Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T14:50:52.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validation Studies of the Eysenck Personality Inventory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2018

James H. White ,
Geoffrey M. Stephenson ,
Sandra E. A. Child  and
Janyce M. Gibbs
James H. White
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Keele, Staffordshire
Geoffrey M. Stephenson
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The University, Nottingham
Sandra E. A. Child
Affiliation:
Teacher, 3, Ashburnham Road, London, S.W.10
Janyce M. Gibbs
Affiliation:
5 Queenswood Road, London, S.E.23
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The validation of personality questionnaires presents the psychologist with knotty problems. His reaction all too often is to plead that, as it is difficult to find criteria for validating measures of personality, he is justified in relying on face validity alone. Fortunately, this has not been true of the Maudsley Personality Inventory (MPI), nor even of its more recent successor, the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI). Serious attempts have been made to validate these questionnaires, and the problem has been tackled from a number of different angles. S. B. G. Eysenck (1962) and Eysenck and Eysenck (1963) found that subjects nominated by judges as extraverted, introverted, stable and neurotic scored significantly differently on scales measuring these dimensions. A further study (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1964), in which larger numbers of both judges and subjects were used, confirmed these findings. Vingoe (1966) found that subjects who rated themselves extraverted on a seven-point scale of extraversion–introversion differed significantly on the extraversion scale of the EPI from those who rated themselves introverted.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 114 , Issue 506 , January 1968 , pp. 63 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1968 

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

Bartholomew, A. A. (1959). “Extraversion-introversion and neuroticism in first offenders and recidivists.” Brit. J. Delinq., 10, 120–129.Google Scholar
Brebner, J. M. T. (1957). “An experimental investigation of the relationship between conditioning and introversion-extraversion in normal subjects.” Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Das, J. P. (1957). “An experimental study of the relation between hypnosis, conditioning and reactive inhibition.” Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1964). Crime and Personality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1965). “Extraversion and the acquisition of eyeblink and G.S.R. conditioned responses.” Psychol. Bull., 63, 258–270.Google Scholar
Eysenck, S. B. G. (1962). “The validity of a personality questionnaire as determined by the method of nominated groups.” Life Sciences, 1, 13–18.Google Scholar
Eysenck, S. B. G. and Eysenck, H. J. (1963). “The validity of questionnaire and rating assessments of extraversion and neuroticism and their factorial stability.” Brit. J. Psychol., 54, 51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, S. B. G. and Eysenck, H. J. (1964). “Personality of judges as a factor in the validity of their judgements of extraversion–introversion.” Brit. J. soc. clin. Psychol., 3, 141–148.Google Scholar
Field, J. G., and Brengelmann, J. C. (1961). “Eyelid conditioning and three personality parameters.” J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 63, 517–523.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J., Latscha, R., Bennett, B. M., and Hsu, P. (1963). Tables for Testing Significance in a 2 × 2 Contingency Table. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Franks, C. M. (1956). “Conditioning and personality: a study of normal and neurotic subjects.” J. abnorm, soc. Psychol., 52, 143–150.Google Scholar
Franks, C. M. (1963). “Personality and eyeblink conditioning seven years later.” Acta Psychologica, 21, 295–312.Google Scholar
Little, A. (1963). “Professor Eysenck's theory of crime: an empirical test on adolescent offenders.” Brit. J. Criminol., 4, 152–163.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (1956). Non-parametric Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W. (1961). “Theories of juvenile delinquency: some empirical investigations.” Paper presented at the XIVth Intl. Cong. Appl. Psychol., Copenhagen. Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W. (1963). “A cross-cultural investigation of the relationship between introversion-extraversion, social attitudes and anti-social behaviour.” Brit. J. soc. clin. Psychol., 2, 196–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweetbaum, H. A. (1963). “Comparison of the effects of introversion-extraversion and anxiety on conditioning.” J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 66, 249–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symon, S. M. (1958). “An investigation of the relationship between conditioning and introversion-extraversion in normal subjects.” Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Vingoe, F. J. (1966). “Validity of the Eysenck extraversion scale as determined by self-ratings in normals.” Brit. J. soc. clin. Psychol., 5, 89–91.Google Scholar
Willett, R. A. (1960). “Measures of learning and conditioning.” In: Eysenck, H. J. (ed.) Experiments in Personality. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.