Relationship patterns questionnaire (RPQ): Psychometric properties and clinical applications

Psychotherapy Research

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 418-434

  Kurth, Regina A ^a   Körner, Annett ^b   Geyer, Michael ^c   Pokorny, Dan ^d  

^a JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ULM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONFLICT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHY; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; PSYCHOTHERAPY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIOECONOMICS; THEORETICAL MODEL; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 7744246187     PISSN: 10503307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ptr/kph037     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Becker, P. (1998). Special feature: A multifacet circumplex model of personality as a basis for the description and therapy of personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 12, 213-225.
2. Benjamin, L. S. (1974). Structural analysis of social behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 392-425.
3. Benjamin, L. S. (1984). Principles of prediction using structural analysis of social behavior. In R. A. Zucker, J. Aronoff, & A. I. Rabin (Eds.), Personality and the prediction of behavior (pp. 121-174). New York: Academic Press.
4. Borg, I., & Groenen, P. (1997). Modern multidimensional scaling. Theory and application. New York: Springer Verlag.
5. Bortz, J. (1999). Statistik [Statistics]. Berlin: Springer.
6. Brähler, E., Horowitz, L. M., Kordy, H., Schumacher, J., & Strauß, B. (1999). Zur Validierung des Inventars zur Erfassung Interpersonaler Probleme (IIP) [Validation of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP)]. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, Medizinische Psychologie, 49, 422-431.
7. Brähler, E., & Richter, H.-E. (2000). Das psychologische Selbstbild der Deutschen im Gießen-Test zur Jahrhundertwende [The psychological self-perception of Germans in the Giessen Test at the turn of the century]. Psychosozial, 80, 47-51.
8. Davies-Osterkamp, S., Hartkamp, N., & Junkert, B. (1993). Die Intrex-Kurzform. [The short form of the Intrex]. In W. Tress (Ed.), Die Strukturale Analyse Sozialen Verhaltens - SASB [The structural analysis of social behavior - SASB] (pp. 156-219). Heidelberg: Ansanger.
9. Fischmann, T., Kaufhold, J., Overbeck, G., & Grabhorn, R. (1999). Differentiation in self- and object-perception as a goal in psychodynamic short-term therapy: A cluster-analytical evaluation. Psychotherapy Research, 9, 468-484.
10. Freedman, M. B., Leary, T., Ossorio, A. G., & Coffrey, H. S. (1954). The interpersonal dimension of personality. Journal of Personality, 20, 143-161.
11. Gurtman, M. B., & Pincus, A. L. (2000). Interpersonal Adjective Scales: Confirmation of circumplex structure from multiple perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 374-384.
12. Guttman, L. (1954). A new approach to factor analysis: The radex. In P. F. Lazarsfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking in the social sciences (pp. 258-348). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
13. Hinz, A., Albani, C., Gießler, A., & Brähler, E. (2002). Welche Werte sind den Deutschen etwas wert? [Which values are meaningful to the Germans?]. Psychosozial, 88, 21-30.
14. Hinz, A., Stöbel-Richter, Y., & Brähler, E. (2001). Der Partnerschaftsfragebogen (PFB): Normierung und soziodemografische Einflussgrößen auf die Partnerschaftsqualität [The "Partnerschaftsfragebogen" (Marital Quality Questionnaire): Psychometric norms and sociodemographic influences on partnership quality]. Diagnostica, 47, 132-141.
15. Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., Baer, B. A., Ureño, G., & Villaseñor, V. S. (1988). Inventory of interpersonal Problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 885-892.
16. Horowitz, L. M., Strauß, B., & Kordy, H. (2000). Inventar zur Erfassung interpersonaler Probleme - Deutsche Version 2., überarb. und neunormierte Aufl [Inventory of interpersonal problems - The German version, 2nd ed., revised and standardized]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
17. Hubert, L., & Arabie, P. (1987). Evaluating order hypotheses within proximity matrices. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 172-178.
18. Kiesler, D. J., Anchin, J. C., Perkins, M. J., Chirico, B. M., Kyle, E. M., & Federman, E. J. (1985). The Impact Message Inventory: Form II. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
19. Körner, A., Drapeau, M., Perry, J. C., Kurth, R. A., Pokorny, D., & Geyer, M. (2004). Self-assessment of interpersonal schemas using the Relationship Patterns Questionnaire: A quantitative approach. Psychotherapy Research, 14, 435-452.
20. Körner, A., Geyer, M., & Brähler, E. (2002). Das Neo-Fünf-Faktoren Inventar (Neo-FFI): Validierung anhand einer deutschen Bevölkerungsstichprobe [The German validation of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory]. Diagnostica, 48, 19-27.
21. Kruskal, J. B., & Wish, M. (1978). Quantitative applications in the social sciences: Vol. 11. Multidimensional scaling Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
22. Kurth, R. A. (1998). Die Selbsteinschätzung von Beziehungsmustern mit Hilfe des Zwischenmenschlichen Beziehungs-Muster-Fragebogens (ZMBM) - eine Validierungs und Reliabilitäts-studie [The self-assessment of relationship patterns by means of the interpersonal Relationship Patterns Questionnaire (IRP) - A study of validation and reliability]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universität Ulm.
23. Kurth, R. A., Leweke, F., Brosig, B., Herr, C., Eikmann, T., & Gieler, U. (2002). Stationäre integrative Psychotherapie bei Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrom. Eine Einzelfallstudie [Inpatient integrative psychotherapy for multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome. A case study]. Psychotherapeut, 47, 229-237.
24. Kurth, R. A., & Pokorny, D. (1999). Der Beziehungs-Muster Fragebogen - RPQ [The Relationship Patterns Questionnaire - RPQ]. Unpublished manuscript, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen.
25. Kurth, R. A., Pokorny, D., Kriebel, R., Paar, G. H., & Dahlbender, R. W. (1999). Selbsteinschätzung von Beziehungsmustern [Self-evaluation of relationship patterns: The IRP (Interpersonal Relationship Patterns) Questionnaire]. Gruppen-psychotherapie und Gruppendynamik, 4, 321-337.
26. LaForge, R., Leary, T., Naboisek, H., Coffrey, H. S., & Freedman, M. B. (1954). The interpersonal dimension of personality: II. An objective study of repression. Journal of Personality, 23, 660-664.
27. Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality New York: Ronald Press.
28. Locke, K. D. (2000). Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Values: Reliability, validity, and applicability to interpersonal problems and personality disorders. Journal Personality Assessment, 75 249-267.
29. Luborsky, L. (1977). Measuring a pervasive psychic structure in psychotherapy: The core conflictual relationship theme. In N. Freedmen & S. Grand (Eds.), Communicative structures and psychic structures (pp. 367-395). New York: Plenum Press.
30. Pincus, A. L., Gurtman, M. B., & Ruiz, M. A. (1998). Structural analysis of social behavior (SASB): Circumplex analyses and structural relations with the interpersonal circle and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 1629-1645.
31. Pincus, A. L., Newes, S. L., Dickinson, K. A., & Ruiz, M. A. (1998). A comparison of three indexes to assess the dimensions of structural analysis of social behavior. Journal of Personality Assessment, 70, 145-170.
32. Pokorny, D., & Kurth, R. A. (in press). Zur Validierung des interpersonalen Zirkumplexmodells mittels "directional statistics" - Perspektiven von Experten, Laien und Patienten [Validity of the interpersonal circumplex model by means of " directional statistics" - Perspectives of experts, laypersons and patients.] Diagnostica.
33. Richter, H.-E. (2002). Soziale Verantwortung in der flexibilisierten Gesellschaft [Social responsibility in a more flexible society]. Psychosozial, 88, 7-15.
34. Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161-1178.
35. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
36. Statistisches Bundesamt (Ed). (2000). Statistisches Jahrbuch für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland 2000 [Statistical Yearbook for the Federal Republic of Germany 2000]. Stuttgart: Metzler-Pöschel.
37. Tracey, T. J. G. (1997). RANDALL: A Microsoft FORTRAN program for a randomization test of hypothesized order relations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 164-168.
38. Tracey, T. J. G., & Schneider, P. L. (1995). An evaluation of the circular structure of the checklist of interpersonal transactions and the checklist of psychotherapy transactions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 496-507.
39. Tscheulin, D., & Glossner, A. (1993). Die deutsche Übertragung der INTREX "Long Form Questionnaires": Validität und Auswertungsgrundlage der SASB-Fragebogenmethode. [The German version of the INTREX "Long Form Questionnaires": Validation and evaluation basis of the SASB questionnaire method.] In W. Tress (Ed.), Die Strukturale Analyse Sozialen Verhaltens - SASB [The structural analysis of social behavior - SASB] (pp. 125-155). Heidelberg: Ansanger.
40. Wiggens, J. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 409-420.
41. Zerssen, D. (2000). Variants of premorbid personality and personality disorder: A taxonomic model of their relationships. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 250, 234-248.