AGGRESSION, IMPULSIVENESS AND PERSONALITY

AVANCES EN PSICOLOGÍA CLÍNICA. 2014

ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

AGGRESSION, IMPULSIVENESS AND PERSONALITY: ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF MEASUREMENT DISTORTION

Isidro Pérez-Martín, Enrique Armas-Vargas, Pablo García-Medina, Teresa Sánchez-Remacho and Leticia Padilla-González Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychobiology and Methodology, Psychology Section, University of La Laguna (Spain)

Abstract Background: Several authors have found a direct relationship between impulsivity and aggressive behaviour. There is less research that measures the effect of response distortion and the influence that this has on the completion of psychological tests, especially when it comes to assessing sensitive content such as social criticism, as in the case of aggressive behaviour. Method: The objective is to study the relationships that exist between aggression, impulsivity, personality characteristics and the distorting effect of assessment, with a sample of 214 adults. Our working group placed particular emphasis on the reduction of the influence of response bias in clinical forensic assessments. To do this, we relied on existing instruments and on scales that have proven their validity and reliability in the assessment of response bias, given the variables measured. For example, the L Scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) in the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) test. Results: The Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) and the “L Scale” of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) helped us to validate their convergence with the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ), Barratt BIS-11 Impulsiveness Scale and with the EPQ-R Eysenck Personality Questionnaire - Revised. The results indicate that those individuals who wish to be noticed (social desirability), score highly on the L Scale; they also tend to recognise neither aggressive nor impulsive behaviour. The variables that best predicted the “BDHI L Scale” were Dissimulation, Hostility and Extroversion. Conclusions: L Scale aid in the interpretation of results as it assists in the assessment of response bias in the same test. It allows us to record a tendency to conceal in those more negative aspects of personality, such as aggressive behaviour or impulsivity.

ASOCIACIÓN ESPAÑOLA 1 DE PSICOLOGÍA CONDUCTUAL (AEPC)

691


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Keywords: Impulsiveness, aggression, personality, response distortion, L Scale.

Introduction In the past decade, many authors have been interested by aggression, impulsiveness, personality characteristics and the importance of assessing response bias. Different authors have found a direct correlation between impulsiveness measured using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) and aggressive behaviour measured using the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) - L Scale (MMPI-2) (Perez-Martin, ArmasVargas, Garcia-Medina, Bethencourt-Perez & Padilla-Gonzalez, 2013), or between Dickman’s Impulsivity Inventory (DII) with the four factors of the aggression questionnaire (BPAQ) Vigil-Colet, Morales-Vives and Tous, (2008). As for the relation between aggression and personality characteristics, authors such as Barlett and Anderson (2012) have found positive as well as negative correlations between aggression and personality characteristics. The study of aggression and the importance of the assessment of response bias in psychological evaluations have led several authors to be generally interested in their further study. In this sense, Armas-Vargas, Bencomo-Hernandez and Sanchez-Remacho (2014) stated the importance of the assessment of response bias in the completion of psychological tests, when, in particular, content sensitive to social criticism is being evaluated, such as aggressive behaviour. Meanwhile, Archer (2009) says that aggression is an innate pattern of behaviour that, with age, becomes inhibited through social learning, owing to the fact that such conduct is socially unacceptable. Concerning aggression, several different studies link to the importance of social pressure, stating that it should be evaluated using scales that assess response bias as this factor is highly vulnerable to social criticism. It is important to highlight that the great majority of psychometric tests used to evaluate aggressive and impulsive behaviour lack scales for assessing test response bias. In this study, we aim to study the relationship between aggression, impulsiveness, personality characteristics, and the distorting effect of response bias. For this we have the L Scale, which was included in the BDHI Hostility Inventory (Armas-Vargas & Garcia-Medina, 2012) and the Dissimulation Scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised EPQ-R (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991).


692


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Method Participants The sample was formed of 214 adults from Tenerife (106 women and 108 men). The mean age was 34.29 years (SD = 8.67). With respect to level of education, 7% had primary level education, 23% secondary level, 42% technical studies, and 28% had university level education. 53% were unmarried and 47% were married.

Instruments The investigation was carried out using the following questionnaires: -

BDHI Hostility Inventory (Buss & Durkee, 1957), previously factorised by Armas-Vargas and Garcia-Medina (2012) with a heterogeneous sample of 850 adults (clinical, normal, forensic and prison population). The authors included the L Scale of the MMPI-2 for the assessment of response bias in the test. The Spanish version of this inventory already included some of the items, as a control measure, corresponding to the L sub-scale of the MMPI (1967 version) to evaluate the level of sincerity of the individual, which appears to be related to social desirability (Castillo et al., 2005, p.44). After the factorisation of the L Scale of the BDHI, it comprised 13 items and the internal consistency was .72. The new structure (BDHI-L Scale) showed that it was sensitive for assessment in a normal population in a clinical/forensic environment. Two subquestionnaires were produced: The first sub-questionnaire (BDHI-A) covered four factors: Hostility (distrust and resentment), L Scale, Verbal Aggression, and Containment of Verbal Aggression. Explained Variance was 32.6%. Total Reliability BDHI-A sub-questionnaire was α=.80. The second questionnaire (BDHI-B): Physical Aggression, Anger, L Scale, Avoidance of Physical Aggression. Explained Variance reached 37%. Total Reliability BDHI-B sub-questionnaire was α=.78. Total Reliability for the BDHI (A-B) test was α=.86.

-

The Aggression Questionnaire (Aggression Questionnaire; AQ by Buss & Perry, 1992) comprises one of the most trusted self-reporting instruments for the assessment of aggressive behaviour. The test is composed of 29 items coded in a


693


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

five point Likert-type scale. There are four sub-scales: physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger and hostility. We have used the results of an exploratory analysis (varimax rotation) of a population of 190 male adults. The Total Explained Variance was 50%. Total Reliability for the test was α=.81 (Armas-Vargas & Garcia Medina, 2012). -

The EPQ-R Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991) is a scale which comprises 83 items that are scored on a dichotomous Yes or No scale. Ibañez (1996) Spanish version. The test assesses three dimensions of personality: Extroversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism, and a Dissimulation Scale (L Scale), with an alpha coefficient of between α=.71 and α=.86.

-

The Barratt BIS-11 Impulsiveness Scale (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995). The Spanish adaptation by Oquendo, et al. (2001) was used. It is a test which comprises 30 items scored from 0 to 4 on a Likert-type scale. It is composed of three sub-scales: Motor Impulsiveness, Cognitive Impulsiveness and Unplanned Impulsiveness. The Spanish version of the test demonstrates adequate psychometric properties, with α=.75.

-

The International Personality Disorders Examination (IPDE) is a useful tool for personality evaluation, compatible with the DSM-IV and CIE-10 classification systems. It permits the identification of features and behaviour which could be relevant for the assessment of personality disorder criteria. The Spanish version was adapted by Lopez-Ibor, Perez-Urdaniz and Rubio-Larrosa (1996). We used the Spanish version, specifically the screening questionnaire of 59 items distributed among 9 sub-scales that measured 9 dimensions of personality with True/False questions: Paranoid, Schizoid, Dissocial, Impulsive, Limiting, Histrionic, Anankastic/Perfectionist, Anxious and Dependent. The reliability and validity indices supported a valid test, of use in the evaluation of personality disorders for research purposes (Loranger et al., 1994).

Procedure The data were taken from a normal population and obtained using the snowball sampling technique, with the participation of students from a master course. All the participants were informed about the objectives and methodology of the study, and all


694


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

participated voluntarily. The results were kept anonymous to protect the identity of the participants.

Design The applied design was of correlational approach and quasi-experimental extraction. Both bivariate and multivariate differences were established. Using test methodology (pencil and paper questionnaires), the respondents lent credence to the BDHI-L Scale, AQ, BIS-11 and EPQ-R questionnaires as measurement systems.

Results The data appearing in Table 1 significantly support the convergent validity between the measurements of the BDHI-L Scale Hostility Inventory and the factors of the AQ Aggression Questionnaire, as also found in other results (Armas-Vargas & Garcia-Medina, 2012). This also corresponds with the results obtained by Vigil-Colet, Ruiz-Pamies, Anguiano-Carrasco and Lorenzo-Seva (2012), with respect to the impact that social desirability has on the evaluation of aggression; in this case applying items from the EPQ-R L Scale.

Table 1. Correlation between the factors of the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) - L Scale of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

(MMPI-2), and the Aggression

Questionnaire (AQ). (Men and Women). N=137. BDHI-L Scale Containment of

Avoidance

Verbal

Verbal

of Physical

Physical

L Scale

Aggression

Aggression

Hostility

Anger

Aggression

Aggression

-.29***

.08

-.08

.35***

.45***

-.33***

.58***

Anger

-.49***

.01

.14*

.52***

.64***

-.29 ***

-.42***

Hostility

-.31***

-.07

.32***

.66***

.44***

-.19*

.37***

-.29***

.21**

.13

.29***

-.30***

.27***

Physical Aggression AQ

Verbal Aggression

-.24**

Nota. *p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001

In Table 2, significant negative correlation can be seen between the BDHI - L Scale and all the variables of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11). These results


695


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

differ from the study by Perez-Martin et al., (2013), which found that the BDHI – L Scale only correlated with the factor for cognitive impulsiveness. The data presented here reinforces the convergent validity of the two tests. Vigil-Colet, et al., (2008) found similar results between impulsiveness and aggression, both physical and verbal, and with more emotional components such as anger. Tables 1 and 2 provide justification of the importance of assessing response bias in psychological testing. Especially when the variables studied (aggression and impulsiveness) are used in relation to the social rejection they incite. The negative correlation between the BDHI – L Scale with the factors of the AQ and the BIS-11 suggest that participants tend to show a defensive pattern in their responses. That is, they try to conceal those more negative aspects of their behaviour or they try to present themselves as more socially desirable (Armas-Vargas, et al., 2014).

Table 2. Correlation between the factors of the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) - L Scale of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2), and Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11). (Men and Women). N=114. BDHI-L Scale Containm L Scale

Cognitive Impulsiveness Motor BIS-11

Impulsiveness Unplanned Impulsiveness

Hostility

Anger

Avoidanc

Physical

e of

Aggressio n

Verbal

ent of

Aggressio

Verbal

Physical

n

Aggressio

Aggressio

n

n

-.33***

-.16*

.05

.48***

.35***

-.25**

.48***

-.32***

.03

-.11

.42***

.48***

-.27**

.32***

-.16*

-.16*

-.07

.29***

.26**

-.24**

.34***

Nota. *p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001

Table 3 shows the correlation between the BDHI-L Scale and the L Scale of the EPQ-R Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (Dissimulation) which significantly supports the convergent validity between both scales that evaluate defensiveness/positive image (Armas-Vargas, 2013).


696


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Table 3. Correlation between the factors of the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) - L Scale of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2), and the factors of the three basic scales of personality and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised control scale (EPQ-R) (Men and Women). N=201. BDHI-L Scale Containment L Scale

Verbal

of Verbal

Aggression

Aggression

Hostility

Anger

Avoidance

Physical

of Physical

Aggression

Aggression

EPQ-R Neuroticism

-.33***

-.03

.37***

.63***

.65***

-.21***

.27***

Psychoticism

-.25***

.08

.27***

.45***

.37***

-.26***

.35***

Extroversion

.09

.15*

-.31***

-.23***

-.21**

-.00

Dissimulation

.57***

-.02

-.21**

-.27***

.18**

.00

-.06 -.29***

Nota. *p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001

Differences between men and women The differences between men and women were analysed (using Student´s test) with the factors of the instruments which formed part of the study (BDHI-L Scale, AQ, BIS-11 and EPQ-R). Table 4 presents the results showing the significant differences for both sexes. The results support those found in other similar studies. Men, with respect to women, scored more highly in the Physical Aggression factor of the BDHI-L Scale (Armas-Vargas & Garcia-Medina, 2012), whilst women, with respect to men, scored more highly in the Neuroticism factor of the EPQ- R.

Table 4. Measurement Differences (Student t) for Men and Women and the factors of the BussDurkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) - L Scale of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2), Aggression Questionnaire (AQ), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) and Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (EPQ-R). VARIABLES

GROUP

N

MEAN

S.D.

t

3.03 **

BDHI-L Scale Physical Aggression

Men

106

8.55

1.85

Women

104

7.87

1.38

EPQ-R Neuroticism

Men

107

31.42

5.18

Women

106

33.01

5.73

-2.12 *

Nota. *p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001


697


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Predictive Validity: “BDHI-L Scale” In Table 5, of the variables studied, we can see the those that best predict the “BDHI-L Scale” are Dissimulation of the EPQ-R, Hostility of the BDHI (with minus sign) and Extroversion of the EPQ-R. Table 5. Multiple Regression for the “BDHI-L Scale” criterion. Multiple Regression

Determination Coeff.

Adjusted Determination

Typical Error

Coeff. .69

Residual Regression

.48

.47

1.56

GL

Quadratic Total

F

3

225.46

30.80 ***

99

241.56

Variance Analysis

Variables included:

B

SE B

Beta

t

Dissimulation

.35

.04

.57

7.83***

Hostility

-.17

.05

-.24

-3.17**

Extroversion

.09

.04

.16

2.14*

(Constant)

9.03

2.38

3.79

Nota. *p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001

Conclusion In summary, the results obtained are in accordance with those obtained in earlier investigations, of which there are many where the authors have found similar results. Worthy of note is the effect found in the constructs for aggression and impulsiveness (Perez-Martin et al., 2013; Vigil-Colet et al., 2008), between aggression and personality characteristics (Barlett & Anderson, 2012) as well as the effect of response distortion and the manner in which these modulate the variables measured (Armas-Vargas, 2013). On the basis of the results obtained, we may conclude that we are in an emerging field of research that will lead to better understanding of the phenomenon of test response distortion. The aim of this is to reduce the impact, mitigate the effects of, and avoid one of the most worrying biases in psychological evaluations. The MMPI-2 L Scale, without a doubt, helps to interpret results, given that it serves to assess response bias in the same test. The results obtained tell us that those people who wish to emphasise their social desirability score highly on the L Scale; whereas others tend not to recognise having aggressive or impulsive behaviour.


698


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Finally, in this study, we should highlight, particularly in respect of the data obtained through the function of multiple regression, the manner in which Dissimulation, Hostility and Extroversion show that they contribute decisively in clarifying what other components may explain how the L Scale works. From these kinds of studies it is clear that in psychological evaluation we must assess response bias in order to avoid distortion and misrepresentation of test results by those being evaluated. In future studies, we consider that the same line of research should be followed, but the sample should be increased, to procure greater heterogeneity in its composition.

References Archer, J. (2009). Does Selection Explain Human Sex Differences in Aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 249-266. Armas-Vargas, E. (2013). Marlowe and Crowne Scale of Social Desirability: Forensic Contrast Study. In M. Vilariño, M. J. Vázquez, R. Monteserin, B. GonzalezAmado & E. Arias. (Eds.), VII (Inter)national Congress de Legal and Forensic Psychology (pp. 104-105). Madrid: Spanish Society for Legal and Forensic Psychology. Armas-Vargas, E., Bencomo-Hernandez, I., & Sanchez-Remacho, T. (2014). Distorted Beliefs and Thoughts in Released Domestic Violence Prisoners: Factorial Structure. In R. Arce; F. Fariña; M. Novo, & D. Seijo (Eds.). Legal and Forensic Psychology: Investigation-Action (pp. 297-308). Santiago de Compostela: Spanish Society for Legal and Forensic Psychology. Armas-Vargas, E., & Garcia-Medina, P. (2012). BDHI Hostility Inventory and the L Scale: Factorial Structure. In R. Quevedo-Blasco & V.J. Quevedo-Blasco (Eds.), V International Congress and X National Congress of Clinical Psychology (pp. 407411). Santander: Spanish Association for Behavioural Psychology. Barlett, C.P., & Anderson, C.A. (2012). Direct and Indirect Relations between the Big 5 Personality Traits and Aggressive and Violent Behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 870-875. Buss, A.H., & Durkee, A. (1957). An Inventory for Assessing Different Kinds of Hostility. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 343-349.


699


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Buss, A.H., & Perry, M.P. (1992). The Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452-459. Castillo, T., Estepa, Z., Guerrero, J., Rivera, G., Ruiz, A., & Sanchez, C. (2005). Prison Treatment Programme for Aggressors in the Family Environment. Domestic Violence Working Party. Prison Documents 2: Madrid. Eysenck, H.J., & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1991). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales (EPS adult). London: Hodder & Stoughton. Ibañez, M.I. (1996). Spanish Adaptation of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire: full version (EPQ-R) and abbreviated (EPQ-RS). Degree Thesis. Castello de la Plana: Jaume I University, Valencia. Lopez-Ibor, J.J., Perez-Urdaniz, A., & Rubio-Larrosa, V. (1996). International Examination for Personality Disorders. Module DSM-IV and module CIE-10. World Health Organisation. Madrid. Meditor. Loranger,

A.W.,

Sartorius,

N.,

Adreoli,

A.,

Berger,

Pl.,

Buchheim,

P.,

Channabasavanna, S. M., Coid, B., Dahal, A., Diekstra, R.F.W., Ferguson, B., Jacobsberg, L. B., Mombour, W., Pull, C., Ono, Y., & Regier, D. A. (1994). The World Health Organization/Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration International Pilot Study of Personality Disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51, 215-224. Oquendo, M.A., Baca-Garcia, E., Graver, R., Morales, M., Montalban, V., & Mann, J.J. (2001). Spanish Adaptation of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS). European Journal of Psychiatry, 15, 147-155. Patton J.M., Stanford, M.S., & Barratt, E.S, (1995). Factor Structure of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology 51, 768-774. Perez-Martin, I., Armas-Vargas, E., Garcia-Medina, P., Bethencourt-Perez, J.M., & Padilla-Gonzalez, L (2013). Impulsiveness, Aggressive Behaviour, Personality and Control of Response Distortion. In R. Quevedo-Blasco & V.J. QuevedoBlasco (Eds.), VI International Congress and XI National Congress for Clinical Psychology. Advances in Clinical Psychology (pp. 354-360). Santiago de Compostela: Spanish Association of Behavioural Psychology.


700


ISBN: 978-84-608-1640-9

Vigil-Colet, A., Morales-Vives, F., & Tous, J. (2008). The Relationships between Functional and Dysfunctional Impulsivity and Aggression across Different Samples. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11(2), 480–487. Vigil-Colet, A., Ruiz-Pamies, M., Anguiano-Carrasco, C., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2012). The Impact of Social Desirability on Psychometric of Aggression. Psicothema, 24(2), 310-315.


701