Psychometric evaluation of a visual interpersonal analogue scale

Abstract

Interpersonal theory organizes social behavior along dominant (vs. submissive) and warm (vs. cold) dimensions. There is a growing interest in assessing these behaviors in naturalistic settings to maximize ecological validity and to study dynamic social processes. Studies that have assessed interpersonal behavior in daily life have primarily relied on behavioral checklists. Although checklists have advantages, they are discrepant with techniques used to capture constructs typically assessed alongside warmth and dominance, such as affect, which typically rely on adjective descriptors. Further, these checklists are distinct from the methodologies used at the dispositional level, such as personality inventories, which rarely rely on behavioral checklists. The current study evaluates the psychometric performance of interpersonal adjectives presented on a visual analogue scale in five different samples. Validity of the visual interpersonal analogue scale (VIAS) approach to momentary assessment was evaluated by comparing its performance with an interpersonal behavior checklist and by examining associations among the VIAS warmth and dominance scales and other momentary and dispositional constructs. Results were generally consistent with an existing interpersonal behavior checklist at the within-person level but diverged somewhat at the dispositional level. Across the five samples, the VIAS generally performed as hypothesized at both the within- and between-person levels.

Assessing Life Satisfaction in Everyday Life: An Example of Scale Development for Ecological Momentary Assessment

“…In other words, when participants were highly satisfied, the instrument seemed less able to reflect differences in the latent variable as participants may have reached the limit of the response scale. This might be a restriction of the seven-point Likert scale and could be addressed by using a visual analog scale instead (e.g., Woods et al, 2022). Third, our findings show that invariance of the measurement model should not be taken for granted when assessing momentary satisfaction.…”

Filling gaps in the nomological networks for dominance and affiliation by examining self-informant agreement on momentary interpersonal behavior

“…For both self and informant ratings, the pole scale scores were then used to calculate level of dominance by subtracting Submissiveness from Dominance and affiliation by subtracting Quarrelsomeness from Agreeableness. Other work using the SBI has shown that average momentary dominance correlates with cross-sectional dominance and lower neuroticism and that average momentary affiliation correlates with cross-sectional affiliation, submissiveness, agreeableness, and lower neuroticism (Côté, & Moskowitz, 1998; Woods et al, in press). In addition, variability in dominance and affiliation correlates with cross-sectional interpersonal problems, lower relationship satisfaction, and higher anxiety and depression (Erikson et al, 2009; Rappaport et al, 2014; Sadikaj et al, 2015).…”

Momentary assessment of the relations between narcissistic traits, interpersonal behaviors, and aggression

“…Next, they were asked to rate the interpersonal behaviors of themselves and the person with whom they interacted using the Visual Interpersonal Analogue Scale (VIAS, Woods et al, 2020), which includes two sliding bars of interpersonal warmth (ranging from Cold/Distant/ Hostile [−5] to extremely Warm/Friendly/Caring [5]) and interpersonal dominance (ranging from extremely Accommodating/Submissive/Timid [−5] to Assertive/ Dominant/Controlling [5]). Individuals' ratings of their own interpersonal behaviors were not used in the current study.…”