[Downloadedfreefromhttp://www.industrialpsychiatry.orgonFriday,September21,2012,IP:164.100.31.

82]||ClickheretodownloadfreeAndroidapplicationfort
journal

original A rticle

The short-form revised Eysenck personality

questionnaire: A Hindi edition (EPQRS-H)
Trayambak Tiwari,
Anju L. Singh,
Indramani L. Singh
Cognitive Science Laboratory,
Department of Psychology,
Banaras Hindu University,
Varanasi - 221005, (U.P.), India
Address for correspondence:
Dr. Trayambak Tiwari,
Department of Psychology,
Cognitive Science Laboratory,
Banaras Hindu University,
Varanasi - 221 005, (UP), India.
E-mail: trayambakbhu@gmail.
com
A B S T R A C T
Background: There is a growing consensus about the validity of human personality
traits as important dispositions toward feelings and behaviors (Matthews, Deary, &
Whiteman, 2003). Materials and Methods: Here we examine the reliability of the Hindi
translation of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised Short Form (EPQR-S;
Eysenck, Eysenck, & Barrett, 1985), which consists of 48 items that assess neuroticism,
extraversion, psychoticism, and lying. The questionnaire was first translated into Hindi
and then back translated. Subsequently, it was administered to 202 students (78 men
and 124 women) from Banaras Hindu University. The internal consistency of the scale
was evaluated. Results: The findings provide satisfactory psychometric properties of
the extraversion, neuroticism and lie scales. The psychoticism scale, however, was
found to be less satisfactory. Conclusion: It can be proposed that due to satisfactory
internal consistency scores, the EPQRS-H is a reliable scale for the measurement of
various personality traits.
Keywords: EPQR - Short, Extraversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism, Lie score
DOI: 10.4103/0972-6748.57854

I n its preliminary version, the Eysenck personality

theory involved neuroticism-stability and extraversion-
introversion dimensions; subsequently, the psychoticism
dimension was added to the theory (Lewis et al., 2002).
As the extraversion dimension represents sociality and
impulsivity, individuals in this dimension were defined
as enjoying social interactions, energetic, and preferring
social situations to loneliness. It was proposed that the
neuroticism dimension indicated emotional instability and
reactiveness, and that individuals who score high on this
dimension tend to be anxious, depressive, overly emotional,
shy, and have low self-esteem. The psychoticism dimension
highlights more bizarre personality characteristics, such
as being distant, cold, insensitive, absurd, and unable to
empathize with others (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975).
Since the development of Eysenck personality theory,
various measures were developed in order to assess the
various personality traits. One of the consequences of this
process has been a progressive increase in their length. The
early Maudsley Medical Questionnaire (MMQ) contains 40
items (Eysenck, 1952), the Maudsley Personality Inventory
(MPI) contains 48 items (Eysenck, 1959), the Eysenck
Personality Inventory (EPI) contains 57 items (Eysenck &
Eysenck, 1964a), the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire
(EPQ) contains 90 items (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975) and
the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR)
contains 100 items (Eysenck, Eysenck, & Barrett, 1985).
This increase in length can be accounted for by the
introduction of an additional dimension of personality
within Eysencks scheme (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1976)
and by the psychometric principle that greater length
enhances reliability (Lord & Novick, 1968). Neuroticism
and extraversion, especially, appear in most trait models
of personality (Matthews et al., 2003). An important part
of the validation of any trait-based model of personality
and its associated measurement instrument is to investigate
its applicability to other cultures. This tends to be done
in two ways: emic and etic. Emic research typically uses
the lexicon of the local culture to investigate the structure
and content of the personality-related terms (Saucier
& Goldberg, 2001). Etic research applies personality
measures devised in one culture to new cultures and asks
whether they show the same psychometric structure and
reliability and validity (McCrae, 2001). A large amount
of etic research has been completed on the Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire. The research has been done
mostly on the original 90-item EPQ. Generally, its
psychometric structure has been well-reproduced in at
least 34 countries (Barrett & Eysenck, 1984; Barrett,
Petrides, Eysenck, & Eysenck, 1998).
Although all these questionnaires were reliable and valid there
are, however, some practical disadvantages in using long
tests. In particular, they caused certain clinical application
problems due to their length. Therefore, the need for

Industrial Psychiatry Journal  27 Jan-Jun 2009 | Vol 18 | Issue 1

[Downloadedfreefromhttp://www.industrialpsychiatry.orgonFriday,September21,2012,IP:164.100.31.82]||ClickheretodownloadfreeAndroidapplicationfort
journal
Tiwari, et al.: Hindi Eysenck personality questionnaire
shorter personality scales resulted in shorter versions of the
mentioned instruments. One of these shorter personality
scales is the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised
- Short Form (EPQR-S; Eysenck et al., 1985). EPQR-S
includes 48 items and 4 subscales: Extraversion (12 items),
Neuroticism (12 items), Psychoticism (12 items), and Lie (12
items). The lie subscale is a control scale in which the whole
scale is tested for social desirability bias. Eysenck et al. (1985)
reported reliabilities for males and females respectively of
0.84 and 0.80 for neuroticism, 0.88 and 0.84 for extraversion,
0.62 and 0.61 for psychoticism, and 0.77 and 0.73 for the lie
scale. The EPQR-S has now been used quite widely (Aleixo
& Norris, 2000; Blagrove & Akehurst, 2001; Chan & Joseph,
2000; Chivers & Blagrove, 1999; Creed, Muller, & Machin,
2001; Francis, 1999; Francis & Wilcox, 1998; Glicksohn
& Bozna, 2000; Glicksohn & Golan, 2001; Halamandaris &
Power, 1999; Linton & Wiener, 2001; Martin & Kirkaldy,
1998; Robbins, Francis & Rutledge,1997).
In a cross-cultural study, Francis, Brown, and Philipchalk
(1992) compared the psychometric properties of the
EPQR-S in four English-speaking countries among a
total of 685 undergraduate students, including 59 men
and 153 women in England, 57 men and 92 women in
Canada, 51 men and 81 women in the USA and 53 men and
139women in Australia. According to this study the short
form extraversion scale achieved alpha coefficients of 0.78,
0.83, 0.85 and 0.87 in the four samples. The short form
neuroticism scale achieved alpha coefficients of 0.79, 0.80,
0.81 and 0.83 in the four samples. The lie scale performed
less well than the extraversion and neuroticism scales, but
proved to be adequate. The short form lie scale achieved
alpha coefficients of 0.65, 0.66, 0.70 and 0.71. However,
for the psychoticism scale, alpha coefficients were very
low (0.33-0.52).
While the EPI, EPQ and EPQR were originally developed
in England and then extended to other English-speaking
areas, the cross-cultural extension of this field of personality
research quickly led to the translation and testing of the
instruments in non-English speaking environments
(Barrett & Eysenck, 1984; Eysenck & Eysenck, 1983).
For example, Francis and associates (Francis, Lewis, &
Ziebertz, 2006) have developed the German edition of the
EPQR-S. Similarly, Ivkovic et al. (2007) have developed
and checked psychometric properties the Croatian edition
of the EPQR-S.
Against this background, the aim of the present study
was to examine the psychometric properties of the Hindi
translation of the EPQR-S for Indian Hindi speaking
college going adult population.
Jan-Jun 2009 | Vol 18 | Issue 1 28
Materials and Methods
Sample
Two hundred two (78 men and 124 women) Hindi
speaking students studying in the Banaras Hindu University
completed the Hindi translation of the EPQR-S. The age
of the respondents ranged from 18 to 30 years with mean
age of 22.27 years and SD of 2.37.
Tool
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Short
Form (EPQR-S)
EPQR-Short (Eysenck, Eysenck & Barrett, 1985) is a self-
reported questionnaire. It has 48 items, 12 for each of the
traits of neuroticism, extraversion, and psychoticism, and
12 for the lie scale. Each question has a binary response,
yes or no. Each dichotomous item was scored 1 or 0,
and each scale had a maximum possible score of 12 and
minimum of zero.
Procedure
For the present study the questionnaire was translated
into Hindi by a bilingual Indian national and then back-
translated into English by a second bilingual Indian national
in order to test for inaccuracies and ambiguities. Where
there were inconsistencies in the retranslated English
version, both translators were consulted as to the best
possible solution. This content-based checking provided
clear support for scoring the neuroticism, extraversion and
lie scale items as suggested by Eysenck et al. (1985). After
the content-based analysis the Hindi version of EPQR-S
(here after referred as EPQRS-H) it was administered
on all the participants (N=202) in order to examine its
psychometric properties.
Statistical analysis
The internal consistency of the four subscales of
EPQRS-H was calculated using Chronbachs alpha method
(Cronbach, 1951).
RESULTS
Table 1 presents the Corrected Item-Total Correlations
for each of the four subscales of the EPQRS-H (i.e.,
extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism and the lie
scale). The reliability of the extraversion, neuroticism,
psychoticism and lie score subscales were found to be 0.766;
0.772; 0.238; 0.624, respectively. The results indicated
that none of the items were psychometrically poor. The
corrected item-total correlation ranged from 0.201 to 0.538
for extraversion, from 0.196 to 0.556 for neuroticism, from
0.109 to 0.449 for lie scale and from 20.020 to 0.284 for
psychoticism subscale of EPQRS-H. Moreover, none
of the alpha-if item deleted values exceeded the overall
Industrial Psychiatry Journal
[Downloadedfreefromhttp://www.industrialpsychiatry.orgonFriday,September21,2012,IP:164.100.31.82]||ClickheretodownloadfreeAndroidapplicationfort
journal

Tiwari, et al.: Hindi Eysenck personality questionnaire

Tabel 1: Results of item analysis for the four subscales of the EPQRS-H
Item Items of the four subscales of the EPQRS-H Corrected item-total Cronbachs a if item
numbera correlations deleted
Extraversion (Cronbachs coefficient = 0.766)
3 Are you a talkative person?
.394 .751
D;k vki ckrwuh gSa\
7 Are you rather lively?
.396 .750
D;k vki okd ftUnkfny gSa\
11 Do you enjoy meeting new people?
.201 .766
D;k u;s yxa ls feyus esa vkid qh grh gS\
15 Can you usually let yourself go and enjoy yourself at a lively party?
.472 .741
D;k lkeU;r% fdlh thyh ikVhZ esa vki qydj vkuan mBk ldrs gSa\
19 Do you usually take the initiative in making new friends?
.319 .760
D;k vki izk;% u;s fe= cukus esa igy djrs gSa\
23 Can you easily get some life into a rather dull party?
.528 .734
D;k vki viskr uhjl ikVhZ esa vklkuh ls dqN tku Mky ldrs gSa\
27 Do you tend to keep in the background on social occasions?
.290 .761
D;k vki lkekftd volja ij Lo;a d ijns ds ihNs gh juk pkgrs gSa\
32 Do you like mixing with people?
.330 .758
D;k vki nwljs yxa ls qyukfeyuk ilan djrs gSa\
36 Do you like plenty of bustle and excitement around you?
.385 .752
D;k vki vius vklikl wc gypy vj jud pkgrs gSa\
41 Are you mostly quiet when you are with other people?
.457 .743
nwljs yxa ds lk jgus ij] d;k vki T;knkrj pqi jgrs gSa\
44 Do other people think of you as being very lively?
.485 .740
D;k vkid nwljs yx cgqr ftUnkfny le>rs gSa\
48 Can you get a party going?
.538 .733
D;k vki fdlh ikVhZ d lfdz; cuk;s j ldrs gSa\
Neuroticism (Cronbachs coefficient =0.772)
1 Does your mood often go up and down?
.437 .753
D;k vkidh eu%fLFkfr izk;% curh fcxM+rh gS\
5 Do you ever feel just miserable for no reason?
.366 .761
dh fdlh otg ds fcuk gh D;k vki nq%h eglwl djrs gSa\
9 Are you an irritable person?
.391 .759
D;k vki fpM+fpM+s O;fDr gSa\
13 Are your feelings easily hurt?
.196 .780
D;k vkidh koukva d vklkuh ls Bsl yx tkrh gS\
17 Do you often feel fed-up?
.510 .747
D;k vki vDlj mcu eglwl djrs gSa\
21 Would you call yourself a nervous person?
.308 .768
D;k vki Lo;a d ,d vhj O;fDr ds :i esa Lohdkj djsaxs\
25 Are you a worrier?
.556 .739
D;k vki ijsku jgk djrs gSa\
30 Would you call yourself tense or highly strung?
.516 .745
D;k vki Lo;a d rukoxzLr ;k vfr mRrstukhy O;fDr dgsaxs\
34 Do you worry too long after an embarrassing experience?
.364 .762
fdlh yTtktud vuqo ds ckn D;k vki cgqr yEcs le; rd fpfUrr jgrs gSa\
38 Do you suffer from nerves?
.474 .749
D;k vki O;kdqy g tkrs gSa\
42 Do you often feel lonely?
.529 .743
D;k vki izk;% vdsykiu eglwl djrs gSa\
46 Are you often troubled about feelings of guilt?
.324 .764
D;k vki izk;% vijk kouk ls nqh jgrs gSa\
Lie scale (Cronbachs coefficient =0.624)
4 If you say you will do something, do you always keep your promise no matter how
inconvenient it might be?
.342 .595
;fn vki fdlh dke d djus dk opu nsrs gSa r fdruh h vlqfokva ds ckotwn D;k vki gesk
viuk oknk fukrs gSa\
8 Were you ever greedy by helping yourself to more than your share of anything?
.265 .605
D;k vius fgLls ls T;knk fdlh pht d ikus dh lpsLV ykylk dh vki esa eatwn h\
12 Have you every blamed someone for doing something you knew was really your fault?
D;k fdlh vU; O;fDr d vkius dh ,sls dke ds fy, nh Bgjk;k gS t okLro esa vkidh gh xyrh dh otg ls .402 .581
gqvk k\
16 Are all your habits good and desirable ones?
.265 .604
D;k vkidh lh vknrsa vPNh ,oa okaNuh; gSa\
(Contd...)

Industrial Psychiatry Journal  29 Jan-Jun 2009 | Vol 18 | Issue 1

[Downloadedfreefromhttp://www.industrialpsychiatry.orgonFriday,September21,2012,IP:164.100.31.82]||ClickheretodownloadfreeAndroidapplicationfort
journal

Tiwari, et al.: Hindi Eysenck personality questionnaire

Item Items of the four subscales of the EPQRS-H Corrected item-total Cronbachs a if item
numbera correlations deleted
20 Have you ever taken anything (even a pin or button) that belonged to someone else?
.397 .581
D;k vkius db ,slh pht ;g rd fd fiu ;k cVu h dh ys yh gS t fdlh vj dh h\
24 Have you ever broken or lost something belonging to someone else?
.449 .571
D;k vkius d ,slh pht dh rM+ Mkyh ;k nh h t fdlh nwljs dh jgh g\
29 Have you ever said anything bad or nasty about anyone?
.399 .581
;k vkius fdlh ds fo; esa d h cqjh ;k vyhy ckr dh dgh gS\
33 As a child were you every cheeky to your parents?
.140 .625
D;k dh vki cPpa dh rjg vius ekrkfirk ls <hB s\
37 Have you ever cheated at a game?
.109 .694
D;k sy esa vkius dh d csekuh dh gS\
40 Have you ever taken advantage of someone?
.387 .584
D;k vkius dh nwlja dk yk mBk;k gS\
45 Do you always practice what you preach?
.303 .598
D;k vkidh duh vj djuh lnSo ,d gh jgrh gS\
47 Do you sometimes put off until tomorrow what you ought to do today?
.176 .618
D;k vki dhdh mu dkea d dy ds fy, Vky nsrs gSa] ftUgsa vkt gh iwjk djuk pkfg, k\
Psychoticism (Cronbachs coefficient =0.238)
2 Do you take much notice of what people think?
.078 .225
Ykx D;k lprs gSa] bl ckr ij D;k vki cgqr /;ku nsrs gSa\
6 Would being in debt worry you?
.106 .211
dtZnkj jguk D;k vkid fpUrk esa Mky nsxk\
10 Would you take drugs which may have strange or dangerous effects?
.112 .214
D;k vki ,slh vf;a dk iz;x djsaxs ftudk vkp;Ztud ;k rjukd izko iM+ ldrk gS\
14 Do you prefer to go your own way rather than act by the rules?
.284 .138
D;k fu;ea dk ikyu djus dh visk vki viuh fpM+h vyx idkuk ilan djrs gSa\
18 Do good manners and cleanliness matter much to you?
.020 .243
D;k f"Vkpkj ,oa LoPNrk d vki vfd egRo nsrs gSa\
22 Do you think marriage is old-fashioned and should be done away with?
.179 .187
D;k vkids fopkj ls fookg ,d nfd;kuwlh ijaijk gS vj bls lekIr dj nsuk pkfg,\
26 Do you enjoy co-operating with others?
.046 .234
D;k vki nwlja d lg;x nsus esa q grs gSa\
28 Does it worry you if you know there are mistakes in your work?
.134 .188
;fn vkid ;g irk py tk; fd vkids dke esa =qfV; ha r D;k vki ijsku g tkrs gSa\
31 Do you think people spend too much time safeguarding their future with savings and
insurance? -.020 .290
D;k vkid yxrk gS fd yx cgqr lk le; cpr ,oa chek }kjk vius fo"; d lqjfr djus esa yxkrs gSa\
35 Do you try not to be rude to people?
-.135 .267
D;k vki df djrs gSa fd nwljs yxa ds lk vkidk O;ogkj vf"V u jgs\
39 Would you like other people to be afraid of you?
.035 .238
D;k vki pkgsaxs fd nwljs yx vkils ;hr jgsa\
43 Is it better to follow societys rules than go your own way?
.078 .226
D;k Lo;a ds rjrjhds ls thou pykus dh visk lekt ds fu;ea dk ikyu djuk csgrj gS\
a 5 The numbers attached to the items are the numbers given by Eysenck et al., 1985, p. 29

alpha except for two items of psychoticism subscale and
one item of lie score subscale which were when deleted
exceeded the overall alpha level of that subscale. When
those items were thoroughly checked by the experts they
suggests that the items are congruent with remaining items
of that factor therefore these items should not be dropped
from the scale. The psychometric analyses further shows
that the neuroticism, extraversion and lie subscales perform
well in this sample, but not the psychoticism subscale.
DISCUSSION
The present study was aimed to evaluate the internal
consistency of the Hindi translation of the EPQR-S. Both
the extraversion and the neuroticism subscales of the Hindi
translation of the EPQR-S achieved satisfactory alpha
coefficients well in excess of 0.7, the level recommended
by Kline (1993). The lie scale with an alpha coefficient of
0.624 is also reached very close to Klines criterion of 0.7.
The psychoticism scale, however, performed poorly with
an alpha coefficient of only 0.238.
When evaluated in general, it can be proposed that due to
satisfactory internal consistency scores, the EPQRS-H is
a reliable scale for the measurement of various personality
traits. With regards to low internal consistency coefficients
for the psychoticism subscale, various studies conducted in
other countries also found the similar results (Francis et al.,
1992, 2006; Ivkovic et al., 2007; Katz and Francis, 2000;
Lewis et al., 2002). It was therefore concluded that the low
alpha score of psychoticism scale was not related to the
Hindi translation (that this subscale can be problematic).

Jan-Jun 2009 | Vol 18 | Issue 1 30 Industrial Psychiatry Journal

[Downloadedfreefromhttp://www.industrialpsychiatry.orgonFriday,September21,2012,IP:164.100.31.82]||ClickheretodownloadfreeAndroidapplicationfort
journal
Tiwari, et al.: Hindi Eysenck personality questionnaire
At the same time these data emphasize the need for further
research and development to produce a more reliable short
index of psychoticism.
The fact that the sample of the study included college
participants from an Indian university supports the
psychometric properties (i.e., reliability) of EPQRS-H. It
would be beneficial to repeat the study with heterogeneous
sample and to examine its discriminative value with clinical
population. An attempt should also be made in future to
investigate the temporal consistency and factorial validity
of the EPQRS-H with larger sample.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Authors are thankful to Mr. Gaurav Kumar Rai, Mrs. Upagya Rai
and Ms. Richa Singh for their help in questionnaire administration.
REFERENCES
1. Aleixo, P. A., & Norris, C. E. (2000). Personality and moral
reasoning in young offenders. Personality and Individual
Differences, 28, 609-623.
2. Barrett, P., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1984). The assessment of
personality factors across twenty-five countries. Personality
and Individual Differences, 5, 615-632.
3. Blagrove, M., & Akehurst, L. (2001). Personality and the
modulation of effects of sleep loss on mood and cognition.
Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 819-828.
4. Chan, R., & Joseph, S. (2000). Dimensions of personality,
domains of aspiration, and subjective wellbeing. Personality
and Individual Differences, 28, 347-354.
5. Chivers, L., & Blagrove, M. (1999). Nightmare frequency,
personality and acute psychopathology. Personality and
Individual Differences, 27, 843-851.
6. Corulla, W. J. (1987). A psychometric investigation of
the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (revised) and its
relationship to the I7 Impulsiveness Questionnaire. Personality
and Individual Differences, 8, 651-658.
7. Creed, P. A., Muller, J., & Machin, M. A. (2001). The role of
satisfaction with occupational status, neuroticism, financial
strain and categories of experience in predicting mental health
in the unemployed. Personality and Individual Differences,
30, 435-447.
8. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal
structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
9. Eysenck, H. J. (1952). The scientific study of personality.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
10. Eysenck, H. J. (1958). A short questionnaire for the
measurement of two dimensions of personality. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 42, 14-17.
11. Eysenck, H. J. (1959). Manual of the Maudsley Personality
Inventory. London: University of London Press.
12. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1964a). Manual of the
Eysenck Personality Inventory. London: University of London
Press.
13. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (adult and junior). London:
Hodder & Stoughton.
14. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1976). Psychoticism as a
Dimension of Personality. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
15. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1983). Recent advances
Industrial Psychiatry Journal 
in the cross-cultural study of personality. In C. D. Spielberger
& J. N. Butcher (Eds), Advances in personality assessment
(pp. 41-69). Hillsdale, New York: Erlbaum.
16. Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1964b). An improved
short questionnaire for the measurement of extraversion and
neuroticism. Life Sciences, 3, 1103-1109.
17. Eysenck, S. B. G., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A
revised version of the psychoticism scale, Personality and
Individual Differences, 6, 21-29.
18. Floderus, B. (1974). Psycho-social factors in relation to
coronary heart disease and associated risk factors. Nordisk
Hygienisk Tidskrift, supplementum, 6.
19. Francis, L. J. (1999). Happiness is a thing called stable
extraversion: A further examination of the relationship
between the Oxford Happiness Inventory and Eysencks
dimensional model of personality and gender. Personality and
Individual Differences, 26, 5-11.
20. Francis, L. J., Brown, L. B., & Philipchalk, R. (1992). The
development of an abbreviated form of the Revised Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire (EPQR-A): Its use among students
in England, Canada, the USA and Australia. Personality and
Individual Differences, 13, 443-449.
21. Francis, L. J., Lewis, C., & Ziebertz, H. (2006). The short-form
revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR-S): AGerman
edition. Social Behavior and Personality, 34, 197-204.
22. Francis, L. J., & Wilcox, C. (1998). The relationship between
Eysencks personality dimensions and Bems masculinity
and femininity scales revisited. Personality and Individual
Differences, 25, 683-687.
23. Glicksohn, J., & Bozna, M. (2000). Developing a personality
profile of the bomb-disposal expert: The role of sensation
seeking and field dependence-independence. Personality and
Individual Differences, 28, 85-92.
24. Glicksohn, J., & Golan, H. (2001). Personality, cognitive style
and assortive mating. Personality and Individual Differences,
30, 1199-1209.
25. Halamandaris, K. F., & Power, K. G. (1999). Individual
differences, social support and coping with the examination
stress: A study of the psychosocial and academic adjustment
of first year home students. Personality and Individual
Differences, 26, 665-685.
26. Ivkovic et al. (2007). The Eysenck personality factors:
Psychometric structure, reliability, heritability and phenotypic
and genetic correlations with psychological distress in an
isolated Croatian population. Personality and Individual
Differences, 42(1), 123-133.
27. Kline, P. (1993). The handbook of psychological testing.
London: Routledge.
28. Linton, D. K., & Wiener, N. I. (2001). Personality and potential
conceptions: Mating success in a modern Western male
sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 675-688.
29. Lord, R. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of
mental test scores. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.
30. Martin, T., & Kirkaldy, B. (1998). Gender differences on
the EPQ-R and attitudes to work. Personality and Individual
Differences, 24, 1-5.
31. Robbins, M., Francis, L. J., & Rutledge, C. (1997). The
personality characteristics of Anglican stipendiary parochial
clergy in England: Gender differences revisited. Personality
and Individual Differences, 23, 199-204.
32. Torrubia, R., & Muntaner, C. (1987). Relationships between
psychoticism and a number of personality measures: A
comparison between the original and revised versions of the
psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 8,
261-263.
Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared.
31 Jan-Jun 2009 | Vol 18 | Issue 1