نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 کارشناس مسئول شورای تحقیقات سازمان آموزش و پرورش استان خوزستان
2 عضو هیات علمی دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی تهران، تهران، ایران
3 عضو هیات علمی دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران
چکیده
هدف از پژوهش حاضر بررسی ساختار عاملی فرم E پرسشنامه 16 عاملی کتل و سنجش پایایی و روایی آن می‌باشد. به همین منظور، پرسشنامه 16PF-E روی 513 آزمودنی از کارکنان مؤسسات دولتی اهواز، اجرا شد. بر اساس تحلیل عوامل پاسخنامه‌های آزمودنیها، 69 ماده از 128 ماده پرسشنامه حذف شد ویک ساختار چهار عاملی به دست آمد. روایی عوامل استخراج شده از طریق ضریب روایی عاملی، و پایایی آنها از روش آلفای کرونباخ محاسبه شد. در کل، ضرایب روایی و پایایی بسیار رضایت‌بخش بود. بر اساس یافته‌های این پژوهش، ساختار اصلی پرسشنامه 16PF-E (یعنی 16 عامل) در جامعه پژوهش مناسب نیست ولی چهار عامل استخراجی که از طریق تحلیل عوامل به دست آمده است، از ساختار عاملی مناسبی برخوردارند و واجد شرایط لازم برای کاربرد در پژوهشهای روانشناختی و فعالیتهای کلینکی و تشخیصی می‌باشند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
An Examination of the Factor Structure of Cattell’s 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16-PE-E) in Ahvaz
نویسندگان [English]
- Gholam Hossein Ebadi 1
- Ali Delavar 2
- Bahman Najarian 3
1 Expert in charge of Research Council of Khuzestan Education Organization
2 Member of the academic staff of Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Allameh Tabatabaei University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3 Member of the Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
چکیده [English]
This study was aimed at examining the factor structure and psychometric characteristics of Cattell’s 16-PF Personality Questionnaire (version E). To this end, a Farsi translation of 16-PF(E) was administered to 513 subjects randomly selected from all personnel of government organizations and institutions in Ahvaz. Based upon the results of a factor analysis carried out on the data, a four-factor structure was indicated, while 69 items of the 16-P(E) didn’t load on any of four extracted factors. Validity of the four factors (i.e., new sub-scales of the Farsi version of 16-PF-E) was examined by factorial validation, and their reliability coeffcients were assessed by Cronbach Alpha. On the whole, the reliability coefficients were satisfactory and validity coefficients were significant. According to these findings, the four-factor solution is more suitable than the 16- factor structure of the 16-PF(E) for use in the Iranian population. The Farsi version of the 16-PF(E) (i.e., 4-PF-E-A) appears to possess sound psychometric characteristics for use in both clinical diagnosis and research settings.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Factor Structure. Cattell’s 16
- PF Questionnaire
Cattell, R.B. (1973). Personality pinned down. Psychology Today, 7, 40-46.
Cattell, R.B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Mul.tivariate Behavioral Research, vol. 1, 245-276.
Child, D. (1978). The Essentials of Factor Analysis, London: Holt, Rineheart, and Winston.
Commrey, A.L. (1973). A First Course in Factor Analysis, New York: Asademic press.
Cronhach, L.J. (1951). Cofficient alpha and internal structure. P.cychometrika, vol. 16, 297-334.
Cronbach, L.J. (1970). Essentials of Psychological Testing (3rd ed), New York:
Harper and Row International.
Eber, H.W. (1975). Some psychometric correlates of inmate behavior. Georgia Journal of Corrections, 4(1) 36-49.
Eysenck, H.J. (1958). A short questionnaire for the measurement of two dimensions of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 42, 14-17.
Floderis, B. (1974). Psycosocial factors in relation to coronary heart disease and associaoed risk factors. Nordisk Hygienist Tidskift, Supplementum 6.
Francis, L.J., Brown, L.B. & Philipchalk, R. (1992). The development of an abbreviated form of the revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR- A): Its use among students in England, Canada, USA. and Ausorsuis. Personality and individual Differences, 13(4), 443-450.
Harris, J,E. and Bodden, J.L. (1978). An activity group experience for disengaged elderly persons. Journal of counseling Psycholoyg, 25(4), 325-330.
Mccrae, R.R., Costa, P.T. & Bosse, R. (1978). Anxiety, extraversion and smoking. Brithsh Journal of School and Clinical Psychology, vol. 17, 269-273.
Muihern, T.J. (1975). Use of the 16PF with mentally retarded adults. Measurement & Evaluation in Guidance, 8(1), 26-28.
Russell, D., Pelau, A. and Fergusen, M.L. (1978). Developing a measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42, 290-294.
Schulman, M.S. & Carpenter, J.G. (1982). Predicting job satisfaction and performance with the I6PF: A nursing personnel study. Second International Conference on the I6PF Test: 1982 Proceedings. Champaing, IL., I.P.A.T.
Seidmon, B.L. (1982). Effects of Group Therapy on the deaf. Second International Conference on the I6PF Test: 1982 Proceedings, Champaing, IL., I.P.AT.
Serban, G. and Katz, 0. (1975). Schizophrenic performance on form E of Cattel’s 16PF Test. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39 (2), 169-177.
Spirrison, C.L. (1991). Pychological Report, June, 9, 1219-1222.
Spirrison, C.L. (1992). Psychological Report, 1200-202.
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (1992). SPSS1PC User’s Guide. New York: Mcgraw- Hill.
Trybus, R.J. (1973). Personality & assessment of entering gearing impaired college using the 16PF, Form E. Journal of Rehabilitation of the Deaf, 6(3), 34-40 PA52:1351.
Tseng, M.S. (1970). Locus of control as a determinant of job proficiency, employabilityf and training satisfation of vocational rehabilitation clients. Journal of counseling Psychology, 17(6), 487. PA45:2799.
Tseng, M.S. (1973). Factors differentiating trainable mentally defficient from physically handicapped clients in vocational rehabilitation setting. Rehabilitation Literature, 34, 168-172.
)