Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:41:03.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of the Behavioral Inhibition System and the Behavioral Approach System: Adaptation and Validation of the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) in a Chilean Sample

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Michele Dufey ,
Ana María Fernández  and
Catalina Mourgues
Michele Dufey*
Affiliation:
Universidad Diego Portales (Chile)
Ana María Fernández
Affiliation:
Universidad Diego Portales (Chile)
Catalina Mourgues
Affiliation:
Universidad Diego Portales (Chile)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michele Dufey. Laboratorio de Neurociencias Cognitivas. Facultad de Psicología. Universidad Diego Portales. Vergara 275. Santiago. (Chile). Phone: +56-28232336. E-mail: mdufey@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The goal of the present study is to estimate the psychometric properties of the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ; Torrubia, Ávila, Moltó, & Caseras, 2001) in a sample of Chilean college students. The main hypothesis is that the instrument would show appropriate levels of reliability and validity, in light of previous validation studies. A pilot study was conducted in order to generate the adapted version of the questionnaire, which was then applied to a student sample from different undergraduate careers (n = 434). The results show the expected levels of reliability (test-retest and internal consistency). The factorial validity does not comply with the expected model, suggesting a further consideration of the structure of the questionnaire. External validity is appropriate, as the questionnaire shows the expected correlations with other personality measures. It is concluded that the SPSRQ is adequate for the context of validation, and this study contributes to the generalization of the questionnaire, since the results are consistent with the expected psychometric properties that have been reported in the literature.

El presente estudio tiene como propósito estimar las propiedades psicométricas del Cuestionario de Sensibilidad al Castigo y Sensibilidad a la Recompensa (SCSR; Torrubia, Ávila, Moltó, y Caseras, 2001) en una muestra de estudiantes chilenos, bajo la hipótesis general de que el instrumento presenta niveles apropiados de fiabilidad y validez, acorde a los estudios previos de validación. Para ello, se condujo inicialmente un estudio piloto que permitió generar la versión adaptada del cuestionario, el cual fue posteriormente aplicado a una muestra definitiva de estudiantes pertenecientes a diferentes carreras universitarias (n = 434). Los resultados muestran los niveles esperados de fiabilidad test-retest y consistencia interna. La validez factorial muestra problemas de ajuste de las escalas según el modelo teórico, sugiriendo una revisión de la estructura del cuestionario. La validez externa, sin embargo, es adecuada y el cuestionario muestra las correlaciones esperadas con otras medidas de personalidad. Se concluye la adecuación del cuestionario SCSR en el contexto de validación y la contribución de este estudio a la generabilidad del instrumento, en tanto los resultados son coherentes con la literatura previa en torno a sus propiedades psicométricas.

Keywords

sensitivity to punishmentsensitivity to rewardpersonalityvalidationadaptationsensibilidad al castigosensibilidad a la recompensapersonalidadvalidaciónadaptación
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , May 2011 , pp. 432 - 440
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Ball, S., & Zuckerman, M. (1990). Sensation seeking, Eysenck's personality dimensions and reinforcement sensitivity in concept formation. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 343–353. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90216-ECrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. P. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452–459. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caci, H., Deschaux, O., & Baylé, F. (2007). Psychometric properties of the French versions of the BIS/BAS scales and the SPSRQ. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 987–998. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, C., & White, T. (1994). Behavioural inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.67.2.319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caseras, X., Ávila, C., & Torrubia, R. (2003). The measurement of individual differences in behavioral inhibition and behavioral activation systems: A comparison of personality scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 999–1013. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00084-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro, J., Huenchullán, L., & Jofré, G. (2003). Adaptación del “Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS)” en una muestra chilena de estudiantes universitarios [Adaptation of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) to a Chilean college students sample]. (Unpublished undergraduated thesis). Universidad Mayor, Temuco.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–76. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cogswell, A., Alloy, L., van Dulmen, M., & Fresco, D. (2006). A psychometric evaluation of behavioral inhibition and approach self-report measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1649–1658. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corr, P. (2004). Reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 28, 317–332. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.01.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corr, P. (2008). Reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST): Introduction. In Corr, P. (Ed.), The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality (pp. 1–43). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corr, P., Pickering, A., & Gray, J. (1997). Personality, punishment, and procedural learning: A test of J. A. Gray's anxiety theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 337–344. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.73.2.337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz, A., & Pickering, A. (1993). The relationship between Gray's and Eysenck's personality spaces. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 297–305. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(93)90220-WCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dufey, M., & Fernández, A. M. (2009). Validez y confiabilidad del Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) en Chile. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Eysenck, S., & Eysenck, H. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness: Their position in a dimensional system of personality description. Psychological Reports, 43, 1247–1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández, A. M., Celis-Atenas, K., & Vera-Villarroel, P. (2006). Propiedades psicométricas de la escala de Autoestima de Rosenberg en universitarios chilenos [Psychometric properties of Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in Chilean university students]. In Memorias de las XIII Jornadas de Investigación y Segundo Encuentro de Investigadores en Psicología del MERCOSUR: Paradigmas, Métodos y Técnicas, Vol. III (pp. 499–500). Buenos Aires: Ediciones de la Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Figueroa Rey, P., Ramírez Troncoso, C. G., & Santis Doyhamboure, M. (2005). Adaptación y validación del Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire a la población adolescente, adulta y adulta mayor del gran Santiago [Adaptation and validation of the Buss-Perry aggression questionnaire to adolescents, adults, and the elderly in Santiago] (Unpublished undergraduated thesis). Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago.Google Scholar
Fullana, M. A., Caseras, X., & Torrubia, R. (2003). Psychometric properties of the Personal State Questionnaire in a Catalan sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 605–611. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00033-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. (1982). Précis of the neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 469–534. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00013066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Gray, J., & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hyppocmpal system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guttman, L. (1953). Image theory for the structure of quantitative variates. Psychometrica, 18, 227–296. doi:10.1007/BF02289264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmon-Jones, E. (2003). Anger and the behavioral approach system. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 995–1005. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00313-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heimpel, S., Elliot, A., & Wood, J. (2006). Basic personality dispositions, self-esteem, and personal goals: An approach-avoidance analysis. Journal of Personality, 74, 1291–1320. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00410.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, S., Turner, R., & Iwata, N. (2003). BIS/BAS levels and psychiatric disorder: An epidemiological study. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 25, 25–36. doi:10.1023/A:1022247919288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, H. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151. doi:10.1177/001316446002000116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacAndrew, C., & Steele, T. (1991). Gray's behavioral inhibition system: A psychometric examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 157–171. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91)90099-WCrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, R., Colder, C., & Hawk, L. (2004). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 985–1002. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.11.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez, A., & Sepúlveda, V. (1991). Estandarización de las Escalas de Evitación y Ansiedad Social (SAD) y Temor a la Evaluación Negativa (FNE), y relación entre la ansiedad social y los comportamientos asertivo y agresivo [Standardization of the Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SAD) and the Fear to Negative Evaluation (FNE) Scale, and the relationship between social anxiety and assertive and aggressive behavior]. (Unpublished undergraduated thesis). Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago.Google Scholar
Pickering, A. Corr, P. Powell, J., Kumari, V., Thornton, J., & Gray, J. (1997). Individual differences in reactions to reinforcing stimuli are neither black nor white: To what extent are they gray? In Nyborg, H. (Ed.) The scientific study of personality: Tribute to Hans J. Eysenck at eighty. London: Elsevier Sciences.Google Scholar
Pinto, A. (2004). Sistemas de activación e inhibición conductual en los trastornos depresivos atendidos en la atención primaria en salud. Un estudio de seguimiento a 6 meses [Behavioral activation and inhibition systems in depressive disorders in primary care health system]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sava, F., & Spereneac, A. M. (2006). Sensitivity to Reward and Sensitivity to Punishment Rating Scales: A validation study on the Romanian population. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 1445–1456. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.04.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smillie, L., Pickering, A., & Jackson, C. (2006). The new reinforcement sensitivity theory: Implications for personality measurement. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 320–335. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smits, D., & Kuppens, P. (2005). The relations between anger, coping with anger, and aggression, and the BIS/BAS system. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 783–793. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spielberger, C., Gorsuch, R., & Luschene, R. (1970). Manual of the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. doi:10.1002/9780470479216Google Scholar
Torrubia, R., & Tobeña, A. (1984). A scale for the assessment of susceptibility to punishment as a measure of anxiety: Preliminary results. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, 371–375. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(84)90078-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrubia, R., Ávila, C., Moltó, J., & Caseras, X. (2001). The Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) as a measure of Gray's anxiety and impulsivity dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 837–862. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00183-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vera-Villarroel, P., Celis-Atenas, K., Cordova-Rubio, N., Buela-Casal, G., & Spielberger, C. (2007). Preliminary analysis and normative data of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) in adolescents and adults of Santiago, Chile. Terapia Psicológica, 25, 155–162. doi:10.4067/S0718-48082007000200006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D., & Friend, R. (1969). Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33, 448–457. doi:10.1037/h0027806CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, G., Barrett, P., & Gray, J. (1989). Human reactions to reward and punishment: A questionnaire examination of Gray's personality theory. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 509–515.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zuckerman, M., Eysenck, S., & Eysenck, H. (1978). Sensation seeking in England and America: Cross-cultural, age and sex comparisons. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 139–149. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.46.1.139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed