2020
DOI: 10.4306/jknpa.2020.59.2.142
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Restandardization of the Korean Personality Assessment Inventory: Comparisons with the Original Korean Version

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
0
0
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
0
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Some Cronbach alphas were very low, particularly ICN, INF, and DRG; however, most of these scales are validity scales, which is consistent with the assertion that the ICN and INF scales possibly measuring variance error indicators and, therefore, leading to low internal consistency values (Morey, 1991). The lower Cronbach alphas observed in the NIM, PIM, and DRG scales were similar, albeit smaller, than the values found in the German version (Groves and Engel, 2007), and the DRG alpha was similar to the South-Korean (Lee et al, 2020) and higher than the French-Canadian alphas (Jeffay et al, 2021). The smaller STR values were also similar to the alphas reported in the Chilean version (Ortiz-Tallo et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Some Cronbach alphas were very low, particularly ICN, INF, and DRG; however, most of these scales are validity scales, which is consistent with the assertion that the ICN and INF scales possibly measuring variance error indicators and, therefore, leading to low internal consistency values (Morey, 1991). The lower Cronbach alphas observed in the NIM, PIM, and DRG scales were similar, albeit smaller, than the values found in the German version (Groves and Engel, 2007), and the DRG alpha was similar to the South-Korean (Lee et al, 2020) and higher than the French-Canadian alphas (Jeffay et al, 2021). The smaller STR values were also similar to the alphas reported in the Chilean version (Ortiz-Tallo et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…In South Korea, the PAI was standardized in 2001. In the Korean version of the PAI, the median value of internal consistency is 0.77, with all clinical scales showing an internal consistency over 0.7, except for the Drug Problems scale, thus confirming validity [ 19 ]. In this study, 11 clinical scales of the 22 subscales of the standardized Korean version of the PAI were analyzed.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A versão coreana do PAI, inicialmente concebida em 2001 (Kim et al, 2001), foi recentemente reavaliada do ponto de vista da sua estrutura fatorial (Lee et al, 2020;Yoon et al, 2020), com recurso a uma amostra de 1279 sujeitos da população normal. A estrutura de três fatores da versão coreana original (i.e., mal-estar e sintomatologia; abuso de substâncias; problemas comportamentais e interpessoais) para as 22 escalas do PAI foi confirmada, no entanto uma AFC revelou que os índices de ajustamento do modelo são pobres.…”
Section: Adaptações E Validações Noutros Paísesunclassified