This article was downloaded by: [Carnegie Mellon University]On: 09 November 2014, At: 00:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal of SocialPsychologyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

Development and Validation ofthe Life Style QuestionnaireMichael P. Nichols a , Thomas P. Gordon a & MurrayD. Levine aa Human Engineering Laboratories , AberdeenResearch and Development Center , USAPublished online: 01 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Michael P. Nichols , Thomas P. Gordon & Murray D. Levine (1972)Development and Validation of the Life Style Questionnaire, The Journal of SocialPsychology, 86:1, 121-125, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1972.9918602

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1972.9918602

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

] at

00:

50 0

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

T h e Journal of Social PJychology, 1972, 86, 121-125.

D E V E L O P M E N T A N D VALIDATION OF T H E LIFE STYLE QUESTIONNAIRE"

Human Engineering Laboratories, A berdeen Research and Development Ccnicr

MICHAEL P. NICHOLS,^ THOMAS P. GORWN,~ AND

MURRAY D. LEVINE3

A. INTRODUCTION I his study was done as a part of a major research effort on the personality

determinants of psychological stress in which it was hypothesized that when a man's life style is incongruent with the demands of a task he must perforin he will experience stress. Testing this hypothesis required selection of two groups with contrasting life styles and subjecting both groups to two task situations. Each group of subjects should find one task congruent with their habitual behavioral repertoire and the other task incongruent.

The specific personality types selected were somewhat arbitrary. The only theoretical demands on selecting subjects were that there be two groups divided along some bipolar personality continuum, However, i t was felt that choosing groups dichotomized along some single personality variable, such as aggression, would allow for too many uncontrolled sources of variance. It was decided, therefore, to select two relatively global, multivariable life styles. T h e A-type chosen was described as active, impulsive, assertive, aggressive, and present-oriented, The B-type was chosen as inactive, compulsive, deferent, cautious, and future-oriented.

The present study involves the development of an objective questionnaire with which to differentiate subjects with these two life styles. Items were selected on the basis of face validity, and chosen to cover a broad range of behaviors, a common procedure recommended in the American Psychological Association's Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests and Man- uals (1).

Usual validation procedures consist of correlation with established inven- tories and factor analyses (2, 9). Some researchers have gone beyond this correlational approach to include self-ratings and peer ratings (8) and staff

* .

* Received in the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on December 14,

1 Now at the University of Rochester. 2 Now at Yerkes Primate Center. 3 Now at Spring Road Community Mental Health Center, Washington, D.C.

1970. Copyright, 1972, by The Journal Press.

121

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

] at

00:

50 0

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

122 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

judgments of validity ( 3 ) . In the present study, the correlational approach was used as a first step, followed by naturalistic observation over an extended period of time.

B. METHOD 1. Subjects

All participants were male members of the United States Army between the ages of 18 and 24. These men were screened on the basis of an Army intelligence test, and those with an intelligence quotient below 95 were excluded. A total of three groups were studied: first, 12 men participated in a pilot study; second, 93 were tested from which 14 were selected for inter- views; and finally, 141 were tested from which 10 were selected for a two- week validation study.

2. Procedure

T h e Minnesota Multiphasic Persoiiality Inventory (MMPI) and the Ed- wards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS) were used to test the 12 sub- jects in the pilot study. Both of these instruments have scales that are relevant to the two life styles. However, it was found that both tests were susceptible to response biases (4) and were impractical to administer in one sitting. I n order to resolve these problems, a new test, the Life Style Questionnaire (LSQ), was developed? T h e LSQ is a short (20 minutes) forced-choice questionnaire based on social learning principles ( 7 ) . Previous research findings indicate that attitude measures are poor predictors of overt behavior ( 6 ) . Therefore, instead of asking respondents to describe themselves in terms of interests, thoughts, and feelings, they were asked for a brief report of past behavior in selected areas. T h e items require examinees to indicate in which of two possible activities they have engaged most frequently. Each item has two types of alternatives, and an attempt has been made to match the alterna- tives for social desirability. Some of the A-type alternatives are as follows: acting, playing basketball, not using seatbelts, and dating early and frequently. Some of the B-type alternatives are long-distance running, collecting stamps or coins, repairing things, and work that requires painstaking attention to detail. In addition to balancing the 58 items for social desirability, seven additional items are included in a Lie scale. Some of the items OR this scale are as follows: “I am always friendly and polite,” “I never masturbate,” and “I have never been angry with my parents.”

4 Copier are availahlp lipon reqnert.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

] at

00:

50 0

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

MICHAEL P. NICHOLS BT AL. 123

A sample of 93 men were tested to obtain norms for the LSQ and to provide data for a factor analysis along with the MMPI and the EPPS. From this sample a group of 14 subjects were selected for follow-up inter- views which were taped and rated by five independent raters.

A second group of 141 subjects was tested to check the reliability of the results from the first sample and to furnish the basis for a new sample for a follow-up study at our laboratory. Ten subjects were housed in our experi- mental barracks for two weeks, during which time they were interviewed, tested, and observed. T h e validation procedure consisted of ( a ) daily observa- tions and ratings by observers who actually lived with the subjects and whose status as psychologists was unknown to the subjects, (b) various paper and pencil tests with scales of theoretical interest, ( c ) individual projective tests, and ( d ) clinical interviews.

C. RESULTS The mean of the 58 item A-scale on the LSQ from the first sample of 93

subjects was 29.8 with a standard deviation of 7.4. T h e mean of the seven- item Lie scale was 1.4 with a standard deviation of 1.3. A Varimax procedure yielded the following two factors. Factor A consisted of the following: LSQ A-scale .77; EPPS Deference --.43, Order -.31, Dominance 56, Aggres- sion .52; MMPI Mania .58. Factor B comprised the following: LSQ A- scale -.73 ; EPPS Succorance .45, Dominance -.56, Abasement .41; MMPI Depression .54, Psychasthenia .37, and Social Introversion .62.

A sample of 14 individuals with LSQ scores one standard deviation or more from the mean in either direction was interviewed and the tapes of the interviews rated. T h e five raters were unanimous in assigning 12 of these subjects to the same life style category as did the LSQ, and the majority were at variance with the LSQ in only one case.

T h e factor analysis of the second sample (141 subjects) produced two factors which were essentially the same as the two from the first sample, but accounted for less of the total variance.

Of the 10 individuals who participated in the two-week pilot study, only eight were one standard deviation or more from the mean of the LSQ. This was so because only a limited number of men in this group were available for temporary duty as subjects in the study. Three observers, to whom the LSQ scores were unknown, lived with the subjects and rated their life styles during social interactions and participation in various tasks. Raters were required to rate each subject on the component dimensions of the two Iife styles (defined above), and then to make one global rating on a seven-point scale ranging

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

] at

00:

50 0

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

124 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

from “very much an A-type” to “very much a B-type.” Only the global ratings were analyzed and they were treated as either/or judgments. T o do otherwise would have been to attribute finer ability to differentiate than was warranted. Although most of the ratings were at one of the two endmost points at either extreme, all ratings of very much, moderately, or somewhat A-type or B-type were translated as simple A-type or B-type, and the center- point which represented an inability to decide was left as is. T h e three raters were unanimous in assigning six of the subjects to the same life style as did the LSQ and two of the three raters concurred with the LSQ on the re- maining two subjects.

A total of seven group and individual tests were administered and analyzed to produce personality descriptions of the subjects. These personality descrip- tions corresponded to the life styles as predicted by the LSQ. However, the personality descriptions were written by the senior author who was biased by knowledge of the LSQ scores and therefore cannot be considered as an in- dependent source of validation.

Each subject was interviewed by one psychiatrist and by two psychologists. These interviewers used the same rating forms as did the observers, and the data were likewise translated into global ratings. T h e three interviewers concurred without exception in assigning the eight subjects to the same life styles as did the LSQ.

D. DISCUSSION T h e LSQ was designed to elicit a self-report of actual behavior. This study

demonstrates that a brief report of past behavior can accurately predict per- sonality types as they are revealed in global personality inventories, clinical interviews, and daily observations. Thus, though the LSQ does not directly yield a behavior sample, and as Meehl ( 5 ) points out, it is a mistake to assume that responses on a test are surrogates for behavior, the LSQ does relate to ratings of actual behavior.

E. SUMMARY A new test, the Life Style Questionnaire, is described and validation pro-

cedures are discussed. Subjects were asked for a brief report of their past behavior on a forced-choice questionnaire. T h e results were then factor analyzed along with scores on the MMPI and the EPPS to obtain concurrent validation. Finally, the results were validated with interviews, further testing, and observations during a two-week study.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

] at

00:

50 0

9 N

ovem

ber

2014

MICHAEL P. NICHOLS ET AL. 125

REFERENCES 1. AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION. Standards for Educational and Psychologi-

2. BYRNE, D. T h e Repression-Sensitization Scale: Rationale, reliability, and validity. cal Tests and Manuals. Washington, D.C.: Amer. Psychol. Assoc., 1966.

J . Personal., 1961, 29, 334-349. 3. HOGAN, R. Development of an empathy scale. J . Consult. W Clin. Psychol., 1969,

33, 307-316. 4. JACKSON, D. N., & MESSICK, S. Response styles on the Minnesota Multiphasic Per-

sonality Inventory: Comparison of clinical and normal samples. J. Abn. W So<.

5. MEEHL, P. E. The dynamics of “structured personality tests.” J. Ch. Psychol.,

6. PITI-EL, S. M., & MENDELSOHN, G. A. Situational Appraisal Inventory: Develop- ment and validation of a measure of evaluative attitudes. J. Consult. W Clin.

7. RIYITER, J. B. Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:

8. VINGOE, F. J. Note on the validity of the California Psychological inventory.

9. ZUCKERMAN, M., KOLIN, E. A., PRICE, L., & ZOOB, I. Development of a sensation-

Department of Psychology University of Rochester Rochester, New York 14627

Psychol., 1962, 65, 285-300.

1945, I, 296-303.

Psychot., 1969, 33, 396-405.

Prentice-Hall, 1954.

J . C o n d t . W Clin. Psychol., 1968, 32, 725-727.

seeking scale. J . Consult. Psychol., 1964, 28, 477-482.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

] at

00:

50 0

9 N

ovem

ber

2014