Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T08:33:10.898Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Preliminary Validation of the Telic and Paratelic Dominance Scales with Japanese Respondents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

John H. Kerr ,
Mary M. Gerkovich  and
Mary R. Cook
John H. Kerr
Affiliation:
University of Tsukuba, Japan
Mary M. Gerkovich
Affiliation:
Midwest Research Institute, USA
Mary R. Cook
Affiliation:
Midwest Research Institute, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to extend international comparative research on the Telic and Paratelic Dominance Scales (TDS & PDS) to include data from 560 Japanese individuals. Statistical analyses to check the factor structure, reliability and relationship between Japanese scores on the two scales were carried out. In addition, test-retest reliability was also examined. The results indicated stronger support for the factor structure of the PDS than the TDS. Coefficient alpha statistics produced weaker alpha values for the TDS than the PDS and the relationship between Japanese scale scores were significant and in the expected direction. Test-retest reliability was found to be strong for both scales. Based on the present results, future work on the development of an international scale of telic-paratelic dominance should focus on the PDS, rather than the TDS.

Keywords

telic dominanceparatelic dominancereversal theoryJapanese students
Type
Articles
Information
South Pacific Journal of Psychology , Volume 12 , 2000 , pp. 23 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © University of Papua New Guinea and Massey University, New Zealand/Aotearoa 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, G., & Brown, R. I. F. (1984). Sensation-seeking and arousal in real and laboratory gambling. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 401–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apter, M. J. (1982). The experience of motivation: The theory of psychological reversals. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Baker, J. (1988). Stress appraisals and coping with everyday hassles. In Apter, M. J., Kerr, J. H., & Cowles, M.P. (Eds.), Progress in Reversal Theory (pp. 137–146). Amsterdam: North Holland/Elsevier.Google Scholar
Barratt, E. S. (1985). Impulsiveness subtraits: Arousal and information processing. In Spence, J.T. & Izard, C. E. (Eds.), Motivation, Emotion and Personality (pp. 137–146). Amsterdam: North Holland/Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bowers, A. J. (1985). Reversals delinquency and disruption. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 25, 303–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brislin, R. (1970). Back translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminate validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, M. R., & Gerkovich, M. M. (1993). The development of a Paratelic Dominance Scale. In Kerr, J. H., Murgatroyd, S. & Apter, M. J. (Eds.). Advances in reversal theory (pp. 178–188). Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Cook, M. R., & Gerkovich, M. M. (Personal communication, 12 4, 1999).Google Scholar
Cook, M. R., Gerkovich, M. M., O'Connell, K. A., & Keele, R. Submitted Reliability and validity of the Paratelic Dominance Scale. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. J. (1975). Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.Google Scholar
Gallacher, J. E. J., Yarnell, J. W. G., & Phillips, K. M. (1988). Goal orientation, Type A behavior and telic dominance in middle-aged men. Counseling Psychology Quarterly, 1, 155–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotts, G. H., Kerr, J. H., & Wangeman, J. F. (2000). Towards an international scale of telic-paratelic dominance. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 217–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, J. H. (1991). Arousal-seeking in risk sport participants. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 613–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, P. (1993). The handbook of psychological testing. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Martin, R. A., Kuiper, N. A., Olinger, L. J., & Dobbin, J. (1987). Is stress always bad? Telic versus paratelic dominance as a stress moderating variable. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 970–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murgatroyd, S. (1985). The nature of telic dominance. In Apter, M. J., Fontana, D., & Murgatroyd, S. (Eds.), Reversal theory: Applications and developments (pp. 20–41). Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press.Google Scholar
Murgatroyd, S., Rushton, C., Apter, M. J., & Ray, C. (1978). The development of the Telic Dominance Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42, 519–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalised expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svebak, S., & Apter, M. J. (1984). Type A behavior and its relation to serious-mindedness (telic dominance). Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 25, 161–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svebak, S., & Murgatroyd, S. (1985). Metamotivational dominance: A multimethod validation of reversal theory constructs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 107–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar