IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v3y2013i2p2158244013486115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reliability of Circumplex Axes

Author

Listed:
  • Micha Strack
  • Ingo Jacobs
  • Martin Grosse Holtforth

Abstract

We present a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) procedure for computing the reliability of circumplex axes. The tau-equivalent CFA variance decomposition model estimates five variance components: general factor, axes, scale-specificity, block-specificity, and item-specificity. Only the axes variance component is used for reliability estimation. We apply the model to six circumplex types and 13 instruments assessing interpersonal and motivational constructs—Interpersonal Adjective List (IAL), Interpersonal Adjective Scales (revised; IAS-R), Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP), Impact Messages Inventory (IMI), Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Values (CSIV), Support Action Scale Circumplex (SAS-C), Interaction Problems With Animals (IPI-A), Team Role Circle (TRC), Competing Values Leadership Instrument (CV-LI), Love Styles, Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI), Customer Orientation Circle (COC), and System for Multi-Level Observation of Groups (behavioral adjectives; SYMLOG)—in 17 German-speaking samples (29 subsamples, grouped by self-report, other report, and metaperception assessments). The general factor accounted for a proportion ranging from 1% to 48% of the item variance, the axes component for 2% to 30%; and scale specificity for 1% to 28%, respectively. Reliability estimates varied considerably from .13 to .92. An application of the Nunnally and Bernstein formula proposed by Markey, Markey, and Tinsley overestimated axes reliabilities in cases of large-scale specificities but otherwise works effectively. Contemporary circumplex evaluations such as Tracey’s RANDALL are sensitive to the ratio of the axes and scale-specificity components. In contrast, the proposed model isolates both components.

Suggested Citation

  • Micha Strack & Ingo Jacobs & Martin Grosse Holtforth, 2013. "Reliability of Circumplex Axes," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(2), pages 21582440134, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:2158244013486115
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244013486115
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244013486115
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244013486115?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. L. Thurstone, 1954. "An analytical method for simple structure," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 19(3), pages 173-182, September.
    2. Michael Browne, 1992. "Circumplex models for correlation matrices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 57(4), pages 469-497, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kennon M. Sheldon & Evgeny N. Osin & Tamara O. Gordeeva & Dmitry D. Suchkov & Vlaidslav V. Bobrov & Elena I. Rasskazova & Oleg A. Sychev, 2015. "Evaluating the Dimensionality of the Relative Autonomy Continuum in Us and Russian Samples," HSE Working papers WP BRP 48/PSY/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Stijn Schelfhout & Bart Wille & Lot Fonteyne & Elisabeth Roels & Filip De Fruyt & Wouter Duyck, 2019. "The effects of vocational interest on study results: Student person – environment fit and program interest diversity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-26, April.
    3. Peter Lenk & Michel Wedel & Ulf Böckenholt, 2006. "Bayesian Estimation of Circumplex Models Subject to Prior Theory Constraints and Scale-Usage Bias," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 33-55, March.
    4. Bert Green, 1966. "The computer revolution in psychometrics," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 31(4), pages 437-445, December.
    5. Tsai, Rung-Ching & Bockenholt, Ulf, 2002. "Two-level linear paired comparison models: estimation and identifiability issues," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 429-449, July.
    6. Rikkert M. van der Lans & Ridwan Maulana & Michelle Helms-Lorenz & Carmen-María Fernández-García & Seyeoung Chun & Thelma de Jager & Yulia Irnidayanti & Mercedes Inda-Caro & Okhwa Lee & Thys Coetze, 2021. "Student Perceptions of Teaching Quality in Five Countries: A Partial Credit Model Approach to Assess Measurement Invariance," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    7. Ledyard Tucker, 1955. "The objective definition of simple structure in linear factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 20(3), pages 209-225, September.
    8. Benjamin Fruchter & Edwin Novak, 1958. "A comparative study of three methods of rotation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 23(3), pages 211-221, September.
    9. Stef Buuren, 1997. "Fitting arma time series by structural equation models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 215-236, June.
    10. Ralston, David A. & Russell, Craig J. & Egri, Carolyn P., 2018. "Business values dimensions: A cross-culturally developed measure of workforce values," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 1189-1199.
    11. Montfort, Kees van & Bijleveld, Catrien, 1997. "Dynamic analysis of multivariate panel data with nonlinear transformations," Serie Research Memoranda 0054, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    circumplex; reliability; CFA;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:2158244013486115. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.