JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Factor Analysis of the Adolescent Personality Assessment Inventory
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Factor Analysis of the Adolescent Personality Assessment Inventory
Kim, Dae-Jin; Park, Min-Cheol; Lee, Kui-Haeng; Lee, Sang-Yeol; Oh, Sang-Woo;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Objectives : The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure of the Adolescent Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI-A) in a standardized adolescent sample using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Methods : For this purpose, three models about factor structure of the PAI-A were explored with EFA in 490 adolescents and then were evaluated with CFA in 268 young offenders. Results : The results showed that the five factor model was considered to be most appropriate for factor structures of the PAI-A in EFA. However, none of the factor models were appropriate for the factor structures of the PAI-A in CFA. Conclusion : These findings suggest that the "five factor model" is thought to explain the PAI-A the best, but further studies are needed.
 Keywords
Adolescent;Factor Analysis, Statistical;Neuropsychological Tests;Psychometrics;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Kim YH, Kim JH, Oh SW, Lee SJ, Jho EK, SH H. Adolescent Personality assessment inventory. Seoul: Hakjisa;2006.

2.
Morey L. Personality assessment inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources;1991.

3.
Kim YH, Kim JH, Oh SW, Leem YL, Hong SH. Personality assessment inventory. Seoul: Hakjisa;2001.

4.
Doo JH, Oh SW, Lee KH. Factor Structures of the Depression Scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Adults with Standardized Sample. J Wonkwang Med Sci 2005;20:359-366.

5.
Kim YH, Park EY, Hong SH, Kang DG. Brief report: exploration of factor structure of personality assessment inventory. Korean J Clin Psychol 2001;20:583-594.

6.
Lee SH, Park MC, Lee SY, Oh SW. Factor Structures of Anxiety Scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Patients with Psychiatric Disorders. J Wonkwang Med Sci 2005;20:223-230.

7.
Oh JY, Rho SH, Kim JH, Oh SW. Factor Structures Mania Scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Patients with Psychiatric Disorders. J Wonkwang Med Sci 2005;20:251-257.

8.
Hong SH. Detection of Response Set and Differential Diagnostic Function Analysis in the PAI. Daegu: Kyungpook National Univ.;2001.

9.
Boyle GJ, Lennon TJ. Examination of the reliability and validity of the Personality Assessment Inventory. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 1994;16:173-187. crossref(new window)

10.
Edens JF, Cruise KR, Buffington-Vollum JK. Forensic and correctional applications of the personality assessment inventory. Behav Sci Law 2001;19:519-543. crossref(new window)

11.
Fantoni-Salvador P, Rogers R. Spanish versions of the MMPI-2 and PAI: an investigation of concurrent validity with Hispanic patients. Assess 1997;4:29-39.

12.
Schinka JA. PAI profiles in alcohol-dependent patients. J Pers Assess 1995;65:35-51. crossref(new window)

13.
Deisinger JA. Exploring the factor structure of the Personality Assessment Inventory. Assess 1995;2:173-179.

14.
Oh SW. Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Personality Assessment Inventory. J Wonkwang Med Sci 2006;21:93-102.

15.
Lee SM. Practice of factor analysis in Korean academic journals. Korean J Ind Organ Psychol 1994;7:1-27.

16.
Church AT, Burke PJ. Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the big five and Tellegen’s three- and four-dimensional models. J Pers Soc Psychol 1994;66:93-114. crossref(new window)

17.
Hong S, Cho Y. Latent structure of the social interaction selfstatement test: an application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol Rep 1999;84:1303-1314. crossref(new window)

18.
Hong SH. The criteria for selecting appropriate fit indices in structural equation modeling and their rationales. Korean J Clin Psychol 2000;19:161-177.

19.
Floyd FJ, Widaman KF. Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assess 1995;7:286-299. crossref(new window)

20.
Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates;1992.

21.
Hong SH, Malik ML, Lee MK. Testing configural, metric, scalar and latent mean invariance across genders in sociotropy and autonomy using a non-western sample. Educ Psychol Meas 2003;63:636-654. crossref(new window)

22.
Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods 1999;4:272-299. crossref(new window)

23.
Kim JH, Hong SH, Kim MK. Thesis Writing in Structural Equation Model. Seoul: Communication Books;2009.

24.
Mulaik SA, James LR, Van Alstine J, Bennet N, Lind S, Stilwell CD. Evaluation of Goodness-of-Fit Indices for Structural Equation Models. Psychological Bulletin 1989;105:430-445. crossref(new window)

25.
John OP, Naumann LP, Soto CJ. Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues: Theory and research. In: John OP, Robins RW, Pervin LA, editors. Handbook of personality. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press;2008. p.114-158.

26.
McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. Personality trait structure as a human universal. Am Psychol 1997;52:509-516. crossref(new window)

27.
Levesque C, Zuehlke AN, Stanek LR, Ryan RM. Autonomy and competence in German and American University students: comparative study based on self-determination theory. JJ Educ Psychol 2004;96:68-84. crossref(new window)

28.
Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol Methods Res 1992;21:230-258. crossref(new window)

29.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5(R)). 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub;2013.