Interpersonal relating has been a focus of attention in psychiatry for decades. To address this domain, a self-rating scale, the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP; Horowitz, Rosenberg, Baer, Ureño, & Villaseñor, 1988), was developed. Analysis of the psychometric properties of IIP presented in this article was performed by principal component analysis (PCA) for the purpose of obtaining subscales with a balanced, bipolar dimensionality. The model was validated by the resulting dimensions' ability to discriminate among different categories of personality disorders (PDs). The problem of a General Complaint factor affecting PCAs of questionnaires such as the IIP is discussed thoroughly, and ways of avoiding the problem are outlined. We present a three-dimensional structure of the IIP with both theoretically appealing and statistically robust dimensions of Assertiveness, Sociability, and Interpersonal Sensitivity based on 48 (out of 127) items. Balanced, additive indexes using the subset of 48 items appeared psychometrically sound by showing much lower correlations internally and less confounding from the General Complaint factor than extant indexes derived from the IIP. External validity seemed to be bolstered by all subscales' discriminating significantly between different PDs versus no PDs, on both cluster and single diagnosis levels. Our analysis seemed to substantiate the reliability (scalability) of three dimensions of the IIP tapping different areas of the interpersonal relational field.

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of this study was to re‐evaluate the psychometric properties of the Basic Character Inventory (BCI). In a rather large sample of 503 subjects (323 women and 180 men, 88 non‐psychotic psychiatric inpatients and 415 non‐patients) factor analysis resulted in three factors with personality traits almost identical with the BCI Oral, Obsessive and Hysterical scales. BCI seems to be a fruitful and reliable assessment instrument for personality traits and character types as outlined in psychoanalytic theory. However, some of the trait subscales ought to be scrutinized in future psychometric re‐evaluative studies of BCI on new, large samples. Another factor analysis showed that the BCI Oral scale, together with all the ten subscales of the psychiatric Symptom Check‐list 90 (SCL‐90), loaded on the first factor, and the BCI Obsessive and Hysterical scales loaded on the second factor, but with different signs. Orality seems to be related to psychopathology.

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between standardized, factor-based measures of religiosity and personality/mental health. In a sample of 471 self-identified Christian subjects, 303 females and 168 males, 79 non-psychotic psychiatric in-patients and 392 non-patients, personal extrinsicness was partially positively correlated with the BCI Obsessive score. In multiple regression analyses some of the factor-based religious orientation indices related differently to the BCI Oral, Obsessive and Hysterical Scales and the SCL-90 Global Symptom Index as dependent variables. The religious orientations explained 8.8% of the variance of the BCI Oral Score, 4.2% of the BCI Obsessive score, 3.3% of the BCI Hysterical score, and 12.3% of the SCL-90 Global Symptom Index score. Of the doctrinal belief and morality indices only with Moral conservatism was significantly related to the BCI Hysterical score, and then negatively.