Can Spouses Provide Knowledge of Each Other's Communication Patterns? A Study of Self‐Reports,Spouses' Reports,and Observational Coding

The purposes of this study were (1) to assess individuals' self-reports of communication and their reports about their spouses' communication in order to examine the congruence of spousal views and (2) to investigate whether each report provided unique information about observed marital interactions. These associations were evaluated in a sample of 119 longtime married couples. The Verbal Aggression and Cooperation subscales from the Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales were used as measures of negative and positive aspects of communication. The findings indicated that self-reports of both verbal aggression and cooperation were strongly associated with the same individual's report of his or her spouse's verbal aggression and cooperation. Conversely, self-reports were only moderately associated with reports made by spouses (e.g., the husband's report of his wife's communication). Hence, within-reporter agreement was higher than between-reporter agreement about marital communication. When entered into regression models, reports made by spouses, but not self-reports, explained unique variance in observations of marital hostility and affection. There was one exception: Wife self-report of verbal aggression explained unique variance in coders' ratings of wife hostility, controlling for husband report of wife verbal aggression. Findings indicate the importance of assessing partners' views of one another's communication for the most accurate portrayal of marital interactions. Implications for research and clinical work are discussed.     

Path model analyzed with ordinary least squares multiple regression versus LISREL

The data of a specified path model using the variables of voice, perceived organizational support, being heard, and procedural justice were subjected to the two separate structural equation modeling analytic techniques--that of ordinary least squares regression and LISREL. A comparison of the results and differences between the analyses is discussed, with the LISREL approach being stronger from both theoretical and statistical perspectives.     

Factors influencing failure on stressful army training courses

A set of ability tests from the Kit of Factor Referenced Cognitive Tests (Ekstrom, French and Harman, 1976, 1979), the EPQ, a Type A scale and a measure of Obsessionality were administered to 135 non-commissioned officers in the British Army at the beginning of an arduous ten-week training course in the Brecon Beacons. It was found that the 25 men (19%) who were unable to complete the training course did not differ from the others in any of the abilities measured, but were significantly more neurotic, and tended to be more extraverted, impatient and emotionally unrepressed. Personality factors are thus seen to contribute more to success or failure on such courses than simple cognitive abilities.     

Factor analysis and personality theory

This article deals with the factor analytic approach to personality. More specifically, it deals with problems in factor analyses of personality questionnaires which contribute to factorial confusion. It is stated that in fact the factorial results make better sense than is usually admitted. The apparent disparity of results can be accounted for by technical defects in the chosen factor analytic method. Furthermore, it is shown that another source of disagreement lies in the interpretation of what are essentially the same factors.     

The itemetric properties of the Eysenck personality questionnaire: A reply to Helmes

Helmes (1980) presented results demonstrating that the purported factors of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) did not emerge in a sample of 191 undergraduates. However, this conclusion was reached using incorrect factor analytic methodology. Helmes not only used an idiosyncratic version of Eysenck's original methodology but also failed to take into account recent evidence on factor analytic procedures. To illustrate the remarkable clarity of the EPQ factors, the results from three samples of data are presented here. The sample data are diverse, taken from three different populations: 1198 British adults, 406 British students and 116 Thai students. The consistency of various psychometric parameters adds further evidence justifying the existence of these factors.     

Personality factors in the Eysenck personality questionnaire

Hierarchical factor analyses were carried out on raw scored EPQ data yielded from two samples of subjects, a Gallup adult quota sample of 1198 subjects and 406 university undergraduates. Each sample was split by sex providing six data sets for analysis. Results at the second order level clearly indicated the recovery of practically all the E, N and L items as three distinct factors, P item recovery differed among males and females. Adult female and student female subject groups did not show clear recovery of a substantial majority of P items. Although P, as a factor, did not appear recognisably in the male student sample, this was interpreted as being due either to the low subject: variable ratio and/or to the low subject number (N=171) and its resultant lack of definition of initial P item variance. The P factor appeared most strongly as a second order in the total Gallup, total student, and male Gallup sample.