The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) is a measure of the 5-factor model developed on volunteer samples in the United States. To examine its validity in a non-Western, psychiatric sample, an existing Chinese translation was modified for use in the People's Republic of China (PRC). The instrument was administered to 2,000 psychiatric in-and outpatients at 13 sites throughout the PRC. Internal consistency was low for some facet scales, but retest reliability was adequate and the hypothesized factor structure was clearly recovered. Correlations with age, California Psychological Inventory scales, and spouse ratings supported the validity of NEO-PI-R scales, and diagnostic subgroups showed meaningful personality profiles. The 5-factor model appears to be useful for the assessment of personality among Chinese psychiatric patients.When psychological measures are to be used in a new population, it is essential to demonstrate that they retain construct validity in the new context. When the new group differs substantially from that on which the instrument was developed, such research has a dual function: On a practical level it tells researchers and clinicians with what degree of confidence they can use the instrument; on a theoretical level, it speaks to the generalizability across populations of psychological constructs and processes. In the present research we examined the reliability and validity of a new Man-

We examined the reliability, cross-instrument validity, and factor structure of Chinese adaptations of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire (PDQ-4+; N = 1,926) and Personality Disorders Interview (PDI-IV; N = 525) in psychiatric patients. Comparisons with data from Western countries suggest that the psychometric properties of these two instruments are comparable across cultures. Low to modest agreement between the PDQ-4+ and PDI-IV was observed for both dimensional and categorical personality disorder evaluations. When the PDI-IV was used as the diagnostic standard, the PDQ-4+ showed higher sensitivity than specificity, and higher negative predictive power than positive predictive power. Factor analyses of both instruments replicated the four-factor structure O'Connor and Dyce (1998) found in Western samples. Results suggested that conceptions and measures of DSM-IV personality disorders are cross-culturally generalizable to Chinese psychiatric populations.

No abstract

No abstract

We factor analyzed the Chinese revision of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-RC) in a sample of 59 individuals with medically diagnosed brain damage. The Chinese subjects consisted of 42 males and 17 females with means for Verbal. Performance, and Full Scale IQ of 83.88 (SD = 22.11), 75.49 (SD = 20.63), and 78.42 (SD = 21.97), respectively. Clear support was found for a general intelligence factor (g) and the Full Scale IQ. Similarly, the two-factor solution provided support for Wechsler's (1981) Verbal and Performance IQ designations. The three-factor solution revealed the familiar Verbal-Comprehension and Perceptual-Organization factors. However, the Freedom From Distractibility factor was less clearly defined. Comparisons of Chinese and American factor structures for neurologically impaired persons demonstrated high coefficients of congruence, ranging from .93 to .98. Overall, the findings demonstrated substantial congruence cross culturally for Chinese and American brain-damaged samples and suggest that the WAIS-RC measures essentially the same constructs as the WAIS-R.