The factor structure of the state-trait anxiety inventory: An alternative view

Journal of Personality Assessment

Volumn 90, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 280-285

  Vigneau, François ^a   Cormier, Stéphanie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONCTON   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PERSONALITY TEST; STATE TRAIT ANXIETY INVENTORY;

EID: 42249106223     PISSN: 00223891     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00223890701885027     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317-332.
2. Benson, J., & Hocevar, D. (1985). The impact of item phrasing on the validity of attitude scales for elementary school children. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 231-240.
3. Bentler, P. M., Jackson, D. N., & Messick, S. (1971). Identification of content and style: A two-dimensional interpretation of acquiescence. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 186-204.
4. Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. C. (1995). EQS for Windows: User's guide. Encino, CA: Mulitvariate Software, Inc.
5. Bernstein, I. H., & Eveland, D. C. (1982). State vs. trait anxiety: A case study in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 361-372.
6. Bors, D. A., Vigneau, F., & Lalande, F. (2006). Measuring the need for cognition: Item polarity, dimensionality, and the relation with ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 819-828.
7. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. J. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). London: Sage.
8. Bruchon-Schweitzer, M. L., & Paulhan, I. (1993). Le manuel du STAI-Y de C. D. Spielberger, adaptation française [Manual of C. D. Spielberger's STAI-Y, French adaptation]. Paris: Éditions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée.
9. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
10. Cronbach, L. J. (1946). Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 475-494.
11. Edwards, A. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality research. New York: Dryden.
12. Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., Nussbeck, F. W., & Trierweiler, L. I. (2003). Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait-multimethod models: A multiple-indicator CT-C(M-1) model. Psychological Methods, 8, 38-60.
13. French, D. J., France, C. R., Vigneau, F., French, J. A., & Evans, R. T. (2007). Fear of movement/(re)injury in chronic pain: A psychometric assessment of the original English version of the Tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK). Pain, 127, 42-51.
14. Furnham, A. (1986). Response bias, social desirability and dissimulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 7, 385-400.
15. Gaudry, E. G., Vagg, P., & Spielberger, C. D. (1975). Validation of the statetrait distinction in anxiety research. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 10, 331-341.
16. Gauthier, J., & Bouchard, S. (1993). Adaptation canadienne- française de la forme révisée du State-Trait Anxiety Inventory de Spielberger [A French-Canadian adaptation of the revised version of Spielberger's State-Trait Anxiety Inventory]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 25, 559-578.
17. Gruman, J. A., & Bors, D. A. (2005, July). Two tests of tolerance for ambiguity: A psychometric study. Paper presented at the 15th annual meeting of the Canadian Society for Brain, Behaviour and Cognitive Science (BBCS), Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
18. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
19. Marsh, H. W. (1989). Confirmatory factor analyses of multitrait- multimethod data: Many problems and a few solutions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 335-361.
20. Matschinger, H., & Angermeyer, M. C. (1992). Effekte der Itempolung auf das Antwortverhalten [The effect of item polarity on response behavior]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 13, 97-110.
21. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
22. Pilotte, W., & Gable, R. K. (1990). The impact of positive and negative item stems on the validity of a computer anxiety scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 603-610.
23. Ramanaiah, N. V., Franzen, M., & Schill, T. (1983). A psychometric study of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 47, 531-535.
24. SAS Institute. (2004). SAS/STAT user's guide (Version 9.1) [Computer software manual]. Cary, NC: Author.
25. Schriesheim, C. A., & Hill, H. D. (1981). Controlling acquiescence response bias by item reversals: The effect on questionnaire validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 1101-1114.
26. Shek, D. T. (1988). Reliability and factorial structure of the Chinese version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 10, 303-317.
27. Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
28. Spielberger, C. D., Vagg, P. R., Barker, L. R., Donham, G. W., & Westberry, L. G. (1980). The factor structure of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. In I. G. Sarason & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Stress and anxiety (Vol. 7; pp. 95-109). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
29. Suzuki, T., Tsukamoto, K., & Abe, K. (2000). Characteristic factor structures of the Japanese version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: Coexistence of positive-negative and state-trait factor structures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74, 447-458.
30. Vagg, P. R., Spielberger, C. D., & O'Hearn, T. P., Jr. (1980). Is the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory multidimensional? Personality and Individual Differences, 1, 207-214.
31. Vautier, S. (2004). A longitudinal SEM approach to STAI data: Two comprehensive multitrait-multistate models. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 167-179.
32. Vautier, S., & Jmel, S. (2003). Transient error or specificity? An alternative to the staggered equivalent split-half procedure. Psychological Methods, 8, 225-238.
33. Vigneau, F., Bors, D. A., & Dauvier, B. (2006, September). Besoin de cognition et tolérance à l'ambiguïté : généralisation d'un modèle trait-méthode à deux questionnaires de personnalité [Need for cognition and tolerance of ambiguity: Generalizing one trait-method model of two personality questionnaires]. Paper presented at the 17th Journées internationales de psychologie différentielle, Université Paris X Nanterre, Paris, France.
34. Vigneau, F., & Lalande, F. (2006). Multidimensionnalité de l'Échelle de besoin de cognition - Note sur l'utilisation d'items négatifs dans un questionnaire de personnalité [Multidimensionality of the Need for Cognition scale: A note on using negative items in a personality questionnaire]. In C. Houssemand, R. Martin, & P. Dickes (Eds.), Perspectives de psychologie différentielle (pp. 267-272). Rennes, France: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.