This article was downloaded by: [University of Massachusetts] On: 09 January 2015, At: 16:53 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Personality Assessment Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjpa20
Some Personality Patterns and Dimensions of Male Alcoholics: A Multivariate Description Dennis M. Eshbaugh , Donald J. Tosi & Charles Hoyt Published online: 10 Jun 2010.
To cite this article: Dennis M. Eshbaugh , Donald J. Tosi & Charles Hoyt (1978) Some Personality Patterns and Dimensions of Male Alcoholics: A Multivariate Description, Journal of Personality Assessment, 42:4, 409-417, DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4204_12 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4204_12
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply,
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
Su?nrnta.r?.:'The assump!ion rnar alcohoiicsfom: a bxnogeneous populatior. has bsen:ounC to be quertiornable. Recent research has been done to empmcallb define ~ o s s i b l personaii!\ e subtypes of aicohoIics. T h s study extended the !ypokogical w o r ~ done p:ei-iody b s Goids i e i ~and Llnder: ! i 96% t and Whiteiack. Overali, end Patrick (197'1 !, They each found i c n r alcoholic subtypes. three of which replicated across srudies. For this reseerch, 3%SIP1 profiles of 208 male akoholics were s u b m i t t d to a hierarchicalciusreringprocedure. S o e n subtypes werc found. These results were compared :o the r e s d t s oitheprio: r\4ostudies. macdrticn to actwriai M MPI types previousI> delineated in cllnicai sexings. Using a hierarchical factor ana!ysis. these data were analyzed t o determine the higher order interreia:ionshps among M h l P l scaies [or this aieoboiic sarnpie. These results were discussrd. especiaii:; :r; terms of the Brnpiications fn: treatment and further research In alc3hoiis.n
Typncally. treaiment of alcokohsn: has been based upon ahesnssnmptron that alcahoiics formed a relatxvel) hornogeneoans population. 4lthor;gh akohohcs d o present the same major sxrnploms of aicoho! abuse, two lines of research Rave led to a questronrng of tius assumption. First, treatment modalit~eshave
w n g Catteii's Sixreen Personalit? Facto: Questionnaire [ IOPF) Ernploi~ng the Dnfferefitial PersonaE:r> In\entor> IDPI), Panmgton and Johnson t 19691 and Skinner. Jackson and I-ioffmar? 61974) aisa found numerous subt>pes Nerviano (IF1761 ir: a fulloh-up :o h ~ s angina?aruck. delineated alcoholic per-
failed r o prmlde an i r i t e r v e n t ~ o nthat
s o n a l l t ? s u b t y p e s usmg Jackson's Per-
has been effectwe for aicoholxs rn general (Bourne & Fox, t 9 T ) . Second, studrer have failed to dnscern a persona!lt, type specafic to alcshalism (Brown. 1950, Sratherimd, Schroeder, 8r lordella. 1940, Syme, 19531. In an effort to examme the honogneaty a s s u m p o n more cntlcaili?. rsmrchers have been attempting to dent& distinct personalit? subtypes within aicohohc samples T o controi for subjective ciimcal judgment and srnaII sampie biases, objective methods were apphed t o rhas research. The muItlvar~aternerhods of numencak taxonomy (Sneath B Sokol, f 933) were used to examme iarge srnpies of objective prsanaht!. test dam caUected on alcoholics. It was found that.
sonaht) Research Form (PRF) Esh-
nndeed, aisohdic personaire> subtypes did exist (at least to theextent that differences an personality measures refiect true personality d~fferencesB. W ~ Y K W E Rthese ~ taxonomic or tkpokogiai studres, LzwIis and Rubm iE!F71) and Nemiano and Cross (1973) found various almhokis persc~nalitysubgroups
baugh, Tosi. dnd Whern t S o t e i J a m obtained slmiar resuits uith the PRF In
a \ alldat~onsitid!. Finair. Goidstem and Linden ( I969a~and U h~telock.Cherall. and Patrick IIP'l! focnd sxbtlpes using the Minnesota M.lzl!tiphaslc Perssnakry In\en:orp ( M MPI I Taxonornx research ~trongl! supports the notion that aicoholrcs can be ciassified or subtyped d o n g certam persona1:t) efmens~ons. Thrs research effort extends the u o r k of Goidsrein and Linden (196%) and Fh'hrtebck, OveraX and Patrxk ( 19-1 1 In the przsent study. a group of M M P I plsofaks of hosp~taiizedmare alcono!ics were analyzed b:, means of tavonomc procedures AdditisnaI!c, a hlerzrch~cal factor anaalysls iRurnrne1, lS)?O) mas performed on the data t o pernirt an exarnlnailon of posslble hlglrer order factors that may urnderl) aico hoi~sm Typdoglcat repi~catron15 importan: In personaht? mauct for several reasons F m t , the vahdltyof an) personahty t)pe
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
cannot be accepted until the particular personality type has beerr observed (clanrcai!?. or statrseicaH/y) oxer trrne. hoca[Ions, samples, and methods. Second. different typolaglca1 procedures tend t o define different clusters of eiernents. Thus no one nurnerxai taxonomic procedure can be cansadered superior in the dew!opment of a typology r Sneath & Sokel. 1972). Thereiore. thex "dlosyncrarrc" effect must be considered CEve~tt.1992; Everitt, Gourlay. & Kenbell. f 97 I1 Moreover. d~fferesrrsimllar~rymdnces used to assess p r o f k s:miIar:t> have been found t o ye16 dairiere~rresuits on thesame data (Carroil & F d d , E 9-74: Heimstadter, 1953; Eshbaugh. Tosi. 24 Wherry. Nore I J EIierarchica! factor analysis ss a method describmg the total set of data. In contrast to statlstrca: typohgres whch r e duce data to subsets of rr~dwaduais,nt perof the \.ambles cornm t s a de~cr~piion nnon to the total sample Ln thas study, hierarchcai factor analysis was useful In making descriptive statements about posebie underlymg factors in aicoho!ism on a higher order b a s . This procedure was partlculzrb :mportanE since a search of the I~terarurefaded to find a single kierarehacal f m o r analytic study of rile M M P I sccties rrsrng a maie zlcohoinc sample.
.,
D = Zd2 between exrep pair of M nit PI profiles (using K-uncsrrected T scores) The $was the d~starace 13 EuciBd~a~ space between each of the I3 MMPI scales doreach parr of persons. T h s partkcukir index wa? chosen far :rs abiirt J to account fa:. all proflkeinformarmn sfstrape, eieva~aonand scatter t Cronbach 8: Gheser, 19.53: 3unnelb. 1962): and for Its ablPity to correct!! dlscern srmlar profiHes (Carroll & Fadd, 1979) 4il three matrices were submitted t o
Johnson's 1 196") Haerarchacal Clcrsterlng Scheme - mam mum met had (tf CSmax) Hubert's /I932 1943. I9741mer hod was empioyed to drscern maximariy dlstmct groGp5. The HCS-max procedure was chosec since rt ddfers slgnafxanriy from the other two methods used pre'timk s el ai C i 97 1j used oblique wousl~.. R3Jch chster-orie~iedfactor ana!ys:s. while Golidstem arid Imcben (I 96%) used Lcirr's IL orr & Radltakrlshnan. 1%') TYPOL method IT was important 10 use a differen: method because "cluster analysis rs beset wrttl problems" (Ever&, I K ! . p. i43i. Therefore. it a a s desirable to use the different method to control for possible bnases ~ntroducecibq the ciuster:ng a l g a r i t n ~ltseIE (see Everiit et at., 1971 1. In add:imn. HCS-max was adapted for other reascns. Fm:, ~t is based upon a Veibzild rank o r d e r i q af data (of the D index) San~p!a The MMPI was admrmstered to 206 and therefore eirminated possible objecmakes 01 er a pernod from 1994 to 1976. trons ta scaling. SecondLy. hrerarchcal They were admtted to the ahcobohc m- taxonomc prdcedrrres rn general and p t i e n t unit a? Riverside Meehod:sr Has- W CS-max in pa-t~cular,are weE research& and have praved to yieid vkabie typolopitak. Columbus, Okm. All were dngfiased alcofminc. Fhex ages ranged from gies [Corrnack. 19-71.F~sher& Van Piess. 19'1, Hubert & Schuirz. 1975; Sneath& 1': to 73 years, the mean age was49 years Sckoi, 1g73 3 F~nai!! %%CS-max, m camThe sample was comprised of males pparason to cther procedures. tends to rnarsly of rn~Me-cIasssocioeconomic & Lanben. yield smailer groups (Gsidsre~n status, w t h a mean m m m e of $15.546 196% B This fatter pamt seemed m p o r The mcorne f~gured ~ dnor ;nciinde per:n artsmpting to f,nd smaEi groups cant sans who ere retired. disabied. m cnthat other merhocis mght have averloaked empioyed. In each of the HCS-max analyses, ocl) A rrta(tw.~ groups of Cow or more profiles were kept Prrrc i The tctal simple of ?OP was for further analyses. as suggested 5y borr randomly drwded int 0 subsarxpies of69. et a i (I963j Wherry's ih'ote 2 ) Prof:z 69. and 70 for separate typological anai- prscedare was empioj ed to assure that y5es. Fer each subsample, a 69x69 (or all rnd;vrduaI p~ohlecin each group be7 W T ) lower triar@rrr aarrlx was cam- longed to that group, anb proillec thal pnted. Each ejernent of thls matrix was were 301 g r e ~ p e dshc.uSd in fact. not
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
D k4 F S H B 4 L G H h) J TOSI, and C K O P T beiong ro a g r o - ~ pt .lf profJes were found t o beiong o r not belong the rnod:ficat>on was rnacle j Mear: centroid procles for all groups in the three analyses Mere compcted and piorteci If hrghS! snmliar mean centroid profdes were found in ta o of three of the HCS-ma\ analyses fusmp visuaI Inspectlon and dnscriminant ana'yw). the! Mere cons~deredstable and merged to be kept far hr:her anaiys~sIf a mean: cent r o d profije IE one HCS-max ana!yls dld not occur in e ~ t h e rof the two otae: HCS-max analyses 11 u a s deleted This use of three s u ~ s a m p i e slcstead of the tradltiona! :w o. and a "tu o out of three" rephcat!on rule was unusual but. just.frable The panicuiar H C S - n a s program was u,ritten t o ecier a maximum ~f 94 cases Rather toan deleting s o n e pror -lies or rewr-ting the program, three qubsanpies r\ ere forrned L smg srniier scbsampies, however. mean: that f i n d i ~ g group' of v > 4 profiles ~ o u l dbe less roba able 'Therefore :he "two of three" ;epi~catlonruie was adapted to provlae azr.;lle oFpor:unIr) for fma. groups to emerge 4ltbough t m was a iirri~tat~on of this s:ud> reiatrse t o past researcn I r w a s believed lo
b e a klrtbie iiltcrna:r\e
Mean centroid profiies uere finailj camputeb for the total sample. Dlscnarnant analys~s(Tatsuoka. 1971 i. was used ro assure thzt the final g r o ~ p ewere slgnrfscanti:+drfferent Part 2 The entire sample of 205 MMFI grofdes was submitted to Q h e q ' s (Yoie 2; hierarchical factor anal! :cis T h ~ sprocedure mt:a!I> does a cornmor. factor anal) sls K R:rlr.rnei. r 9"6t, and .s rotated or:hogonaiiy :a a \.'armax s o h :lor. I Kaiser. 19581 Gronps cs?\ arlables s n these factors are :hen rr, turr, used fer anaIysls b) 7 hursr on'% n x t i p i e g-oxp method t Harman. 1967: rewltwg ~c nrgher order factors. These resu!r.ng factors. :f s:atrstacall! feas;he. are .n tu-n r e a n d y ~ e db~ the mulripke grcup rnethad. qiddtng a n m e n higher order fac:or(sI This procedure is c o m n u e d m t l l no further higher order factors car. be statrst~cali:,defined The squared mul:>pie correht:or, (SMC) H a < used as the !nrriai cornmnna!it! estimate. as recommended b:t IVrrgle: (Yule 1; and Rum-
4! l
me1 (1370, p 3171
P mJ
Resliirz
The final typoiogncai anal! sls > d d e d seien personality types that Mere s;gr.if~cantly6:fferer-t (ji < 001) Of the tom, sarcple of 3 0 8 . 4 8 . percent, or 101 profiies uere clustered This percecr of cia+ slfied profiles was smriar ; c ~iha: of the psev)ots typologicaI studies of z i c o t o : ~ personalit~es,and vras considered satisfactor) Since relatne:) "pure" proflie :ypes were desred the remaimrig p~ofile. u e r e not ciassrf~ed:o keep the original mean profries xitact The mean proflle for eacr group was compnted and proE,ea (see Frgcre 1 1 The fxst group. T ~ p A, e contamed 28 prnfiies i.\i ape = 45 4 t Type 4 & a s associated ~ x a h2-?-'=' MMPI profile code kt was focnd to be rer,larkabl> srnniiar to Pattern III reported $4 M'h:teiock et al (19-11 One minor diKerence u;ts tha: Whi:elock's Pattern IEI showed a someuhat hlgher eIe\at.or: on scaIe PI 4iso. the M3IPE prof:le code ( 2 4 - " ! ,v. as observed b! Gr'berstad: and Duiier t i 465, Based upon their actuana: tlpes. :he 2-4" configuration was assoctated wlth heal7 dcrrkrnp.
actanpout
vrth
sr~bsequent
g ~ l tand remorse: and $elf-blame and projected biarne Tq peal d~agnosecfor the 2-4' prof& ue-e "acxietq reac:mn with alcoholisrr In paswe-dggress:\e x r sonair:! "depressn e rac:!on a l i t aicohol~sm".and "pzss~ve-aggress.:e personahrq with alcohshsm" I CLkrstadt & Dnker, '965, pp 5(i-021 T! pe B of t h ~ rstud! ( n = I3, ti zpe = 42 3 !wrs\. u a. who u a s more defens:se am! soclalI) outgoing. and i \ ~ t hmtlch jess subjective dnstress aad or p s ~ c h o p a t f d o g y h'onetheless. bath t) ;pes Band C seemed to be assocmted nitn excessne alcoho: wx Type D. contaming 8 profiles axh a mean age of 45.7 years. was someu hat s ~ r n ~ ito a r the Type II of Whnteiock et al i i 9 7 I ) Thns type was also reported ~ r , G'brrstadt and Duker, the 8 - 2 - 4 7 Type ilZr65. p -51. These latter rruchors suggested a dlagraos~sd paranold personal; ! Thls prctle. t h e znd~caied.war asmcialed u?:h such s>mptoms as heal? dnnking. rnferronrq feei:ngs. host:!ny. restiessness and paranold trends. as we2 a and 1) were someM hat represented. Aii other scaies weit 5 resenbkd rhe very ilea; zero. T h ~ iacto: secondary h c r o r I ( i I , which reflected the neurotic t l ~ p eof h:sirionic defenses. but tiithcut the oi.m denial !lca scak A? P ~ L I i:S ,was ia'kicd "Aicohoiicn Deknse+Kepress;on. Qne may qnestisn !he l m v percent of variance accounted fo"o:y \ - . o m of the second and third order factors. This tvas essential!! due to tfiel: being "cieaned up factors.'" These fictors were the residaai o: remaining fad:m after a higher order kictor(s'i uas extracted. Thus. the isria x e s represent u het has remaned after "
sariancc b a a been extrasred.
Ar; ana!)sis of rhe comrcunziities ih:i was very revealing. t t represented the amoarit of variance a c c o n ~ t e dfor by a \ ariable across ali factors. Inspectior, of the h' co!umn of Table t suggests thar. scaies ffi. and K were the most prominen:. Ninety-nine percent of the :ariance of these scales was accoucted for across [he seven factors. Thrs wou2d indicate that repressior. and denial a.ex cjr;ite rernarkabk in this sample of alcohoiics. On !he otber hand. scaies . I f f and L had \.cry i o n ;7%. Thus., sesuaj role stereot~rpedattitudes and behaviors and na1i.e deception were not at ail prominent in t h s sample. T h e remarning n:nc scaies were all w d I represenred. EIeveil of the I ? MMPI scaies made large contributions t o the factors. an ;nd:ca:!on they were i ~ ~ ? . u c n t iic a l describirig alcoholic perso~ailties. The f a d i n g s of this stud) suggest :ha: persons j3iexntin.g prcbiens wi:h aico-
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
holism d c not form a homogeneous pog- met subgraups Srcond. :Re tqpes need to ulation. The typologxal analys~sdks- be used expermentally In treatment reclosed seven dlstaraet personalrrq sub- search to dnsrern rithey are of value In that types based on M M P l pr~fihecorrf~gura- capacrty. Also, the methodeiogy emtrons. These results lend ta support GiI- ployed suggem cautnorr in interpretmg berstadt and Duker i :96% who noted these types. 5esp:te the usefirhess of that fundamental personalltj differ- nameldmi taxonomy it IS present?! :n an ences are to be found among alcohoim. ear14 stage of deveicprnent. Thus. scneaWrerzrcknca; factor anaIysrs further tlfic ske+xsrr s h o ~ l dbe the rule reinforced the peasoraal~tydsversitj of ehrs akcohohc sampie At Ieast seven Reference Notes components appeared to underhe a h hohsm However, since repressson and
d e m i were vey prmmemt across near15 all factors, r: is qute understandabie why some might conclude that alcohohsrn 1s a upartmy disorder. The hrghest order fartor, 1081. showed hrgh joadrngs on all of 13 sales and accounted for 23% of the test varnance ~ndicatlngthat many alcohohcs have some conmor: symptoms 23lltraits Taking the resuk. as z whole it was apparent rhat extenswe psychopathoiogy 1s common to nicohslrsm irr generai 1 : was also evident that specfic eia~nbinatmns of symptoms and traits render an aIc s h o k sarnpie qurte heterogeneous At least three conckastons can be tentatively presented Frrst, repressisr, and denial appeared k g & characieristic af alcohohsm. Second, drverse types of psychoparhobgy seem associated wrth a h holism Thrrcl, borh statistleal and aclerari d research has k e n converging, in so far as identrfyng personralitj subtypes :n alcohohsm. The assumption rhat zlcohsshcs present unitary prsonitlxp $trucEuresappears questlonabk and ma) expiam, partialEy, the lack of success in tr=tmg a h holics. This research strong!!: mnfok-ces the expenmental ncptlon of dlfferernt~a; treatment for these vanous subgroups. as suggested earlier by Kiesier C l966r In exammng these results, hawever, It wsuM be advisable to vie\\ them as experimental and therefore. tentative Three MMPE t y p l o g d studies yieidsng smdar alcoholic prsonahty subtypes does not. necessarily imply they exnsn rn fact. nor that they are actual!). useful (k., in treatment). Exiensrve research must t x condusted to answer these questions M o r e they can be accepted. For exampke, the types must be described by cliazid data to detemnne if they truly represent dis-
.4rieti. S Amrr~canimndbocik ofp.~.vciria!,~j (Vol. !). New Y o;k: Basic Books. 1959.
Brcrw'~..M. A Aicoholicprofiies or; the kfinnesntf: Mnkiphasic. .iour?ra: of C'lrnical h.whoiog.i'. 3 353.6, 266-265. Carroli. 8. M.. h F~eid,J. A comparison of the c1assifca::on acccracv 3f ~ m f i i e cirniizritr measures. hfiririvoriare ~eh&cral ~t-srar&, :974. 9, i?.?i.385.
Cronbaik. L -7.. B Gieser. 6. C. Assessingsim;iarit!. between pro5ies. .fiyr)loiopirai drriie;zr?, i953.50.456-479 Dahlstrom. W G . . Welsh. 6.5.. $ Dahist:oxl, k.E. An M M P i f3andhorrk. Minneapaiis: Ciniversity oi Mnnesota Press. 1954. Eventt. B. S . Cluster analysis: A brief discussion of some ai the problems. Br;!:sh B'ozrrnoi c f P s ~ chiatry, 1972. ??Q, i43- 145. E,verith, 5. S.. Gouriay, A. J., & KendeK, R. E. 4r: attempt at d i d a t i a n of traCitionai psychiztric synd:ornes bp ciuster analysis. Brit:slr .!ournd of Psyrhiarrj. 1971, 119. 399Af2. Fisher, t..L \'anNess, J. W. Admrssibie clustering p r o d o r e s . Biclmetrfcrcs, 197I, 58.91-104. Gilberstadr. tl.. B Dcker. J. A hondbook.for c h i ro! and oc:u?ro: MWP:' irrrerpsetcrion Phiiadelpbia: W B. Saunders, 1965.
D %f ESHBAe'GH. D. J. TOSI. and C. HOY7 Nerviano. \:. J. fnmrnnn penonalit> patterns a m o n g a i c o h o k s : A mulavariatestudp. Jourrrci c.f Consuifiyeand Ciinlcai Px:rholog?.. 1976.44. !Od-11D
U'.F 4 m u h i v a n a x de1inea:ion of rno aicohalic profile types an the P F Journoi qf C l h r a i P.~xhoiogt.19'3. 3.
Zeruznc. V. J.,& Gross. 2.1-373.
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
%-..
liaher;. L . Some tsrensicns of Johnson's hierarchlc.'I cluslering 1:igcri~hnb. . ? T I : ~ I ) ~ E : T ; X C . 1972. 3'. '(,1.274.,
Rumrnel. R J A p p / r e ~ f a c r o r a n a f ~ ~Esanstoc: sfs. \or:hwesterr: Unive:s~ty Press. 19'0. Sklnnei. tl. 4.. Jackson. D.5..& Hoffman. H . .41cch:>l:c personzlii! tj.pes: 1dent:ftia':ior: and ccrreieies. Jourm? q l 4bnorrno: .%rchoiog> 1974.13. 658-666. Sneiiih. P FI A , .& Snkcri. R R .Vriniericai Tarono : y T i l ~pria:.:pie urrdprac:ices qfnunrericai ciassiCrai;:v. Sdr. Franc!sco: F r e e n z n Press. 19-5 Su!herland. E . H Schroedei. H G . . & Tordelir-.. C, 1.. Personzii:~ t r a m and :he aicohoiic: .A crit!$ue 0 C existing studles. Quarter$ Jeuraai q / S:;r(ire+o? .4icoh process researen 4niericao ~~~~ 5, ~ .i ,75- 155. .ic:;iirrzi:ii PJI: , , h i j l i l ~ L96h. La.-'~au:,, TiV' l.f CfP4 C!:??lccl/CASPJSIRF?!! a?l(i nuiswcrud inier;lrc:n:ior!. Lo? Ar.geies. UJr'rsrex Psi.chaiogical Se-;ices. 197.4. I.au:lis. (:. F.. B Rubln. S. F.. : h PF S:uay of persc;naL!y patterns ir: aicohoiics. Q : ~ C T : E I ( : . . ~ ! P : ~ T rid c:f.Sr:di~> i n 4
Journal of Personality Assessment Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjpa20
Some Personality Patterns and Dimensions of Male Alcoholics: A Multivariate Description Dennis M. Eshbaugh , Donald J. Tosi & Charles Hoyt Published online: 10 Jun 2010.
To cite this article: Dennis M. Eshbaugh , Donald J. Tosi & Charles Hoyt (1978) Some Personality Patterns and Dimensions of Male Alcoholics: A Multivariate Description, Journal of Personality Assessment, 42:4, 409-417, DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4204_12 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4204_12
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply,
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
Su?nrnta.r?.:'The assump!ion rnar alcohoiicsfom: a bxnogeneous populatior. has bsen:ounC to be quertiornable. Recent research has been done to empmcallb define ~ o s s i b l personaii!\ e subtypes of aicohoIics. T h s study extended the !ypokogical w o r ~ done p:ei-iody b s Goids i e i ~and Llnder: ! i 96% t and Whiteiack. Overali, end Patrick (197'1 !, They each found i c n r alcoholic subtypes. three of which replicated across srudies. For this reseerch, 3%SIP1 profiles of 208 male akoholics were s u b m i t t d to a hierarchicalciusreringprocedure. S o e n subtypes werc found. These results were compared :o the r e s d t s oitheprio: r\4ostudies. macdrticn to actwriai M MPI types previousI> delineated in cllnicai sexings. Using a hierarchical factor ana!ysis. these data were analyzed t o determine the higher order interreia:ionshps among M h l P l scaies [or this aieoboiic sarnpie. These results were discussrd. especiaii:; :r; terms of the Brnpiications fn: treatment and further research In alc3hoiis.n
Typncally. treaiment of alcokohsn: has been based upon ahesnssnmptron that alcahoiics formed a relatxvel) hornogeneoans population. 4lthor;gh akohohcs d o present the same major sxrnploms of aicoho! abuse, two lines of research Rave led to a questronrng of tius assumption. First, treatment modalit~eshave
w n g Catteii's Sixreen Personalit? Facto: Questionnaire [ IOPF) Ernploi~ng the Dnfferefitial PersonaE:r> In\entor> IDPI), Panmgton and Johnson t 19691 and Skinner. Jackson and I-ioffmar? 61974) aisa found numerous subt>pes Nerviano (IF1761 ir: a fulloh-up :o h ~ s angina?aruck. delineated alcoholic per-
failed r o prmlde an i r i t e r v e n t ~ o nthat
s o n a l l t ? s u b t y p e s usmg Jackson's Per-
has been effectwe for aicoholxs rn general (Bourne & Fox, t 9 T ) . Second, studrer have failed to dnscern a persona!lt, type specafic to alcshalism (Brown. 1950, Sratherimd, Schroeder, 8r lordella. 1940, Syme, 19531. In an effort to examme the honogneaty a s s u m p o n more cntlcaili?. rsmrchers have been attempting to dent& distinct personalit? subtypes within aicohohc samples T o controi for subjective ciimcal judgment and srnaII sampie biases, objective methods were apphed t o rhas research. The muItlvar~aternerhods of numencak taxonomy (Sneath B Sokol, f 933) were used to examme iarge srnpies of objective prsanaht!. test dam caUected on alcoholics. It was found that.
sonaht) Research Form (PRF) Esh-
nndeed, aisohdic personaire> subtypes did exist (at least to theextent that differences an personality measures refiect true personality d~fferencesB. W ~ Y K W E Rthese ~ taxonomic or tkpokogiai studres, LzwIis and Rubm iE!F71) and Nemiano and Cross (1973) found various almhokis persc~nalitysubgroups
baugh, Tosi. dnd Whern t S o t e i J a m obtained slmiar resuits uith the PRF In
a \ alldat~onsitid!. Finair. Goidstem and Linden ( I969a~and U h~telock.Cherall. and Patrick IIP'l! focnd sxbtlpes using the Minnesota M.lzl!tiphaslc Perssnakry In\en:orp ( M MPI I Taxonornx research ~trongl! supports the notion that aicoholrcs can be ciassified or subtyped d o n g certam persona1:t) efmens~ons. Thrs research effort extends the u o r k of Goidsrein and Linden (196%) and Fh'hrtebck, OveraX and Patrxk ( 19-1 1 In the przsent study. a group of M M P I plsofaks of hosp~taiizedmare alcono!ics were analyzed b:, means of tavonomc procedures AdditisnaI!c, a hlerzrch~cal factor anaalysls iRurnrne1, lS)?O) mas performed on the data t o pernirt an exarnlnailon of posslble hlglrer order factors that may urnderl) aico hoi~sm Typdoglcat repi~catron15 importan: In personaht? mauct for several reasons F m t , the vahdltyof an) personahty t)pe
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
cannot be accepted until the particular personality type has beerr observed (clanrcai!?. or statrseicaH/y) oxer trrne. hoca[Ions, samples, and methods. Second. different typolaglca1 procedures tend t o define different clusters of eiernents. Thus no one nurnerxai taxonomic procedure can be cansadered superior in the dew!opment of a typology r Sneath & Sokel. 1972). Thereiore. thex "dlosyncrarrc" effect must be considered CEve~tt.1992; Everitt, Gourlay. & Kenbell. f 97 I1 Moreover. d~fferesrrsimllar~rymdnces used to assess p r o f k s:miIar:t> have been found t o ye16 dairiere~rresuits on thesame data (Carroil & F d d , E 9-74: Heimstadter, 1953; Eshbaugh. Tosi. 24 Wherry. Nore I J EIierarchica! factor analysis ss a method describmg the total set of data. In contrast to statlstrca: typohgres whch r e duce data to subsets of rr~dwaduais,nt perof the \.ambles cornm t s a de~cr~piion nnon to the total sample Ln thas study, hierarchcai factor analysis was useful In making descriptive statements about posebie underlymg factors in aicoho!ism on a higher order b a s . This procedure was partlculzrb :mportanE since a search of the I~terarurefaded to find a single kierarehacal f m o r analytic study of rile M M P I sccties rrsrng a maie zlcohoinc sample.
.,
D = Zd2 between exrep pair of M nit PI profiles (using K-uncsrrected T scores) The $was the d~starace 13 EuciBd~a~ space between each of the I3 MMPI scales doreach parr of persons. T h s partkcukir index wa? chosen far :rs abiirt J to account fa:. all proflkeinformarmn sfstrape, eieva~aonand scatter t Cronbach 8: Gheser, 19.53: 3unnelb. 1962): and for Its ablPity to correct!! dlscern srmlar profiHes (Carroll & Fadd, 1979) 4il three matrices were submitted t o
Johnson's 1 196") Haerarchacal Clcrsterlng Scheme - mam mum met had (tf CSmax) Hubert's /I932 1943. I9741mer hod was empioyed to drscern maximariy dlstmct groGp5. The HCS-max procedure was chosec since rt ddfers slgnafxanriy from the other two methods used pre'timk s el ai C i 97 1j used oblique wousl~.. R3Jch chster-orie~iedfactor ana!ys:s. while Golidstem arid Imcben (I 96%) used Lcirr's IL orr & Radltakrlshnan. 1%') TYPOL method IT was important 10 use a differen: method because "cluster analysis rs beset wrttl problems" (Ever&, I K ! . p. i43i. Therefore. it a a s desirable to use the different method to control for possible bnases ~ntroducecibq the ciuster:ng a l g a r i t n ~ltseIE (see Everiit et at., 1971 1. In add:imn. HCS-max was adapted for other reascns. Fm:, ~t is based upon a Veibzild rank o r d e r i q af data (of the D index) San~p!a The MMPI was admrmstered to 206 and therefore eirminated possible objecmakes 01 er a pernod from 1994 to 1976. trons ta scaling. SecondLy. hrerarchcal They were admtted to the ahcobohc m- taxonomc prdcedrrres rn general and p t i e n t unit a? Riverside Meehod:sr Has- W CS-max in pa-t~cular,are weE research& and have praved to yieid vkabie typolopitak. Columbus, Okm. All were dngfiased alcofminc. Fhex ages ranged from gies [Corrnack. 19-71.F~sher& Van Piess. 19'1, Hubert & Schuirz. 1975; Sneath& 1': to 73 years, the mean age was49 years Sckoi, 1g73 3 F~nai!! %%CS-max, m camThe sample was comprised of males pparason to cther procedures. tends to rnarsly of rn~Me-cIasssocioeconomic & Lanben. yield smailer groups (Gsidsre~n status, w t h a mean m m m e of $15.546 196% B This fatter pamt seemed m p o r The mcorne f~gured ~ dnor ;nciinde per:n artsmpting to f,nd smaEi groups cant sans who ere retired. disabied. m cnthat other merhocis mght have averloaked empioyed. In each of the HCS-max analyses, ocl) A rrta(tw.~ groups of Cow or more profiles were kept Prrrc i The tctal simple of ?OP was for further analyses. as suggested 5y borr randomly drwded int 0 subsarxpies of69. et a i (I963j Wherry's ih'ote 2 ) Prof:z 69. and 70 for separate typological anai- prscedare was empioj ed to assure that y5es. Fer each subsample, a 69x69 (or all rnd;vrduaI p~ohlecin each group be7 W T ) lower triar@rrr aarrlx was cam- longed to that group, anb proillec thal pnted. Each ejernent of thls matrix was were 301 g r e ~ p e dshc.uSd in fact. not
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
D k4 F S H B 4 L G H h) J TOSI, and C K O P T beiong ro a g r o - ~ pt .lf profJes were found t o beiong o r not belong the rnod:ficat>on was rnacle j Mear: centroid procles for all groups in the three analyses Mere compcted and piorteci If hrghS! snmliar mean centroid profdes were found in ta o of three of the HCS-ma\ analyses fusmp visuaI Inspectlon and dnscriminant ana'yw). the! Mere cons~deredstable and merged to be kept far hr:her anaiys~sIf a mean: cent r o d profije IE one HCS-max ana!yls dld not occur in e ~ t h e rof the two otae: HCS-max analyses 11 u a s deleted This use of three s u ~ s a m p i e slcstead of the tradltiona! :w o. and a "tu o out of three" rephcat!on rule was unusual but. just.frable The panicuiar H C S - n a s program was u,ritten t o ecier a maximum ~f 94 cases Rather toan deleting s o n e pror -lies or rewr-ting the program, three qubsanpies r\ ere forrned L smg srniier scbsampies, however. mean: that f i n d i ~ g group' of v > 4 profiles ~ o u l dbe less roba able 'Therefore :he "two of three" ;epi~catlonruie was adapted to provlae azr.;lle oFpor:unIr) for fma. groups to emerge 4ltbough t m was a iirri~tat~on of this s:ud> reiatrse t o past researcn I r w a s believed lo
b e a klrtbie iiltcrna:r\e
Mean centroid profiies uere finailj camputeb for the total sample. Dlscnarnant analys~s(Tatsuoka. 1971 i. was used ro assure thzt the final g r o ~ p ewere slgnrfscanti:+drfferent Part 2 The entire sample of 205 MMFI grofdes was submitted to Q h e q ' s (Yoie 2; hierarchical factor anal! :cis T h ~ sprocedure mt:a!I> does a cornmor. factor anal) sls K R:rlr.rnei. r 9"6t, and .s rotated or:hogonaiiy :a a \.'armax s o h :lor. I Kaiser. 19581 Gronps cs?\ arlables s n these factors are :hen rr, turr, used fer anaIysls b) 7 hursr on'% n x t i p i e g-oxp method t Harman. 1967: rewltwg ~c nrgher order factors. These resu!r.ng factors. :f s:atrstacall! feas;he. are .n tu-n r e a n d y ~ e db~ the mulripke grcup rnethad. qiddtng a n m e n higher order fac:or(sI This procedure is c o m n u e d m t l l no further higher order factors car. be statrst~cali:,defined The squared mul:>pie correht:or, (SMC) H a < used as the !nrriai cornmnna!it! estimate. as recommended b:t IVrrgle: (Yule 1; and Rum-
4! l
me1 (1370, p 3171
P mJ
Resliirz
The final typoiogncai anal! sls > d d e d seien personality types that Mere s;gr.if~cantly6:fferer-t (ji < 001) Of the tom, sarcple of 3 0 8 . 4 8 . percent, or 101 profiies uere clustered This percecr of cia+ slfied profiles was smriar ; c ~iha: of the psev)ots typologicaI studies of z i c o t o : ~ personalit~es,and vras considered satisfactor) Since relatne:) "pure" proflie :ypes were desred the remaimrig p~ofile. u e r e not ciassrf~ed:o keep the original mean profries xitact The mean proflle for eacr group was compnted and proE,ea (see Frgcre 1 1 The fxst group. T ~ p A, e contamed 28 prnfiies i.\i ape = 45 4 t Type 4 & a s associated ~ x a h2-?-'=' MMPI profile code kt was focnd to be rer,larkabl> srnniiar to Pattern III reported $4 M'h:teiock et al (19-11 One minor diKerence u;ts tha: Whi:elock's Pattern IEI showed a someuhat hlgher eIe\at.or: on scaIe PI 4iso. the M3IPE prof:le code ( 2 4 - " ! ,v. as observed b! Gr'berstad: and Duiier t i 465, Based upon their actuana: tlpes. :he 2-4" configuration was assoctated wlth heal7 dcrrkrnp.
actanpout
vrth
sr~bsequent
g ~ l tand remorse: and $elf-blame and projected biarne Tq peal d~agnosecfor the 2-4' prof& ue-e "acxietq reac:mn with alcoholisrr In paswe-dggress:\e x r sonair:! "depressn e rac:!on a l i t aicohol~sm".and "pzss~ve-aggress.:e personahrq with alcohshsm" I CLkrstadt & Dnker, '965, pp 5(i-021 T! pe B of t h ~ rstud! ( n = I3, ti zpe = 42 3 !wrs\. u a. who u a s more defens:se am! soclalI) outgoing. and i \ ~ t hmtlch jess subjective dnstress aad or p s ~ c h o p a t f d o g y h'onetheless. bath t) ;pes Band C seemed to be assocmted nitn excessne alcoho: wx Type D. contaming 8 profiles axh a mean age of 45.7 years. was someu hat s ~ r n ~ ito a r the Type II of Whnteiock et al i i 9 7 I ) Thns type was also reported ~ r , G'brrstadt and Duker, the 8 - 2 - 4 7 Type ilZr65. p -51. These latter rruchors suggested a dlagraos~sd paranold personal; ! Thls prctle. t h e znd~caied.war asmcialed u?:h such s>mptoms as heal? dnnking. rnferronrq feei:ngs. host:!ny. restiessness and paranold trends. as we2 a and 1) were someM hat represented. Aii other scaies weit 5 resenbkd rhe very ilea; zero. T h ~ iacto: secondary h c r o r I ( i I , which reflected the neurotic t l ~ p eof h:sirionic defenses. but tiithcut the oi.m denial !lca scak A? P ~ L I i:S ,was ia'kicd "Aicohoiicn Deknse+Kepress;on. Qne may qnestisn !he l m v percent of variance accounted fo"o:y \ - . o m of the second and third order factors. This tvas essential!! due to tfiel: being "cieaned up factors.'" These fictors were the residaai o: remaining fad:m after a higher order kictor(s'i uas extracted. Thus. the isria x e s represent u het has remaned after "
sariancc b a a been extrasred.
Ar; ana!)sis of rhe comrcunziities ih:i was very revealing. t t represented the amoarit of variance a c c o n ~ t e dfor by a \ ariable across ali factors. Inspectior, of the h' co!umn of Table t suggests thar. scaies ffi. and K were the most prominen:. Ninety-nine percent of the :ariance of these scales was accoucted for across [he seven factors. Thrs wou2d indicate that repressior. and denial a.ex cjr;ite rernarkabk in this sample of alcohoiics. On !he otber hand. scaies . I f f and L had \.cry i o n ;7%. Thus., sesuaj role stereot~rpedattitudes and behaviors and na1i.e deception were not at ail prominent in t h s sample. T h e remarning n:nc scaies were all w d I represenred. EIeveil of the I ? MMPI scaies made large contributions t o the factors. an ;nd:ca:!on they were i ~ ~ ? . u c n t iic a l describirig alcoholic perso~ailties. The f a d i n g s of this stud) suggest :ha: persons j3iexntin.g prcbiens wi:h aico-
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
holism d c not form a homogeneous pog- met subgraups Srcond. :Re tqpes need to ulation. The typologxal analys~sdks- be used expermentally In treatment reclosed seven dlstaraet personalrrq sub- search to dnsrern rithey are of value In that types based on M M P l pr~fihecorrf~gura- capacrty. Also, the methodeiogy emtrons. These results lend ta support GiI- ployed suggem cautnorr in interpretmg berstadt and Duker i :96% who noted these types. 5esp:te the usefirhess of that fundamental personalltj differ- nameldmi taxonomy it IS present?! :n an ences are to be found among alcohoim. ear14 stage of deveicprnent. Thus. scneaWrerzrcknca; factor anaIysrs further tlfic ske+xsrr s h o ~ l dbe the rule reinforced the peasoraal~tydsversitj of ehrs akcohohc sampie At Ieast seven Reference Notes components appeared to underhe a h hohsm However, since repressson and
d e m i were vey prmmemt across near15 all factors, r: is qute understandabie why some might conclude that alcohohsrn 1s a upartmy disorder. The hrghest order fartor, 1081. showed hrgh joadrngs on all of 13 sales and accounted for 23% of the test varnance ~ndicatlngthat many alcohohcs have some conmor: symptoms 23lltraits Taking the resuk. as z whole it was apparent rhat extenswe psychopathoiogy 1s common to nicohslrsm irr generai 1 : was also evident that specfic eia~nbinatmns of symptoms and traits render an aIc s h o k sarnpie qurte heterogeneous At least three conckastons can be tentatively presented Frrst, repressisr, and denial appeared k g & characieristic af alcohohsm. Second, drverse types of psychoparhobgy seem associated wrth a h holism Thrrcl, borh statistleal and aclerari d research has k e n converging, in so far as identrfyng personralitj subtypes :n alcohohsm. The assumption rhat zlcohsshcs present unitary prsonitlxp $trucEuresappears questlonabk and ma) expiam, partialEy, the lack of success in tr=tmg a h holics. This research strong!!: mnfok-ces the expenmental ncptlon of dlfferernt~a; treatment for these vanous subgroups. as suggested earlier by Kiesier C l966r In exammng these results, hawever, It wsuM be advisable to vie\\ them as experimental and therefore. tentative Three MMPE t y p l o g d studies yieidsng smdar alcoholic prsonahty subtypes does not. necessarily imply they exnsn rn fact. nor that they are actual!). useful (k., in treatment). Exiensrve research must t x condusted to answer these questions M o r e they can be accepted. For exampke, the types must be described by cliazid data to detemnne if they truly represent dis-
.4rieti. S Amrr~canimndbocik ofp.~.vciria!,~j (Vol. !). New Y o;k: Basic Books. 1959.
Brcrw'~..M. A Aicoholicprofiies or; the kfinnesntf: Mnkiphasic. .iour?ra: of C'lrnical h.whoiog.i'. 3 353.6, 266-265. Carroli. 8. M.. h F~eid,J. A comparison of the c1assifca::on acccracv 3f ~ m f i i e cirniizritr measures. hfiririvoriare ~eh&cral ~t-srar&, :974. 9, i?.?i.385.
Cronbaik. L -7.. B Gieser. 6. C. Assessingsim;iarit!. between pro5ies. .fiyr)loiopirai drriie;zr?, i953.50.456-479 Dahlstrom. W G . . Welsh. 6.5.. $ Dahist:oxl, k.E. An M M P i f3andhorrk. Minneapaiis: Ciniversity oi Mnnesota Press. 1954. Eventt. B. S . Cluster analysis: A brief discussion of some ai the problems. Br;!:sh B'ozrrnoi c f P s ~ chiatry, 1972. ??Q, i43- 145. E,verith, 5. S.. Gouriay, A. J., & KendeK, R. E. 4r: attempt at d i d a t i a n of traCitionai psychiztric synd:ornes bp ciuster analysis. Brit:slr .!ournd of Psyrhiarrj. 1971, 119. 399Af2. Fisher, t..L \'anNess, J. W. Admrssibie clustering p r o d o r e s . Biclmetrfcrcs, 197I, 58.91-104. Gilberstadr. tl.. B Dcker. J. A hondbook.for c h i ro! and oc:u?ro: MWP:' irrrerpsetcrion Phiiadelpbia: W B. Saunders, 1965.
D %f ESHBAe'GH. D. J. TOSI. and C. HOY7 Nerviano. \:. J. fnmrnnn penonalit> patterns a m o n g a i c o h o k s : A mulavariatestudp. Jourrrci c.f Consuifiyeand Ciinlcai Px:rholog?.. 1976.44. !Od-11D
U'.F 4 m u h i v a n a x de1inea:ion of rno aicohalic profile types an the P F Journoi qf C l h r a i P.~xhoiogt.19'3. 3.
Zeruznc. V. J.,& Gross. 2.1-373.
Downloaded by [University of Massachusetts] at 16:53 09 January 2015
%-..
liaher;. L . Some tsrensicns of Johnson's hierarchlc.'I cluslering 1:igcri~hnb. . ? T I : ~ I ) ~ E : T ; X C . 1972. 3'. '(,1.274.,
Rumrnel. R J A p p / r e ~ f a c r o r a n a f ~ ~Esanstoc: sfs. \or:hwesterr: Unive:s~ty Press. 19'0. Sklnnei. tl. 4.. Jackson. D.5..& Hoffman. H . .41cch:>l:c personzlii! tj.pes: 1dent:ftia':ior: and ccrreieies. Jourm? q l 4bnorrno: .%rchoiog> 1974.13. 658-666. Sneiiih. P FI A , .& Snkcri. R R .Vriniericai Tarono : y T i l ~pria:.:pie urrdprac:ices qfnunrericai ciassiCrai;:v. Sdr. Franc!sco: F r e e n z n Press. 19-5 Su!herland. E . H Schroedei. H G . . & Tordelir-.. C, 1.. Personzii:~ t r a m and :he aicohoiic: .A crit!$ue 0 C existing studles. Quarter$ Jeuraai q / S:;r(ire+o? .4icoh process researen 4niericao ~~~~ 5, ~ .i ,75- 155. .ic:;iirrzi:ii PJI: , , h i j l i l ~ L96h. La.-'~au:,, TiV' l.f CfP4 C!:??lccl/CASPJSIRF?!! a?l(i nuiswcrud inier;lrc:n:ior!. Lo? Ar.geies. UJr'rsrex Psi.chaiogical Se-;ices. 197.4. I.au:lis. (:. F.. B Rubln. S. F.. : h PF S:uay of persc;naL!y patterns ir: aicohoiics. Q : ~ C T : E I ( : . . ~ ! P : ~ T rid c:f.Sr:di~> i n 4
