A Cross‐National Comparison of a Shorter Version of the Person's Relating to Others Questionnaire. (29th September 2011)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Birtchnell, John; Hammond, Sean; Horn, Eva; De Jong, Cornelis; Kalaitzaki, Argyroula
• Is Part Of: Clinical psychology & psychotherapy. Volume 20:Number 1(2013:Jan./Feb.)
• Page Start: 36
• Page End: 48
• Publication Date: 2011-09-29
• Subjects: Clinical psychology -- Periodicals; Psychotherapy -- Periodicals; 616.89
• DOI: 10.1002/cpp.789
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1063-3995

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="cpp789-sec-0050" sec-type="section"> <p>The shorter version of the Person's Relating to Others Questionnaire (PROQ3) is half the length of the earlier PROQ2. Both questionnaires were designed to measure negative relating as organized around a theoretical structure called the interpersonal octagon. Each questionnaire has an upper, lower, close and distant scale and four intermediate scales (e.g., upper close). As would be expected, moderately high positive correlations were observed between primary scales (upper, lower, close and distant) and neighbouring intermediate scales. Correlations diminished with increasing separation around the octagon. The psychometric properties of the PROQ3 were examined within four national samples. Alpha coefficients were consistently acceptable across samples. Gender differences varied between samples. Comparisons were made between the PROQ3 and a measure of the big five (International Personality Item Pool) and between the PROQ3 and two measures based upon the interpersonal circle (Revised Interpersonal Check List [ICL‐R] and Circumplex Version of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems [IIP‐C]). It is important to note that, unlike with the PROQ3, significant negative correlations were observed between opposite scales of the ICL‐R and opposite scales of the IIP‐C. A confirmatory factor analysis provided support for most PROQ3 scales, although some overlap between scales was demonstrated. Correlations between the PROQ3 scales and the big five scales were either non‐significant (two scales) or negative. Each PROQ3 scale correlated positively and meaningfully with a short sequence of scales of both the ICL‐R and the IIP‐C. Psychotherapy patients had higher mean scores than non‐patients on four scales but non‐patients had higher mean scores on two. Over the course of psychotherapy, the patients' mean score dropped significantly on six scales but rose significantly on one. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</p> </sec> <sec id="cpp789-sec-0051" sec-type="section"> <title>Key Practitioner Message</title> <p> <list list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>The PROQ3 is an effective self‐rating measure of negative relating.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>It is half the length of previous versions of the PROQ but is equally sound psychometrically.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>It has been shown to differentiate significantly between psychotherapy patients and non‐patients.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>It has revealed a significant reduction in scores over the course of psychotherapy.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>It has been successfully translated into other European languages.</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> </abstract>