the present instance. In any event, what is now required is extensive research using large and varied samples with Cattell's multivariate instruments. Clearly, the Cattellian multivariate psychometric model with its emphasis on numerous primary dimensions across the normal and abnormal personality trait, emotional/mood state and motivational dynamic domains (cf. Cattell, 1984) provides a logical avenue for elucidating intermodality superfactors additional to those already investigated by Eysenck. Delineation of further superfactors along the lines of the present investigation will greatly simplify the application of Cattellian psychometrics in both research and applied areas and will simultaneously add more specificity to Eysenck's typological model. Such

14 13 endeavours should clearly demonstrate the essential compatibility of both the Cattellian and Eysenckian structural models. References Barrett P. T. and Kline P. (1980a) Personality factors in the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Person. Individ. Diff., 1, 3l Barrett P. T. and Kline P. (1980b) The location of superfactors P, E and N within an unexplored personality factor space. Person. Individ. Diff., l, Bolton B. (1977) Evidence for the 16PF primary and secondary factors. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 3, l-15. Bolton B. (1979) Longitudinal stability of the primary and secondary dimensions of the 16PF-E. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 3, Boyle G. J. (1983) Higher-order factor structure of Cattell's MAT and 8SQ. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 6, Boyle G. J. (1985) A re-analysis of the higher-order factor structure of the Motivation Analysis Test and the Eight State Questionnaire. Person. Individ. Diff. 6, Boyle G. J. (1986) Elucidation of motivation structure by dynamic calculus. In Handbook of Multivariate Experimental Psychology. 2nd edn. (Edited by Nesselroade J. R. and Cattell R. B.). Plenum Press. New York. Burdsal C. (1975) An examination of second order motivational factors as found in adults. J. Genet. Psychol., 127, Burdsal C. (1976) An examination of the relationship between personality traits and motivational dynamics. J. Psychol., 94,

15 14 Burdsal C. and Cattell R. B. (1974) A definitive second order factor analysis of the personality structure in high school aged children. J. Genet. Psychol., 124, Cattell R. B. (1973) Personality and Mood by Questionnaire. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco. California. Cattell R. B. (1979) Personality and Learning Theory: Vol. I. The Structure of Personality in Its Environment. Springer. New York. Cattell R. B. (1983) Structured Personality-learning Theory: A Wholistic Multivariate Research Approach. Praeger. New York. Cattell R. B. (1984) The voyage of a laboratory Multivar. Behav. Res., 19, Cattell R. B. and Birkett H. (1980) The known personality factors found aligned between first order T-data and second order Q-data factors, with new evidence on the inhibitory control, independence, and regression traits. Person. Individ. Diff., 1, Cattell R. B. and Child D. (1975) Motivation and Dynamic Structure. Holt. Rinehart & Winston, London. Cattell R. B. and Sells S. (1974) The Clinical Analysis Questionnaire (CAQ). IPAT. Champaign, Illinois. Cattell R. B. and Vogelmann S. (1976) Second stratum personality structure in joint rating and questionnaire measures with new light on questionnaire distortion. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 2, Cattell R. B., Horn J. L., Sweney A. B. and Radcliffc J. (1964) Handbook for the Motivation Analysis Test, MAT. IPAT. Champaign, Illinois.

16 15 Cattell R. B., Eber H. W. and Tatsuoka M. M. (1970) Handbook for the 16PF. IPAT, Champaign, Illinois. Cattell R. B., Brackenridge C. J., Case J., Propert D. N. and Sheehy A. J. (1980) The relation of blood types to primary and secondary personality traits. Mankind Q., 21, Child D. (1970) The Essentials of Factor Analysis. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, London. Cureton E. E. and D'Agostino R. B. (1983) Factor Analysis: An Applied Approach. Erlbaum. Hillsdale, New Jersey. Curran J. P. and Cattell R. B. (1976) Manual for the Eight State Questionnaire. IPAT. Champaign, Illinois. Eysenck H. J. (1981) A Model for Personality. Springer, New York. Eysenck H. J. (1983) Personality as a fundamental concept in scientific psychology. Aust. J. Psychol., 35, Eysenck H. J. (1984) Cattell and the theory of personality. Multivar. Behav. Res., 19, Eysenck H. J. and Eysenck M. W. (1984) Personality and Individual Differences: A Natural Science Approach. Plenum Press, New York. Gillis J. S. and Cattell R. B. (1979) Comparison of second-order personality structures at 6-8 years with later patterns. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 4, Gillis J. S. and Lee D. C. (1978) Second-order relations between different modalities of personality trait organization. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 3, Gorsuch R. L. (1983) Factor Analysis. 2nd edn., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey.

17 16 Hakstian A. R., Rogers W. T. and Cattell R. B. (1982) The behavior of number-of-factors rules with simulated data. Multivar. Behar. Res., 17, Krug S. E. (1978) Reliability and scope in personality assessment: A comparison of the Cattell and Eysenck inventories. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 3, Krug S. E. and Laughlin J. E. (1977) Second-order factors among normal and pathological primary personality traits. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 45, Nesselroade J. R. and Baltes P. B. (1975) Higher-order convergence and divergence of two distinct personality systems: Cattell's HSPQ and Jackson's PRF. Multivar. Behav. Res., 10, Stewart D. W. and Stewart L. F. (1976) An application of P-technique to the Eight State Questionnaire. Multivar. Exp. Clin. Res., 2,