The purpose of this study is the development of an index to assess inconsistency in the answers of Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) in order to identify and discard inconsistent subjects in applied psychology, as clinical, forensics, or personnel selection. The procedure consists in the use of 10 pairs of highly correlated items in a wide sample of voluntary and anonymous subjects of both sexes (n = 5.644). We inserted random cases to the original data in order to obtain simulated scores of inconsistency and we established a cut-off criterion to discriminate between consistent and inconsistent subjects according to a 70 T Score. A score higher than 10 points discriminated the 3.7% of the subjects. Cronbach’s alpha average for facets was calculated by ZKA-PQ facets distributed in 8 (α: 0.79), 9–10 (α: 0.67), and above 10 points (α: .50) of the inconsistency index. The Feldt test indicates that alpha differences were significant. The inconsistency score did not affect the factorial structure of the ZKA-PQ. We discussed the utility of this index to identify inconsistent subjects with the ZKA-PQ, as, for instance, those with individual difficulties (a limited vocabulary, poor verbal comprehension, an idiosyncratic way of interpreting item meanings, carelessness, inattentiveness…).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aluja et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: