The Temporal Reliability of the Maudsley Personality Inventory

Abstract

The Maudsley Personality Inventory (MPI) that purports to assess the two personality dimensions, extraversion-introversion (E-I) and neuroticism-normality (N-N), has been used extensively in recent research work and a number of published papers in somewhat different spheres bear witness to the use made of the questionnaire (Eysenck, 1956a; Coppen, 1958; Franks, 1957; Bartholomew, Franks and Marley, 1958). A clear description of its construction and use has been presented by Eysenck (1956b) and a comparison between it and other personality scales, as well as some criticisms of its construction, has been set out by Jensen (1958). The particular interest this questionnaire has evoked is due in part to the fact that it is one of the few personality inventories constructed and standardized this side of the Atlantic. The importance of a reliable questionnaire of this type is noted by Eysenck (1958) in his attempt to produce a shortened version of the MPI that will be of value in such work as market research.

Sleep Quality and Related Factors in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study in Taiwan

“… 25 , 26 Maudsley Personality Inventory (MPI) is a questionnaire designed to reflect a constellation of traits including extroversion, psychoticism, or neuroticism. 27 , 28 …”

“…25,26 Maudsley Personality Inventory (MPI) is a questionnaire designed to reflect a constellation of traits including extroversion, psychoticism, or neuroticism. 27,28 Here, patients' sleep quality was assessed using the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI), which contains 19 questions distributed among seven components: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, sleeping medication use, and daytime dysfunction. The overall score is between 0 and 21, and PSQI > 5 indicates poor sleep quality.…”

A longitudinal study of personality and major depression in a population-based sample of male twins

“…These considerations underscore the importance of epidemiological samples and longitudinal designs. E measures sociability, liveliness, and the level of ease and pleasure felt in the company of others (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985). Several studies support a state effect (Coppen, 1965;Kerr et al 1970 ;Farmer et al 2002), whereby subjects in a depressive episode experience lower levels of E, but two others fail to support it (Bartholomew, 1959 ;Mezey et al 1963). Several studies support a state effect (Coppen, 1965;Kerr et al 1970 ;Farmer et al 2002), whereby subjects in a depressive episode experience lower levels of E, but two others fail to support it (Bartholomew, 1959 ;Mezey et al 1963).…”

“…Its relationship to MD may be in the opposite direction to that seen with N, but is probably less robust (Akiskal et al 1983; Hirschfeld & Cross, 1983). Several studies support a state effect (Coppen, 1965; Kerr et al 1970; Hirschfeld et al 1983 a ; Farmer et al 2002), whereby subjects in a depressive episode experience lower levels of E, but two others fail to support it (Bartholomew, 1959; Mezey et al 1963). In two studies, low E did not predict future MD (Hirschfeld et al 1989; Boyce et al 1991).…”

Trait Routinization, Functional and Cognitive Status in Older Adults

“…Popular models of vulnerability at older age define personality factors as moderating factors that facilitate or inhibit emotional and social well-being in older age (Goldberg & Huxley, 1992;DeBeurs, Conijs, Twisk, Sonnenberg, Beekman, & Deeg, 2005). Personality patterns tend to remain relatively stable throughout the adult lifespan, and empirical research points to a typical correlation of 0.7 between measures of personality taken at different time points in the lives of adults (Bartholomew & Marley, 1959). These findings suggest that personality factors are quite stable constructs.…”