Corrigendum to: Development of the Zuckerman–Kuhlman–Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA–PQ): A Factor/Facet Version of the Zuckerman–Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ) (Journal of Personality Assessment, (2010), 92, 5, (416-431), 10.1080/00223891.2010.497406);Development of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ): A factor/facet version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ)

Journal of Personality Assessment

Volumn 92, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 416-431

  Aluja, Anton ^a,b   Kuhlman, Michael ^c   Zuckerman, Marvin ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LLEIDA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LLEIDA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVALUATION; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; LANGUAGE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY; PERSONALITY DISORDER; PERSONALITY TEST; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SPAIN; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; LANGUAGE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY; PERSONALITY DISORDERS; PERSONALITY INVENTORY; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SPAIN;

EID: 77955561669     PISSN: 00223891     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2018.1476307     Document Type: Erratum

References (75)

1. Aluja, A., Cuevas, L., García, L. F., & García, O. (2007). Zuckerman's personality model predicts MCMI-III personality disorders. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1311-1321.
2. Aluja, A., García, L. F., Cuevas, L., & García, O. (2007). The MCMI-III personality disorders scores predicted by the NEO-FFI-R and the ZKPQ-50-CC: A comparative study. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21, 58-71.
3. Aluja, A., García, O., & García, L. F. (2002). A comparative study of Zuckerman's three structural models for personality throught the NEO-PI-R, ZKPQ-III, EPQ-RS and Goldberg's 50-bipolar adjectives. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 713-725.
4. Aluja, A., García, O., & García, L. F. (2003). Psychometric properties of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ-III-R): A study of a shortened form. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1083-1097.
5. Aluja, A., Garcia, O., & Garcia, L. F. (2004). Replicability of the three, four, and five Zuckerman's personality super-factor analyses of the EPQ-R, ZKPQ, and NEO-PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1093-1108.
6. Aluja, A., García, O., García, L. F., & Seisdedos, N. (2005). Invariance of the "NEO-PI-R" factor structure across exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1879-1889.
7. Aluja, A., Garcia, O; Rossier, J., & García, L. F. (2005). Comparison of the NEO-FFI, the NEO-FFI-R and an alternative short version of the NEO-PI-R (NEO-60) in Swiss and Spanish samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 591-604.
8. Aluja, A., Rossier, J., Garciia, L. F., Angleitner, A., Kuhlman, M., & Zuckerman, M. (2006). A cross-cultural shortened form of the ZKPQ (ZKPQ-50-CC) adapted to English, French, German, and Spanish languages. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 619-628.
9. Aluja, A., Rossier, J., & Zuckerman, M. (2007). Equivalence of paper and pencil vs internet forms of the ZKPQ-50-CC in the Spanish and Swiss samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 2022-2032.
10. Angleitner, A., Riemann, R., & Spinath, F. M. (2004). Investigating the ZKPQ-III-R: Psychometric properties, relations to the Five-factor model, and genetic and environmental influences on its scales and facets. In R. M. Stelmack (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 89-105). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
11. Arbuckle, J. L. (1999). AMOS 4.01. Chicago, IL: Smallwaters Corp.
12. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
13. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
14. Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. New York, NY: Sage.
15. Breen, R. B., & Zuckerman, M. (1999) "Chasing" in gambling behavior: Personality and cognitive determinants. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 1097-1111.
16. Browne, M. W., & Cudek, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). London, England: Sage.
17. Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452-459.
18. Buss, A., & Plomin, R. (1984). Temperament: Early developing personality traits. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with Amos. London, England: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Cloninger, C. R. (1999). The Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised. St. Louis, MO: Washington University, Center for Psychobiology of Personality. (Available from C. R. Cloninger, Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, P.O. Box 8134, St. Louis, MO 63110.)
21. Cloninger, C. R., Svrakic, D. M., & Przybeck, T. R. (1993). A psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, 975-990.
22. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Costa, P. T., Jr., Herbst, J. H., McCrae, R. R., & Siegler, I. C. (2000). Personality at midlife: Stability, intrinsic maturation, and response to life events. Assessment, 7, 365-378.
24. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
25. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (2008) The revised NEO Personality inventory (NEO-PI-R). In G. J. Boyle, G. J. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Personality theory and measurement (Vol. 2, pp. 179-198). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
26. De Fruyt, F., De Wiele, L., & Van Heeringen, C. (2000). Cloninger's psychobiological model of temperament and character and the Five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 441-452.
27. De Pascalis, V., & Russo, M. M. (2003). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire: Preliminary results of the Italian version. Psychological Reports, 92, 965-974.
28. Eysenck, H. J. (1947). Dimensions of personality. New York, NY: Praeger.
29. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences. New York, NY: Plenum.
30. Eysenck, H. J., & Wilson, G. D. (1991). The Eysenck Personality Profiler. London, England: Corporate Assessment Network.
31. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., Maccallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 3, 272-299.
32. Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation on adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6, 304-312.
33. Gignac, G. E., Bates, T. C., & Jang, K. L. (2007). Implications relevant to a CFA model misfit, reliability and the five-factor model as measured by the NEO-FFI. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 587596.
34. Goma-i-Freixanet, M., Valero, S., Punti, J., & Zuckerman, M. (2004). Psychometric properties of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire in a Spanish sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20, 134-146.
35. Goma-i-Freixanet, M., Wismeijer, A. J., & Valero, S. (2005). Consensual validity parameters of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire: Evidence from self-reports and spouse reports. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 279-286.
36. Gutierrez-Zotes, J. A., Bayon, C., Montserrat, C., Valero, J., Labad, A., Cloninger, C. R., & Fernandez-Aranda, F. (2004). Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised (TCI-R). Standardization and normative data in a general population sample. Actas Espanolas de Psiquiatria, 32, 8-15.
37. Haven, S., & ten Berge, J. M. F. (1977). Tucker's coefficient of congruence as a measure of factorial invariance: An empirical study. Unpublished manuscript, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
38. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
39. Johnson, W., Krueger, R. F., Bouchard, T. J., & McGue, M. (2002). The personality of twins: Just ordinary folks. Twin Research, 5, 125-131.
40. Joireman, J., & Kuhlman, D. M. (2004). The Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire: Origin, development, and validity of a measure to assess an alternative Five-Factor Model of personality. In R. M. Stelmack (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 49-64). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
41. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: SPSS publications.
42. Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika, 35, 401-416.
43. Lanyon, R. I., & Goodstein, L. D. (1997). Personality assessment (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
44. Lynam, D. R., Smith, G. T., Whiteside, S. P., & Cyders, M. A. (2006). The UPPS-P: Assessing five personality pathways to impulsive behavior (Technical Report). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
45. Lynn, R., & Martin, T. (1995). National differences for thirty-seven nations in extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism and economic, demographic and other correlates. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 403-406.
46. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P., Jr. (2004). A contemplated revision of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 587-596.
47. McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T., Bond, M. H., & Paunonen, S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552-566.
48. Morizot, J., & Le Blanc, M. (2003). Continuity and change in personality traits from adolescence to midlife: A 25-year longitudinal study comparing representative and adjudicated men. Journal of Personality, 71, 705-755.
49. Mulaik, S. A. (2007). There is a place for approximate fit in structural equation modelling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 883-891.
50. Muniz, J., Garcia-Cueto, E., & Lozano, L. M. (2005). Item format and the psychometric properties of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 61-69.
51. O'Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instrumentation, and Computers, 32, 396-402.
52. Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 524-539.
53. Paunonen, S. V., Haddock, G., Forsterling, F., & Keinonen, M. (2003). Broad versus narrow personality measures and the prediction of behavior across cultures. European Journal of Personality, 17, 413-433.
54. Roberts, B. W., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. E. (2001). The kids are alright: Growth and stability in personality development from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 670-683.
55. Rossier, J., Verardi, S., Massoudi, K., & Aluja, A. (2008). Psychometric properties of the French-version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 8, 203-217.
56. Schmitz, P. G. (2004). On the alternative Five-factor model: Structure and correlates. In R. M. Stelmack (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 65-87). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
57. Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.
58. Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (2008). Exploring personality through test construction: Development of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Personality theory and assessment (Vol. 2, pp. 261-292). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
59. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10.
60. Westen, D. (1995). A clinical-empirical model of personality: Life after the Mischelian ice age and the NEO-lithic era. Journal of Personality, 63, 495524.
61. Wu, Y.-X., Wang, W., Du, W.-Y., Li, J., Jiang, X.-F., & Wang, Y.-H. (2000). Development of a Chinesse version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire: Reliabilities and gender/age effects. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 241-250.
62. Zuckerman, M. (1971). Dimensions of sensation seeking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 45-52.
63. Zuckerman, M. (1991) Psychobiology of personality (1st ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
64. Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
65. Zuckerman, M. (2002). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ): An alternative five-factorial model. In B. de Raad & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five assessment (pp. 377-396). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber.
66. Zuckerman, M. (2005). Psychobiology of Personality (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
67. Zuckerman, M. (2007). Sensation seeking and risky behavior. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
68. Zuckerman, M. (2008). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ): An operational definition of the alternative Five factorial model of personality. In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment: Vol 2. Personality measurement and testing (pp. 219-238). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
69. Zuckerman, M., & Cloninger, C. R. (1996). Relationships between Cloninger's, Zuckerman's, and Eysenck's dimensions of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 283-285.
70. Zuckerman, M., Eysenck, S., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Sensation seeking in England and America: Cultural, age and sex comparisons Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 139-149.
71. Zuckerman, M., Kolin, I, Price, L., & Zoob, I. (1964). Development of a sensation seeking scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 28, 477-482.
72. Zuckerman, M., & Kuhlman, D. M. (2000). Personality and risk taking: Common biosocial factors. Journal of Personality, 68, 999-1029.
73. Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., & Camac, C. (1988). What lies beyond E and N? Factor analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 96107.
74. Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The Big Three, the Big Five, and the Alternative Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757-768.
75. Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Thornquist, M., & Kiers, H. (1991). Five (or three) robust questionnaire scale factors of personality without culture. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 929-941.