Development and Validation of the Dutch Brief Form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ-BF-NL)

Abstract

This study describes the development and psychometric properties of the Dutch brief form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ-BF-NL). Representative samples from the Netherlands (N = 1,055) and the United States (N = 1,153) and a Dutch student sample (N = 987) were used for development, cross- and external validation, respectively. The authors' strategy for item selection and scale validation replicated the development of the U.S. brief form (MPQ-BF). Internal consistencies were generally good and comparable to the U.S. version, as were correlations with the U.S. full-length scales and higher order structure. Moreover, convergent and divergent patterns were consistent with prediction, with Positive Emotionality related to social and activating behavior, Negative Emotionality to anxiety, and Constraint to reversed impulsivity and externalizing behaviors. In sum, the MPQ-BF-NL provides the Dutch-Flemish language area with a personality inventory well suited for both psychopathology research and clinical practice and offers new opportunities for fundamental and cross-cultural studies on personality.

Being Honest About Dishonesty: Correlating Self-Reports and Actual Lying

“…This is a general self‐report measure of personality, measuring a range of discrete trait dispositions (Patrick, Curtin, & Tellegen, ; see Eigenhuis, Kamphuis, & Noordhof, , for the Dutch version). In this study, two measurements for inconsistent response patterns were used: the Variable Response Inconsistency scale (VRIN) and the True Response Inconsistency (TRIN).…”

Internal and external validity of the brief version of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire: Exploratory structural equation modelling

“…Therefore, all four factors of the ESEM MPQ-BF model were reasonably well defined, thereby supporting the four-factor oblique ESEM model at the scale-level. Previous PCA/ EFA studies involving the MPQ-BF at the scales level have shown that although the primary factor scales loaded saliently on their target higher-order broad factors, there was considerable crossloadings on the higher-order broad factors [4,8], thereby indicating that the higher-order broad factors in the MPQ-BF were not clearly defined. A likely explanation for the differences in the present study and that of previous studies is that unlike previous studies that used PCA and EFA…”

“…Absorption loaded on both the higher-order dimensions of Positive Emotionality and Negative Emotionality. In a subsequent study, Eigenhuis, Kamphuis, and Noordhof [8] examined the factor structure of the primary trait scales of the MPQ-BF using EFA. As in Patrick et al's study, the primary trait scales loaded saliently on their target higher-order dimensions.…”

“…BAS-Reward Responsiveness assesses approach motivation in anticipation of a future reward; BAS-Drive assesses goal-directed behavior; and BAS-Fun Seeking assesses motivation to approach immediately (a form of impulsivity). Related to these associations, the study by Eigenhuis et al [8] examined the relationships of the MPQ-BF broad factors with the factors in the BIS/BAS scales. Findings showed that Positive Emotionality was correlated positively with all three BAS scale scores; Negative Emotionality was correlated negatively with BAS-Drive and BAS-Reward Responsiveness scale scores, and positively with the BIS scale score; and Constraint was correlated negatively with the BAS-Fun Seeking scale score, and positively with BAS-Drive and BIS scale scores.…”

“…Additionally, all the primary trait factors also had several non-designated items loading saliently on them. Excluding non-salient items, negative salient items, and items that cross-loaded on other factors, there were (out of 12 in each case), 9,6,10,7,8,6,7,6,3 24, 71, 83, 95, 107 and 119) factors, respectively. Consequently, all factors were not well defined.…”