Abstract
All versions of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) are broadly used to measure people's interpersonal functioning. The aims of the current study are: (a) to examine the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Italian version of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems—short version (IIP-32); and (b) to evaluate its associations with core symptoms of different eating disorders. One thousand two hundred and twenty three participants (n = 623 non-clinical and n = 600 clinical participants with eating disorders and obesity) filled out the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems—short version (IIP-32) along with measures of self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, RSES), psychological functioning (Outcome Questionnaire, OQ-45), and eating disorders (Eating Disorder Inventory, EDI-3). The present study examined the eight-factor structure of the IIP-32 with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM). ESEM was also used to test the measurement invariance of the IIP-32 across clinical and non-clinical groups. It was found that CFA had unsatisfactory model fit, whereas the corresponding ESEM solution provided a better fit to the observed data. However, six target factor loadings tend to be modest, and ten items showed cross-loadings higher than 0.30. The configural and metric invariance as well as the scalar and partial strict invariance of the IIP-32 were supported across clinical and non-clinical groups. The internal consistency of the IIP-32 was acceptable and the construct validity was confirmed by significant correlations between IIP-32, RSES, and OQ-45. Furthermore, overall interpersonal difficulties were consistently associated with core eating disorder symptoms, whereas interpersonal styles that reflect the inability to form close relationships, social awkwardness, the inability to be assertive, and a tendency to self-sacrificing were positively associated with general psychological maladjustment. Although further validation of the Italian version of the IIP-32 is needed to support these findings, the results on its cross-cultural validity are promising.
Highlights
Given the growing recognition of the importance of targeting interpersonal difficulties as outcome variables in psychotherapy, the need for measures of interpersonal problems is warranted
The current study aims to provide some evidence of the cross-cultural generalizability of the psychometric properties of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP)-32 to the Italian population, by testing it with both clinical and non-clinical samples
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) had unsatisfactory model fit (χ2 = 1586.345; df = 436; comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.798; Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.770; root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.066; SRMR = 0.078; RMSEA 90% CI = 0.063–0.070), whereas the corresponding Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) solution provided a better fit to the observed data (χ2 = 512.871; df = 268; CFI = 0.957; TLI = 0.920; RMSEA = 0.039; SRMR = 0.021; RMSEA 90% CI = 0.034– 0.044), as indicated by higher CFI and lower RMSEA values
Summary
Given the growing recognition of the importance of targeting interpersonal difficulties as outcome variables in psychotherapy, the need for measures of interpersonal problems is warranted. The Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP; Horowitz et al, 1988, 2000) is one of the most widely used measures to assess people’s interpersonal functioning. It identifies a person’s most salient interpersonal difficulties (Horowitz et al, 1988), which are conceptually organized along the dimensions of dominance and affiliation (see Figure 1). In the IIP manual (Horowitz et al, 2000), two versions of the IIP are reported: the 64-item version (IIP-64), and a shorter 32-item version (IIP-32) Both the IIP-64 and the IIP-32 comprise the eight interpersonal dimensions and are used to measure individual’s interpersonal distress. The primary spur for the development of a short version (32-items) was to increase the feasibility of it being used as a screening measure in a clinical setting (i.e., to provide a more rapid assessment)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
