The Irrational Beliefs Inventory: Cross-Cultural Comparisons between South African and Previously Published Dutch and American Samples

Abstract

The Irrational Beliefs Inventory gives a measure of irrational beliefs, as postulated by Ellis's Rational Emotive Behavior therapy. Given the increasing cross-cultural use of psychometric scales, it is important to assess whether the psychometric properties of the inventory are consistent across cultures. In the present study cross-cultural applicability, in terms of internal consistency and independence of subscales, was investigated for an ad hoc sample of White (n= 100, M age = 21.3 yr., SD=4.0) and Black (n=82, M age=19.8 yr., SD=2.2) undergraduate South African university students. Cronbach coefficients alpha for the subscales and Pearson correlations between subscales for American and Dutch students, as reported by Bridges and Sanderman, were compared with those indices for the South African students. The magnitude and rank order of Cronbach alpha, as well as the correlations between subscales for the three groups showed strong similarities. Values of alpha for the Black South African students were lower in magnitude on all subscales than those for American, Dutch, and White South African samples, but intercorrelations between subscale scores were consistent. Findings in the present study are supportive of the cross-cultural applicability of the Irrational Beliefs Inventory to White South African students but not to South African Black students.

The Irrational Beliefs Inventory: Psychometric Properties and Cross-Cultural Validation of its Arabic Version

“…The internal consistency reliability of the 34-item arabic version and almost all of its subscales were in the barely-acceptable range, with the exception of Rigidity which was very weak, according to the .70 cutoff criteria set by nunnally (1978) and used by Koopmans, et al (1994). These results are consistent with the White south african sample, but not with the Black south african sample in which only one subscale (need for approval) showed acceptable internal consistency (duPlessis, et al, 2004). There could be cultural or language issues and these must be addressed further in both versions of the scale.…”

“…Irrational beliefs are defined as "unrealistic verbal reasoning processes by which external events are interpreted and through which emotional distress is mediated" (Koopmans, sanderman, Timmerman, & emmelkamp, 1994, p. 15). Irrational beliefs interrupt the attainment of individuals' goals and consequently result in emotional disturbances (Macavei, 2005), especially non-psychotic psychiatric disorders such as depression and anxiety (duPlessis, moller, & steel, 2004). It is thought that identification and treatment of irrational beliefs may help persons overcome their emotional distress (vandervoort, divers, & madrid, 1999).…”

“…The IBI measures five irrational beliefs, the result of an exploratory factor analysis: Problem Avoidance (i.e., a tendency to experience difficulty in coping with problems and in taking responsibility), rigidity (i.e., a tendency to hold rigid moral standards for own self and others), Worrying (i.e., a tendency to be overly concerned about potential calamity), need for approval (i.e., a tendency to seek respect and approval from others), and emotional Irresponsibility (i.e., a tendency to attribute feelings and emotions to external factors instead of referring them to personal internal factors). an evaluation of the IBI concluded it is more valid and reliable than both the IBT and rBI (duPlessis, et al, 2004). only a few studies (Woodward, et al, 2001) have addressed and tested the construct validity of the scale.…”

Professional Identity Development of Counselor Education Doctoral Students: A Qualitative Investigation

“…The internal consistency of the subscales of the IBI for American samples ranges from .69 (emotional irresponsibility) to .79 (worrying). When evaluated, the IBI was found more reliable and valid than other measures of irrational beliefs (DuPlessis, Moller, & Steel, 2004) The General Self Efficacy Scale (GSES; Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) is a measure of self-efficacy designed for use with general populations, but can be used as a measure for specific samples as well. Statements include "I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough" and "I am confident that I could deal efficiently with unexpected events."…”