Doctor of Philosophy / Grossarth-Maticek and Eysenck (1988) demonstrated that personality type as measured by the 70-item Grossarth-Maticek Personality Stress Inventory (GMPSI), predicts mortality and its cause with remarkable accuracy. Further, various forms of autonomy training, such as bibliotherapy and short individual treatment that were designed to reduce the toxic personality features (such as emotional dependence) effectively improved long-term health outcomes. However, several aspects of their theory and research were either insufficiently explicated or require further investigation. For example, the researchers did not thoroughly investigate the psychometric properties of the inventory, and they did not sufficiently examine the mechanisms that may mediate the personality-health relationship. Further, the autonomy training was inadequately described, and perhaps could have been briefer and had the same impact. Three studies were run to investigate these issues further. Study 1 (Chapter 2) investigated the internal consistency, test-retest reliability and convergent, discriminant and concurrent validity of the GMPSI in 312 first-year students, using a variety of statistical techniques (e.g., structural equation modeling, confirmatory factor analysis, and simple correlations). In addition, the psychometric properties of this scale were compared to those of three revised versions of the scale, which were theorised to be psychometric improvements of the original version from basic principles. The revised versions contained reverse-worded items (of different types) to monitor and disrupt acquiescence response sets, and/or an extended response scale to improve internal consistency and stability. Psychometric effects of reverse-wording and the extended response scale on scale reliability were examined via the analysis of construct reliability estimates, personality subscale model fit of congeneric measurement models (a form of structural equation modeling), and test-retest reliability estimates. The original version of the scale appeared to be the most reliable and valid scale of the four versions. This improved reliability of the original version was not an artifact of an acquiescence response set, because this form of responding was not prevalent in the reverse-worded versions. In contrast, it appeared that the incorporation of reverse-wording degraded the internal consistency of the scale as participants appeared to respond to the positive and negative-worded items as if they were measurements of independent constructs, rather than measurements of constructs on opposite ends of a particular dimension. Predicted correlations between the GMPSI and concurrent validity measures offered support for Grossarth-Maticek's theory, and suggest that the GMPSI is an effective and reliable tool for the measurement of these personality types. However, experimental evidence supporting the link between personality, mediating mechanisms and disease is required to further substantiate these findings. The second and third studies (Chapters 3 and 4, respectively) were investigations of the utility of an information pamphlet discussing stress, assertiveness and relaxation, in improving GMPSI personality type stress responses in a student and a community sample (Studies 2 and 3 respectively), and provided an opportunity to investigate the mechanisms mediating the personality-health relationship via experimental manipulation. Specifically, Study 2 investigated the effectiveness of the pamphlet in improving personality scores, mood, coping strategies, health behaviours, and salivary cortisol levels (measured at pre-treatment, 1-month post-treatment and 5-months post-treatment) in 200 first-year university students. Further, two modes of administration of the pamphlet were compared: pure selfadministration versus instruction accompanied by self-administration. Group differences in mood and cortisol reactivity to a visualisation stress task were also assessed. Very few significant differences were found between the two pamphlet administration forms. Both pamphlet forms were effective in improving mood states, some lifestyle habits (e.g., exercise), and salivary cortisol responses to the acute stress task compared to the control group. The strength of these effects ranged from small to medium, and all significant differences were between pre-treatment and the 1-month post-treatment session. The failure to observe differences at the 5-months post-treatment session may have been due to inadequacies of the treatment, or low statistical power for detecting effects from the final session due to the large attrition rate that had occurred by this session. Overall, while large treatment effect sizes were not found, the results could be construed as "clinically" significant when taking into account the low costs of implementing an information pamphlet in the larger community, and the potential benefits on individuals' stress responses and health behaviours. Study 3 aimed to investigate the treatment effects of the same self-administered pamphlet in 77 participants from the general community, who varied largely in age (19 - 77 years). Treatment and control groups were compared in terms of treatment compliance, cortisol levels, health behaviours, personality scores, perceived stress, mood, and coping styles (measured at pre-treatment, 2 weeks posttreatment, 3 months post-treatment, and 6 months post-treatment). In addition, group differences in cortisol reactivity to an acute cognitive stress task were examined. Home visits were arranged for each session to reduce sample attrition. Further, an intervention evaluation form was administered at each post-treatment session to verify and maintain treatment involvement. Several significant treatment effects were observed, including changes in personality scores and non-productive coping strategies, and the strength of these effects ranged from medium to very large. Most participants reported that they found the information pamphlet very appealing and helpful. In addition to the examination of intervention effects in the second and third studies, a path model that aimed to identify direct and mediating relationships between personality and concurrently measured disease was examined for the two samples (Chapter 5). This path model was based on a new integrative theory of personality-disease, which was developed. Eysenck's (1991) proposed personality-disease model formed the foundation of this new theory, and elements of several other generic personality-disease models were also incorporated. This theory was empirically tested using path analysis on the student and community data separately. Common pathways in the two models were then tested for invariance. Overall, most paths proposed by the integrative model were identified in one or both samples; thus, the model was generally supported. All common direct paths were statistically invariant (i.e., equivalent) in the two samples. While personality did not appear to directly predict illness, several significant indirect pathways were identified by which personality appears to affect disease incidence, such as via perceived stress, mood, coping styles, and physical risk factors. These findings appear to support Grossarth-Maticek's theory that personality affects disease incidence via stress responses, as well as other generic approaches (i.e., the personality-induced hyperreactivity model and the stress moderator model) that emphasise the stress-moderating effects of personality on health. However, support for the dangerous behaviours model was not found, which posits that certain personality dispositions seek risky behaviours (e.g., poor health behaviours such as smoking and alcohol consumption) that fit their personality. The final Chapter 6 directly compares the results of these three studies, and discusses their practical and theoretical significance in terms of Grossarth-Maticek's theory and research, views of critics, and other personality-health perspectives and research. In summary, the current studies appear to suggest that the GMPSI is a reliable and valid scale for the measurement of particular personality traits. Further, there appears to be evidence to suggest that personality traits can be changed by an intervention pamphlet. This information pamphlet also appears to be effective in significantly improving responses to stress, and these effects are more prominent in high-risk groups (i.e., subjects with extreme personality trait scores). Moreover, there is some evidence to suggest that personality may have direct effects on several mechanisms involved in the development of disease. Overall, this thesis demonstrates the importance of recognising the role of personality and stress in disease prevention and prediction by providing independent evidence for the benefits of treatment and mechanisms by which benefits may occur.

The Employment Equity Act, 55 of 1998, Section 8 (Government Gazette, 1998) provides clear guidelines for psychometric testing in South Africa. Due to the cultural complexity of the South African population, personality tests in particular do not always comply with these specifications. Most personality tests used in South Africa have been developed in and imported from other countries, and are consequently not always appropriate for all cultural groups. Also, the majority of indigenous personality tests were developed and standardised specifically for the white population. Today a major challenge in personality assessment development is to develop and standardise inventories for the 11 official language groups in South Africa. The objectives of this study were to develop valid and reliable items for an Intellect–measuring instrument that will form part of a larger personality inventory, to investigate the factor solution of this Intellect cluster, and to compare the factor solutions of the white and African race groups respectively. An Intellect questionnaire consisting of 202 items was developed based on the qualitative phase of the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). This research served as a pilot study. The sample consisted of (N=524) students from tertiary institutions in the Gauteng and the North West Provinces of South Africa. A quantitative design with an exploratory approach was used to collect data. Statistical analysis was used to analyse the data. The results indicated that only 18 of the original 202 items proved to be unreliable. Acceptable reliability levels for all facets were found. First–order factor analysis produced two sub–clusters: Aesthetics and Intellect. The Aesthetics sub–cluster consisted of the Artistic, Concrete work and Creative facets, and the Intellect sub–cluster consisted of the Intellect, Knowledgeable, Logical, Self–insight, Articulate, Competent, Enterprising, Perceptive, Social Intellect and Understanding facets. Second–order factor analysis indicated a single–order factor for the Intellect cluster with two second–order factors: Aesthetics and Intellect. Support was found to discard the Musical and Enterprising facets from the Intellect cluster. Similar factor solutions were found for the white and African groups - except for the Musical facet, which loaded on the Aesthetics sub–cluster for the white group and on the Intellect sub–cluster for the African group. Recommendations were made for future research. / Thesis (M.Com. (Industrial Psychology))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

The Employment Equity Act, 55 of 1998, Section 8 (Government Gazette, 1998) provides clear guidelines for psychometric testing in South Africa. Due to the cultural complexity of the South African population, personality tests in particular do not always comply with these specifications. Most personality tests used in South Africa have been developed in and imported from other countries, and are consequently not always appropriate for all cultural groups. Also, the majority of indigenous personality tests were developed and standardised specifically for the white population. Today a major challenge in personality assessment development is to develop and standardise inventories for the 11 official language groups in South Africa. The objectives of this study were to develop valid and reliable items for an Intellect–measuring instrument that will form part of a larger personality inventory, to investigate the factor solution of this Intellect cluster, and to compare the factor solutions of the white and African race groups respectively. An Intellect questionnaire consisting of 202 items was developed based on the qualitative phase of the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). This research served as a pilot study. The sample consisted of (N=524) students from tertiary institutions in the Gauteng and the North West Provinces of South Africa. A quantitative design with an exploratory approach was used to collect data. Statistical analysis was used to analyse the data. The results indicated that only 18 of the original 202 items proved to be unreliable. Acceptable reliability levels for all facets were found. First–order factor analysis produced two sub–clusters: Aesthetics and Intellect. The Aesthetics sub–cluster consisted of the Artistic, Concrete work and Creative facets, and the Intellect sub–cluster consisted of the Intellect, Knowledgeable, Logical, Self–insight, Articulate, Competent, Enterprising, Perceptive, Social Intellect and Understanding facets. Second–order factor analysis indicated a single–order factor for the Intellect cluster with two second–order factors: Aesthetics and Intellect. Support was found to discard the Musical and Enterprising facets from the Intellect cluster. Similar factor solutions were found for the white and African groups - except for the Musical facet, which loaded on the Aesthetics sub–cluster for the white group and on the Intellect sub–cluster for the African group. Recommendations were made for future research. / Thesis (M.Com. (Industrial Psychology))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

Doctor of Philosophy / Grossarth-Maticek and Eysenck (1988) demonstrated that personality type as measured by the 70-item Grossarth-Maticek Personality Stress Inventory (GMPSI), predicts mortality and its cause with remarkable accuracy. Further, various forms of autonomy training, such as bibliotherapy and short individual treatment that were designed to reduce the toxic personality features (such as emotional dependence) effectively improved long-term health outcomes. However, several aspects of their theory and research were either insufficiently explicated or require further investigation. For example, the researchers did not thoroughly investigate the psychometric properties of the inventory, and they did not sufficiently examine the mechanisms that may mediate the personality-health relationship. Further, the autonomy training was inadequately described, and perhaps could have been briefer and had the same impact. Three studies were run to investigate these issues further. Study 1 (Chapter 2) investigated the internal consistency, test-retest reliability and convergent, discriminant and concurrent validity of the GMPSI in 312 first-year students, using a variety of statistical techniques (e.g., structural equation modeling, confirmatory factor analysis, and simple correlations). In addition, the psychometric properties of this scale were compared to those of three revised versions of the scale, which were theorised to be psychometric improvements of the original version from basic principles. The revised versions contained reverse-worded items (of different types) to monitor and disrupt acquiescence response sets, and/or an extended response scale to improve internal consistency and stability. Psychometric effects of reverse-wording and the extended response scale on scale reliability were examined via the analysis of construct reliability estimates, personality subscale model fit of congeneric measurement models (a form of structural equation modeling), and test-retest reliability estimates. The original version of the scale appeared to be the most reliable and valid scale of the four versions. This improved reliability of the original version was not an artifact of an acquiescence response set, because this form of responding was not prevalent in the reverse-worded versions. In contrast, it appeared that the incorporation of reverse-wording degraded the internal consistency of the scale as participants appeared to respond to the positive and negative-worded items as if they were measurements of independent constructs, rather than measurements of constructs on opposite ends of a particular dimension. Predicted correlations between the GMPSI and concurrent validity measures offered support for Grossarth-Maticek's theory, and suggest that the GMPSI is an effective and reliable tool for the measurement of these personality types. However, experimental evidence supporting the link between personality, mediating mechanisms and disease is required to further substantiate these findings. The second and third studies (Chapters 3 and 4, respectively) were investigations of the utility of an information pamphlet discussing stress, assertiveness and relaxation, in improving GMPSI personality type stress responses in a student and a community sample (Studies 2 and 3 respectively), and provided an opportunity to investigate the mechanisms mediating the personality-health relationship via experimental manipulation. Specifically, Study 2 investigated the effectiveness of the pamphlet in improving personality scores, mood, coping strategies, health behaviours, and salivary cortisol levels (measured at pre-treatment, 1-month post-treatment and 5-months post-treatment) in 200 first-year university students. Further, two modes of administration of the pamphlet were compared: pure selfadministration versus instruction accompanied by self-administration. Group differences in mood and cortisol reactivity to a visualisation stress task were also assessed. Very few significant differences were found between the two pamphlet administration forms. Both pamphlet forms were effective in improving mood states, some lifestyle habits (e.g., exercise), and salivary cortisol responses to the acute stress task compared to the control group. The strength of these effects ranged from small to medium, and all significant differences were between pre-treatment and the 1-month post-treatment session. The failure to observe differences at the 5-months post-treatment session may have been due to inadequacies of the treatment, or low statistical power for detecting effects from the final session due to the large attrition rate that had occurred by this session. Overall, while large treatment effect sizes were not found, the results could be construed as "clinically" significant when taking into account the low costs of implementing an information pamphlet in the larger community, and the potential benefits on individuals' stress responses and health behaviours. Study 3 aimed to investigate the treatment effects of the same self-administered pamphlet in 77 participants from the general community, who varied largely in age (19 - 77 years). Treatment and control groups were compared in terms of treatment compliance, cortisol levels, health behaviours, personality scores, perceived stress, mood, and coping styles (measured at pre-treatment, 2 weeks posttreatment, 3 months post-treatment, and 6 months post-treatment). In addition, group differences in cortisol reactivity to an acute cognitive stress task were examined. Home visits were arranged for each session to reduce sample attrition. Further, an intervention evaluation form was administered at each post-treatment session to verify and maintain treatment involvement. Several significant treatment effects were observed, including changes in personality scores and non-productive coping strategies, and the strength of these effects ranged from medium to very large. Most participants reported that they found the information pamphlet very appealing and helpful. In addition to the examination of intervention effects in the second and third studies, a path model that aimed to identify direct and mediating relationships between personality and concurrently measured disease was examined for the two samples (Chapter 5). This path model was based on a new integrative theory of personality-disease, which was developed. Eysenck's (1991) proposed personality-disease model formed the foundation of this new theory, and elements of several other generic personality-disease models were also incorporated. This theory was empirically tested using path analysis on the student and community data separately. Common pathways in the two models were then tested for invariance. Overall, most paths proposed by the integrative model were identified in one or both samples; thus, the model was generally supported. All common direct paths were statistically invariant (i.e., equivalent) in the two samples. While personality did not appear to directly predict illness, several significant indirect pathways were identified by which personality appears to affect disease incidence, such as via perceived stress, mood, coping styles, and physical risk factors. These findings appear to support Grossarth-Maticek's theory that personality affects disease incidence via stress responses, as well as other generic approaches (i.e., the personality-induced hyperreactivity model and the stress moderator model) that emphasise the stress-moderating effects of personality on health. However, support for the dangerous behaviours model was not found, which posits that certain personality dispositions seek risky behaviours (e.g., poor health behaviours such as smoking and alcohol consumption) that fit their personality. The final Chapter 6 directly compares the results of these three studies, and discusses their practical and theoretical significance in terms of Grossarth-Maticek's theory and research, views of critics, and other personality-health perspectives and research. In summary, the current studies appear to suggest that the GMPSI is a reliable and valid scale for the measurement of particular personality traits. Further, there appears to be evidence to suggest that personality traits can be changed by an intervention pamphlet. This information pamphlet also appears to be effective in significantly improving responses to stress, and these effects are more prominent in high-risk groups (i.e., subjects with extreme personality trait scores). Moreover, there is some evidence to suggest that personality may have direct effects on several mechanisms involved in the development of disease. Overall, this thesis demonstrates the importance of recognising the role of personality and stress in disease prevention and prediction by providing independent evidence for the benefits of treatment and mechanisms by which benefits may occur.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-07-27T14:19:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Otilia Aida Monteiro Loth.pdf: 1016710 bytes, checksum: 9c3eff095f11fcca6e3b545c7fc3fbe7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-08-06 / This dissertation is composed of two sections, and its principal aim is the study of psychological instruments for Personality Assessment. The first section consists of a systematic literature revision with the purpose of analyzing the scientific production regarding the use of personality assessment instruments and studies related to these. Two databases in Psychology were consulted: (a) The Virtual Library of Health in Psychology (BVS-PSI), that integrates several sources; and (b) The Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (BDTD), a repository of Stricto Sensu Graduation works from several Brazilian Universities. Additionally, research has been extended to theses and dissertation databases of nine specific Brazilian universities which maintain research in Psychological Evaluation in Stricto Sensu courses. Results have shown the prevalence of Stricto Sensu studies over articles; the majority of works from South-eastern and South Regions; and the main focus at psychometric parameters of the assessment personality evaluation instruments. Self-reporting measuring instruments are employed more often than projective and performance ones. The second section analyses the convergent validity among variables from the Rorschach Method and the Big Five Model. One hundred and twenty nine psychology undergraduate students, from two Universities in Goiânia, one public and one private, have participated. They were submitted to a socio-demographic questionnaire and two types of psychological tests: the (projective) Rorschach Method and the (objective) Inventário Reduzido dos Cinco Fatores de Personalidade (ICFP-R). Results have showed the Five Factors are correlated to some variables the Rorschach Method. However in correlations to studies, these correlations are few and low, which corroborates previous studies. Some hypotheses were considered to explain this fact. In a broad view, this study has contributed to knowledge expansion on what has been produced in Personality Assessment and its psychological tests in particular. Moreover, it was possible to improve understanding on how distinct assessment methods could be related and factors that could influence their correlations. / A presente dissertação está organizada em duas seções que têm como objetivo principal o estudo de instrumentos psicológicos para avaliação de personalidade. A primeira seção consiste em uma revisão bibliográfica sistematizada a fim de analisar a produção científica sobre o uso de instrumentos de avaliação de personalidade e estudos relacionados a estes instrumentos. Para isso, foi realizada uma busca em duas bases de dados na área de psicologia: (a) Biblioteca Virtual de Saúde na área específica de Psicologia (BVS-PSI), que faz buscas em vários bancos de dados; e (b) Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações (BDTD), que é um banco de trabalhos de pós-graduação stricto sensu de várias universidades do país. Além das duas bases de dados, pesquisouse em bancos de teses e dissertações de nove universidades que oferecem linhas de pesquisa na área de Avaliação Psicológica nos cursos de pós-graduação Stricto Sensu. Os resultados mostraram prevalência de estudos de pós-graduação Stricto Sensu em relação aos artigos; a concentração de estudos nas regiões Sudeste e Sul; e maior preocupação a respeito de parâmetros psicométricos dos instrumentos de avaliação de personalidade. Em relação ao tipo de instrumento utilizado, houve maior incidência de instrumentos de medida de autorrelato em comparação a medidas projetivas ou de desempenho. A segunda seção tem por objetivo analisar a validade convergente entre as variáveis do Método de Rorschach e dos Cinco Grandes Fatores de Personalidade. Participaram deste estudo 129 alunos, graduandos de psicologia, provenientes de duas universidades de Goiânia, uma pública e outra privada. Os alunos foram submetidos a dois tipos de testes psicológicos: um teste projetivo Método de Rorschach, e um teste objetivo Inventário Reduzido dos Cinco Grandes Fatores de Personalidade (ICFP-R), além de responderem a um Questionário Sócio-demográfico. Os resultados mostraram que os Cinco Fatores apresentaram correlações com algumas variáveis do Rorschach. No entanto, foram encontradas poucas correlações e estas foram consideradas baixas, o que corrobora estudos anteriores. Foram consideradas algumas hipóteses que podem explicar, pelo menos parcialmente, a baixa quantidade e intensidade das correlações encontradas. De forma geral, os estudos possibilitaram ampliação do conhecimento sobre o que está sendo produzido na área de Avaliação de Personalidade, especialmente no que diz respeito aos testes psicológicos utilizados pra esse fim. Além disso, foi possível compreender melhor como métodos distintos de avaliação podem estar relacionados e os fatores que podem influenciar na correlação destes.