Interpersonal Adjective Scales Research Articles

Love and confidence in protection as two independent systems underlying intimate relationships.

This comment provides theoretical and empirical support for 2 independent systems, love and security of attachment, that have often been confounded in the literature. These systems have different functions, different emotions, a different distribution among the primates, and a different pattern of theoretically expected sex differences. Evidence for this distinction can be found in M. D. S. Ainsworth's (1967) original empirical studies and the recent work of Phillip R. Shaver and his colleagues (K. A. Brennan, C. L. Clark, & P. R. Shaver, 1998), as well as data reported here. The Experiences in Close Relationships Inventory (ECR) was administered to 239 undergraduates. Participants also filled out the Nuturance/Love (LOV) scale from the Interpersonal Adjective Scale Big Five-Revised to explore expected negative correlations between love as measured in standard personality tests and the avoidance factor of the ECR. As predicted, women scored lower on the Avoidance scale and higher on the LOV scale, whereas there were no gender differences in security in close relationships. As predicted, LOV was negatively correlated with avoidance but not with security.

The Structure of Wiggins' Interpersonal Circumplex: Cross-Cultural Studies

Summary: This paper presents the results obtained in Spain with The Interpersonal Adjective Scales of J.S. Wiggins (1995) concerning the variables' structure. There are two Spanish versions of IAS, developed by two independent research groups who were not aware of each other's work. One of these versions was published as an assessment test in 1996. Results from the other group have remained unpublished to date. The set of results presented here compares three sources of data: the original American manual (from Wiggins and collaborators), the Spanish manual (already published), and the new IAS (our own research). Results can be considered satisfactory since, broadly speaking, the inner structure of the original instrument is well replicated in the Spanish version.

Close Relationships and Complementary Interpersonal Styles Among Men and Women

An important assumption in interpersonal theory is that complementary interpersonal styles characterize close relationships. Using the Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scale (J. S. Wiggins, 1991) and the Relationship Closeness Inventory (E. Berscheid, M. Snyder, & A. M. Omoto, 1989), 48 American college students (24 men, 24 women) answered questions on their own interpersonal styles and those of their close and not close, same-gender friends. Results revealed that a complementarity of interpersonal styles was present in the close, same-gender relationships of the women but not of the men. Women reported engaging in more activities overall and in more diverse activities with their close friends than men. However, women and men did not differ in how important close relationships were to them.

Internal and temporal reliability estimates for informant ratings of personality using the NEO PI-R and IAS. NEO Personality Inventory. Interpersonal Adjective Scales.

This study examines the internal consistency and temporal stability of informant ratings from two widely used instruments for normal personality assessment, the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and the Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS). Well-known adult targets were selected by 109 undergraduate students and rated on two occasions separated by a 6-month interval. With few exceptions, estimates of internal consistency are adequate to good for both instruments. NEO PI-R domain scores yield coefficient alphas ranging from .89 to .96, with a median of .80 for the 30 facet scales. IAS octant scales show coefficient alphas ranging from .83 to .92. Retest Pearson correlations are above .70 for each of the NEO PI-R domain scores and both IAS axis coordinates, and intraclass correlations are above .60 for all scales from both instruments. Score changes were small but statistically significant for three of the five NEO PI-R domains at retest. The retest stability of IAS type classifications varies as a function of the extremity of the associated octant scores.

Measures of mental health and a five factor theory of personality.

Principal components analyses were calculated with intercorrelations of scores on scales measuring mental health and the five-factor model of personality on a sample of 296 university students. Mental health was measured with Affect Balance scale, Happiness Measure, Satisfaction with Life scale, Life Orientation test, Short Index of Self-actualization, Social Interest scale, and the Self-control Schedule, along with subscales from Scales of Psychological Well-being, Openness to Experience scale, and the Perceived Self Questionnaire. The five-factor model was measured with the Interpersonal Adjective Scale Revised-B5. Separate analyses for both the traditional five-factor model and the expanded interpersonal circumplex model of personality gave six-factor solutions. Scores on scales measuring subjective well-being, openness, and social interest loaded on the same factors as Neuroticism, Openness to Experience, and Agreeableness, respectively. Scales that measured autonomy and self-actualization formed a factor that was separate from the five-factor model.

Prospects for the Assessment of Normal and Abnormal Interpersonal Behavior

The Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS) and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) are current representatives of a long-standing tradition and their use as assessment instruments is expected to become increasingly widespread in the near future and beyond. The IAS is a direct descendent of the interpersonal circumplex tradition and is characterized by an extraordinarily close relation between theory and method in the assessment of both normal and disordered personalities. The IIP stems from a more recent conceptual distinction between psychiatric symptoms and problems of living that has been linked directly to the interpersonal circumplex. This review is meant to alert clinicians to promising supplements to traditional intrapsychic and symptomatic psychodiagnostic batteries.

Structure of the Jackson Personality Inventory from the Perspective of the Five-Factor Model

The generality and comprehensiveness of the five-factor model was tested using the Jackson Personality Inventory. The Interpersonal Adjective Scales Revised-B5 and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory scales were used as markers for the five-factor model. 220 introductory psychology students (104 men and 116 women) voluntarily completed the three inventories for partial course credit. Combined factor analysis of the 25 scales from the three inventories yielded six major factors. Five of these factors were similar to the five major factors of personality, namely, Extraversion, Neuroticism, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness, and the sixth factor was identified as Social Adroitness. These results supported the generality but not the comprehensiveness of the five-factor model.

Friendships, femininity, and reaction to affective arousal.

This study examined relations between college women's scores on femininity and their same-sex friendships and how these women's perceptions were influenced by induction of success or failure. 200 undergraduate women described themselves and their best friends on the dominance and submissiveness scales of the Interpersonal Adjective Scales and also completed the Behavioral Self-report of Femininity and a biographical information sheet. Mean ratings of dominance were above average both for self and best-friend ratings, but these two dominance ratings were not significantly correlated. However, women viewed themselves as similar to their best friends on submissiveness characteristics. Highly feminine women described themselves as more dominant than less feminine women. Highly feminine women also experienced less anxiety and fatigue as measured by the Profile of Mood States in response to failure induction than less feminine women. Both sets of results are contrary to expectations, but the behavioral definition of femininity was different from that used earlier.

The Interpersonal Circle as a Heuristic Model for Interpersonal Research

In this article, I review major advances in the development of the interpersonal circle and its measurement, as delineated by Timothy Leafy (1957) and his colleagues. In my early work (Lorr & McNair, 1963, 1965), an interpersonal Behavior Inventory consisting of manifest behavioral statements was constructed. The 14 categories were found to fit a circular order in several samples. Studies using LaForge and Suczek's (1955) Interpersonal Check List, and Wiggins's (1979) Interpersonal Adjective Scales further established the value of Leary's conceptions and extended them. Several major theorists, researchers, and clinicians including Benjamin, Carson, Horowitz, Kiesler, and Wiggins have been inspired by Leary and, in many cases, have extended his ideas in ways not originally envisioned. Recent research (e.g., Hofstee, de Raad, & Goldberg, 1992; Millon, 1987) demonstrated the pertinence of the interpersonal conception of personality to the 5-factor model and personality disorders.

Effects of client personality on dominance and affiliation during early sessions of rational-emotive psychotherapy

This is a study of effects of client personality on interpersonal presentation during early Rational-Emotive therapy (RET). Independent variables were intake scores for clients from the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI; Millon, 1983). Dependent variables, from audiotapes of sessions at the Institute for RET (IRET), were Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scale (IAS-R; Wiggins, Trapnell and Phillips, 1988) ratings of clients and therapists. Three commonly adaptive axis II traits (histrionic, narcissistic and antisocial) had significant positive effects on clients, increasing their apparent interpersonal dominance. Paranoid traits, which have previously shown either neutral or positive patterns, mirrored the adaptive patterns. Compulsive traits, which have also been helpful in other stressful situations, seemed maladaptive, however, here. Finally, six commonly maladaptive axis II traits (schizoid, avoidant, dependent, passive-aggressive, schizotypal and borderline) had weak, insignificant effects on clients. In general, these findings suggest that the IRET therapeutic setting may be a psychologically “safe” place for clients. Personality traits that are usually troublesome did not impair self presentation in early sessions of RET, and several usually positive traits appear helpful.

Effects of client presenting syndromes on client and therapist dominance and affiliation during early sessions of Rational-Emotive psychotherapy

This is a study of effects of presenting clinical status on interpersonal presentation during early Rational-Emotive therapy (RET). Independent variables were intake scores for clients from the axis I scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI; Millon, 1983). Dependent variables, from audiotapes of sessions at the Institute for RET (IRET), were Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scale (IAS-R; Wiggins, Trapnell and Phillips, 1988) ratings of clients and therapists. MCMI scales associated with stimulation seeking (N, hypomania; T, drug abuse) were significantly positively correlated with client dominance. Therapist affiliation was negatively correlated with all client MCMI scales, and these were significant for scales that assessed the most severe intake presenting problems (A, anxiety, D, dysthymia).

SASB and Clinical Psychology: Further Hypotheses

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). From catalog to classification: Murray's needs and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 258-265. Lorr, M. (1966). Explorations in typing psychotics. Oxford, England: Pergamon. Trapnell, P. D., & Wiggins, J. S. (1990). Extension of the Interpersonal Adjective Scales to include the Big Five dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1-10. Wiggins, J. S., Trapnell, P., & Phillips, N. (1988). Psychometric and geometric characteristics of the revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS-R). Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 517530.

Personality Differences between Left- and Right-Handers: An Overlooked Minority Group?

Left-handers form a minority group of about 10% of the world′s population. They are often subjected to both overt and covert prejudice by some segments of society, and are occasionally actively discriminated against. Such experiences might be expected to cause some personality differences between left- and right-handers. A sample of 930 consistent left- and right-handers was tested with the Interpersonal Adjective Scales. Left-handers were found to score higher on measures of dominance and lower on measures of nurturance, a pattern that has been reported in studies of other minority groups. Left-handers were found to rate themselves as higher on the arrogant/calculating dimension (claiming "cocky," "crafty, "cunning," "boastful," "wily," "calculating," "tricky," and "sly" as accurate self descriptors) and were also higher on the cold hearted dimension (agreeing that "ruthless," "ironhearted," "hardhearted," "uncharitable," "coldhearted," "cruel," and "unsympathetic" as self descriptors). Some possible explanations, based upon environmental and social factors which affect all minorities, and some factors that affect left-handers specifically, are considered.

Psychopathy and The Big 5: Correlations Between Observers' Ratings of Normal and Pathological Personality

We investigated the relation between psychopathy, assessed using the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV— Hare, Cox, & Hart, in press), and observers' ratings of normal personality made using the revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales—Big 5 Version (IASR-B5—Trapnell & Wiggins, 1991). Subjects were 24 men: 12 university students and 12 incarcerated offenders. PCL:SV ratings were significantly (p < .05) correlated with the IASR-B5 dimensions of Dominance (r = .66), Love (r = −.82), Conscientiousness (r = .83), Openness (r = .76), and Neuroticism (r = −.46). These correlations were not attributable to stereotyped perceptions of students or offenders. The results suggest that observer ratings may be a useful adjunct to self-reports in the study of personality pathology. The advantages and disadvantages of observer ratings relative to self-reports are discussed.

California Psychological Inventory and the Five-Factor Model of Personality

The generality and comprehensiveness of the five-factor model was tested using the California Psychological Inventory, with the Interpersonal Adjective Scales Revised—B5 and the NEO-Personality Inventory scales as markers for the five major personality factors. The three inventories were completed by 88 male and 99 female undergraduates. Results provided strong empirical evidence for the generality of four factors (Extraversion, Neuroticism, Openness, and Conscientiousness) but not for the comprehensiveness of the five-factor model.

The circle as a model for the interpersonal domain of Swedish trait terms

Swedish interpersonal traits were assumed to have the structure demonstrated by Wiggins for the Interpersonal Adjective Scales in English. Positive and negative interpersonal trait terms were rated for accuracy when describing people. The ratings were used to construct 16 eight‐item scales which were ordered relative to two principal components and labelled A to P. The evaluative meaning of each scale item was rated by a second group. The ranks of the mean ratings for the scales followed expectations. The 16 scales were combined into eight scales PA, BC, DE, etc., to NO. From a new group of subjects (N = 159) self‐ratings were obtained. The correlations between the eight scales were used to obtain maximum‐likelihood estimates of population coefficients of a hypothetical circulant matrix. A circumplex model fitted the data well and the two equally large orthogonal components ordered the PA to NO variables within a circular semantic space. The model was interpreted as a structural representation of basic‐level categories for interpersonal attributes of personality in the natural language.

The effect of acquaintanceship on the validity of personality impressions: A longitudinal study.

Previous studies have used cross-sectional designs to demonstrate the beneficial effect of acquaintanceship on the validity of personality impressions. To counter critiques of those studies, a longitudinal design was used. Participants were randomly assigned to 16 groups of 5-7 members who met once a week for 7 weeks. None of the participants in any group were previously acquainted. Before the first meeting, they completed a battery of self-report measures, including the NEO Five Factor Inventory and the revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales

A geometric taxonomy of personality scales

Previous taxonomies of personality traits have been lexical in nature and have been concerned primarily with the meaning of adjectives in personality description. The taxonomy presented in this article employed personality scales as the units to be classified and was guided by theoretical, rather than lexical, considerations. A priori distinctions among different domains of trait‐descriptive terms identified a distinctive domain of interpersonal traits within which a preliminary conceptually‐based taxonomy was developed. The Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS) were constructed to provide geometrically precise semantic markers of that domain in the form of a circumplex model organized around the orthogonal coordinates of dominance and nurturance. In the course of a decade of research, some 172 personality scales were classified with reference to the IAS by computational procedures described in detail. Advantages and limitations of the current geometric taxonomy of personality scales are discussed, and future research directions are indicated.

Classifying personality types with occupational prototypes

The interpersonal properties of Holland's occupational preferences model was examined with respect to the Interpersonal Circumplex. We investigated the hypothesis that occupational preferences, selected on the basis of their judged interpersonal relevance, may be used to classify subjects into their appropriate trait category on the Circumplex. In Study 1, eight Interpersonal Occupation Scales (IOS) were developed to map categories from the Circumplex, with Holland's Self-Directed Search (SDS) serving as the occupations item pool. The IOS was designed according to the prototype scale construction strategy ( Broughton, 1984). Intraclass correlation analysis of the IOS revealed high interjudge agreement among prototype rankings. In Study 2, 236 undergraduates completed the SDS, IOS, and Wiggins' Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS-R). On the basis of IAS-R scores, subjects were classified into one of eight personality types on the Circumplex. Discriminant function analyses, with SDS and IOS scale scores serving as separate predictors of quadrant and octant criteria, revealed significantly higher hit rates for IOS scales. Subsequent separate-group discriminant analyses indicated an average 71% correct classification rate for IOS scale predictors. Results were interpreted with respect to the link between personality and occupational preference and the use of a prototype approach in exploring this link.

The Relationship Between A Circumplex Model of Interpersonal Behaviors and Personality Disorders

The Relationship Between A Circumplex Model of Interpersonal Behaviors and Personality DisordersJordan P Sim and David M. RomneyJordan P SimRequests for reprints should be sent to Dr. D. M. Romney. Department of Educational Psychology. University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada.Search for more papers by this author and David M. RomneyUniversity of Calgary.Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. D. M. Romney. Department of Educational Psychology. University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:February 2011https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1990.4.4.329PDFPDF PLUS ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations About Next article FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Cited byCited by1. Narcissism on interpersonal circumplex model: Reactions to imaginary abandonment and rejectionOnline publication date: 1 December 2022. Go to citation Crossref Google ScholarAidan G. C. Wright, Michael N. Hallquist, Jennifer Q. Morse, Lori N. Scott, Stephanie D. Stepp, Kimberly A. Nolf and Paul A. Pilkonis2. Clarifying Interpersonal Heterogeneity in Borderline Personality Disorder Using Latent Mixture ModelingOnline publication date: 20 March 2013. Go to citation Crossref Google ScholarJorden A. Cummings, Adele M. Hayes, Lawrence H. Cohen, Jean-Philippe Laurenceau, D. Sebastian Saint and Kelley Gricol3. Interpersonal Competence and Daily Stress Generation in Individuals with Avoidant Personality Disorder SymptomsOnline publication date: 8 February 2013. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar4. Maladaptive Variants of Conscientiousness and AgreeablenessOnline publication date: 5 December 2012. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar5. A Five-Factor Measure of Dependent Personality TraitsOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar6. ReferencesOnline publication date: 27 April 2011. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar7. Interpersonal problems in eating disordersOnline publication date: 28 August 2009. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar8. Modeling Stability and Change in Borderline Personality Disorder Symptoms Using the Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales–Big Five (IASR–B5)Online publication date: 15 October 2010. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar9. Variations in the Understanding of Interpersonal Behavior: Adherence to the Interpersonal Circle as a Moderator of the Rigidity-Psychological Well-Being RelationOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar10. The development of a ‘best practice’ service for women in a medium-secure psychiatric setting: treatment components and evaluationOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google ScholarChristopher J. Hopwood and Leslie C. Morey11. Psychological Conflict in Borderline Personality as Represented by Inconsistent Self–Report Item RespondingOnline publication date: 21 November 2007. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar12. Assessment of borderline pathology using the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems Circumplex Scales (IIP-C): a comparison of clinical samplesOnline publication date: 1 January 2007. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar13. Interpersonal profiles in major depressive disorderOnline publication date: 1 January 2007. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar14. Relationships between personality disorder attributes and friendship qualities among college studentsOnline publication date: 30 June 2016. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar15. Online publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar16. Interpersonal rigidity and complementarityOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar17. Normale versus abnormale persoonlijkheidOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar18. Zur diskriminativen Validität des Inventars zur Erfassung Interpersonaler Probleme (IIP)Online publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar19. Beauty in the eye of the beholder? How high security hospital psychopathically-disordered patients rate their own interpersonal behaviourOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar20. Stability, reliability, and norms for the inventory of interpersonal problemsOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar21. Interpersonal Perception and Pathological Personality Features: Consistency Across Peer GroupsOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar22. Self- and Peer Perspectives on Pathological Personality Traits and Interpersonal Problems.Online publication date: 1 January 2005. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar23. Where is the Personality in Personality Disorder Assessment? A Comparison Across Four Sets of Personality Disorder ScalesOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar24. MCMI-II predictors of judgmental tendencies as measured by the first impression interaction procedureOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar25. The dimensional view of personality disorders: a review of the taxometric evidenceOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar26. A conceptualization of personality-related disorders of interpersonal behaviour with implications for treatmentOnline publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google ScholarRonald Blackburn27. Relationship of Personality Disorders to Observer Ratings of Interpersonal Style in Forensic Psychiatric PatientsOnline publication date: 22 February 2011. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar28. Personality Disorders as Social CategoriesOnline publication date: 30 June 2016. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar29. Online publication date: Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar30. Personlighedsforstyrrelser og den interpersonelle cirkelOnline publication date: 24 January 2013. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar Volume 4Issue 4Dec 1990 Information© 1990 The Guilford PressPDF download