Validation of the Dutch translation of the I7 questionnaire

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1123–1133

Validation of the Dutch translation of the I7 questionnaire

Marijn Lijffijt a,*, Herve Caci b, J. Leon Kenemans a,c

a Department of Psychopharmacology, Utrecht University, Sorbonnelaan 16, 3584 CA, Utrecht, The Netherlandsb Department of Pediatry, University Hospital in Nice, Hopital Archet 2, France

c Department of Psychonomics, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

Received 15 January 2004; received in revised form 28 May 2004; accepted 9 July 2004

Available online 11 September 2004

Abstract

The Impulsiveness–Venturesomeness–Empathy questionnaire (I7) is a frequently used questionnaire

assessing aspects of impulsivity. Since a Dutch translation is lacking, comparisons and inferences regarding

these traits are limited between results from studies that do use the I7. We translated the I7 and studied the

psychometric properties in a Dutch sample of 1048 students between 16 and 59 years of age. The results areconsistent with those found in English, French, German, Spanish, and Swiss samples. That is, three orthog-

onal factors were extracted that are highly congruent between genders and with the English normative sam-

ple. Furthermore, scale inter-correlations and reliabilities were also similar to previous results. This implies

that the Dutch translation of the I7 questionnaire is suitable to assess impulsivity and venturesomeness in

Dutch-speaking countries, and to differentiate between these traits.

� 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Personality; Impulsiveness; Venturesomeness; Empathy; I7; Psychometrics

1. Introduction

The I7 Impulsiveness–Venturesomeness–Empathy questionnaire is a 54-item questionnairedeveloped by Eysenck, Pearson, Easting, and Allsopp (1985) to assess aspects of the personality

0191-8869/$ - see front matter � 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.07.010

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 30 253 3868; fax: +31 30 253 7386.

E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Lijffijt).

mailto:[email protected]

1124 M. Lijffijt et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1123–1133

traits impulsivity and venturesomeness. A further personality trait assessed by the I7 is empathy,although items assumed to assess this dimension were originally meant as filler items (Eysencket al., 1985). Originally, impulsivity and venturesomeness had to be extracted from scales assessingpsychoticism, extraversion and neuroticism as measured by the Eysenck Personality Question-naire (EPQ). However, it became clear that those scales did not fully grasp the essence of impul-sivity and venturesomeness (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1978).

In the I7, Impulsiveness is regarded as acting without considering the possible consequencesfirst. In previous studies, Impulsiveness correlated relatively highly with motor impulsivity as as-sessed by the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-10), but lowly with non-planning and cognitiveimpulsivity (Caci, Nadalet, Bayle, Robert, & Boyer, 2003; Luengo, Carrillo-De-La-Pena, &Otero, 1991). Furthermore, Impulsiveness correlated highly with dysfunctional impulsivity, butlowly with functional impulsivity as assessed by Dickman�s Impulsivity Scales (Caci et al.,2003). Venturesomeness, on the other hand, is regarded as conducting risk-full actions with priorconsideration of possible consequences and correlated modestly with functional impulsivity (Caciet al., 2003; Dickman, 1990).

The I7 is frequently used in studies that are published in peer-reviewed international journals.Those studies primarily focus on impulsivity as a personality trait and investigate its relation tobehavior and physiology. Obviously, the I7 is not used in studies conducted in countries for whichno proper translation exists. As noted by Caci et al. (2003), this impedes a comparison of resultsconcerning the relation between impulsivity and other behavioral and physiological variablesbetween studies in countries in which the I7 can be used (English, French, German, andSpanish-speaking countries), and studies in countries in which this questionnaire cannot be used,like the Netherlands and Belgium, but where other instruments must be used, like the EPQ(Sanderman, Arrindell, Ranchor, Eysenck, & Eysenck, 1995). To improve comparisons betweenstudies conducted in Dutch-speaking countries with those from countries with a validated versionof the I7, the questionnaire was translated into Dutch, in such a way that content, order andresponse style were identical to the original English version. The current paper presents the psy-chometric properties of this translation in a Dutch student sample.

Previous validation studies of the I7 were conducted for English (Corulla, 1987, 1988; Eysencket al., 1985), French (Caci et al., 2003), German (Eysenck, Daum, Schugens, & Diehl, 1990),Spanish (Luengo et al., 1991), and Swiss (Zimmermann, Rossier, & Stadelhofen, 2004) samples.Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) showed that Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness items loadedon two different factors, suggesting that the I7 differentiates between these two personality traits(Caci et al., 2003; Corulla, 1987, 1988; Eysenck et al., 1985; Eysenck et al., 1990; Luengo et al.,1991; Zimmermann et al., 2004). Two studies compared the factor solutions across culturesand found only minor differences between the solutions for Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness(Caci et al., 2003; Eysenck et al., 1990). However, larger differences were reported between the fac-tor solutions for Empathy (Caci et al., 2003; Eysenck et al., 1990). These findings suggest thatImpulsiveness and Venturesomeness measure the same constructs across cultures, whereas Empa-thy does not.

Studies taking the effect of gender into account found that males scored higher than femaleson Venturesomeness, but lower on Empathy. The effect of gender on Impulsiveness is less con-vincing: three studies reported slightly higher scores for females than for males (Corulla, 1988;Eysenck et al., 1985, study; Eysenck et al., 1990), whereas four studies reported similar outcomes

M. Lijffijt et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 38 (2005) 1123–1133 1125

for males and females (Caci et al., 2003; Corulla, 1987; Eysenck et al., 1985, study 2; Luengoet al., 1991). Across studies, factor similarity between genders was very high for Impulsivenessand Venturesomeness (Caci et al., 2003; Eysenck et al., 1990), suggesting that Impulsiveness andVenturesomeness measure the same constructs in males and females. Results are less conclusivefor Empathy: factor similarity was high in the Eysenck et al. (1990) study, but notably lower inthe Caci et al. (2003) study. It should be noted that the results reported by Eysenck et al. (1990)concern a reduced version of the Impulsiveness (items 33 and 38 were discarded) and of theEmpathy (items 8, 10, 24, 29 and 53 were discarded) scales, which may explain why Caci etal. (2003) detected a difference in Empathy between genders whereas Eysenck et al. (1990) didnot.

Across studies, correlations between Impulsiveness, Venturesomeness, and Empathy were low(all <0.40). The former two scales correlated positively and relatively highly, whereas the correla-tions between these two scales with Empathy were notably lower (Caci et al., 2003; Corulla, 1987,1988; Eysenck et al., 1985; Eysenck et al., 1990; Luengo et al., 1991). Moreover, the correlationbetween Venturesomeness and Empathy was negative in the female groups (Caci et al., 2003;Corulla, 1987, 1988; Eysenck et al., 1985; Eysenck et al., 1990).

We translated the I7 questionnaire into Dutch. We expected males and females to score com-parably on the Impulsiveness scale. In contrast, males were expected to score higher on Venture-someness, whereas females were expected to score higher on Empathy. Furthermore, it wasexpected that the inter-correlation between Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness is higher thanthe inter-correlations between these two scales and Empathy, and that the correlation betweenVenturesomeness and Empathy is negative in the female group. Finally, an EFA 1 was performedseparately for the male and female sample to investigate the factor structure in the Dutch popu-lation. The resulting factor solutions were compared between genders and between the originalEnglish sample (Eysenck et al., 1985) and the Dutch sample to study whether scales measuredthe same constructs across genders and cultures.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants and procedure

The I7 contained 54 dichotomous (YES/NO) items assessing Impulsiveness (19 items), Venture-someness (16 items) and Empathy (19 items). The original I7 was translated into Dutch by the first

1 Some researchers would suggest using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) for testing the hypothesized three

factor model (impulsiveness, venturesomeness, and empathy). However, each of the three traits is actually multifaceted

(see e.g., Evenden, 1999 for a discussion of impulsivity), complicating a CFA. This view was confirmed by conducting a

CFA with the original English dataset. The CFA revealed a bad fit when assuming three factors, even though the EFA

analysis showed the presence of three factors (P. Barrett, personal communication, 16 May 2004). This problem has

been reported before for the NEO-PI-R. Several studies using an EFA reported five factors, whereas a CFA did not

confirm this model (McCrae, Zonderman, Bond, Costa, & Paunonen, 1996), suggesting that when scales are actually

multifaceted, CFA is a more stringent method than EFA. Finally, EFA could be considered ‘‘[. . .] as a special case

CFA’’ (Caci et al., 2003). For these reasons, we conducted EFA.


author and back-translated into English by an independent English-native speaker. Item contentand item order were preserved. One thousand one hundred and seventy five (1175) students atUtrecht University filled out the Dutch translation of the I7 in advance of a lecture. Participantshad to complete the questionnaire within 10min and were instructed beforehand to fill out ageand sex and to answer all questions as quickly as possible without thinking about the answerstoo long. One hundred twenty-seven participants failed to fill out their age or sex, or did not an-swer all 54 questions. They were excluded from the sample, leaving 1048 participants to be in-cluded in the analysis.

2.2. Statistics

Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS package (version 10.0) and Mplus 2.02.For the analyses, males and females were treated as separate groups, unless stated otherwise.Mean, standard deviation, median, skewness, and kurtosis were calculated for each scale usingdescriptive statistics in SPSS. Normality tests using skewness and kurtosis were assessed follow-ing methods of DeCarlo (1997). Because results suggested non-normality of the data, differencesbetween males and females were assessed using Mann–Whitney U-tests, and scale inter-correla-tions were calculated using Spearman�s rho. Differences in scale inter-correlations between malesand females were tested statistically using Fisher�s r–z transformation (for details please contactthe author). Scale reliability for dichotomous items was assessed by the Kuder–Richardson-20formula (KR-20) using an excel macro created by Dr. Siegle (for details please contact theauthor).

For both the male and female sample scree plots suggested the presence of three factors.Exploratory factor analyses were conducted following Caci et al. (2003), who used the Un-weighted Least Squares factor extraction. Both oblique PROMAX and orthogonal VARIMAXrotations were performed using Mplus 2.02, in which the Pearson correlation matrix was substi-tuted with a tetrachoric correlation matrix. The latter matrix is assumed to reduce the bias be-tween inter-item correlations when items are scored dichotomously, thus reducing falsenegatives (omitting items because factor loadings are non-salient) (Bollen & Barb, 1981). The fac-tor solutions obtained for the PROMAX and VARIMAX rotation were compared for factor sim-ilarity using the Kaiser–Hunka–Bianchini (KHB) procedure implemented within FACSIM(Barrett, 1986; Barrett, Petrides, Eysenck, & Eysenck, 1998). A KHB coefficient greater than0.90 indicates similar factor solutions (Barrett et al., 1998). We adopted the orthogonal VARI-MAX rotation because, firstly, with the PROMAX rotation all factor inter-correlations werelow (<0.25), and, secondly, the KHB values for the comparison between PROMAX and VARI-MAX rotated matrices were greater than 0.98, suggesting similar solutions and therefore orthogo-nality of the factors. For the orthogonal rotation, factor loadings higher than 0.30 were assumedto be salient (Comrey & Lee, 1992, pp. 242–243). Differences in factor solutions between gendersand between the original English sample (Eysenck et al., 1985) and the Dutch sample were testedwith the KHB procedure using tables published by Eysenck et al. (1985, Tables 1 & 2). The DutchI7 was not modified with regard to the original I7. Finally, factor structure stability was tested fol-lowing Friedman, Samuelian, Lancrenon, Even, and Chiarelli (2001), conducting separate factoranalyses after randomly splitting the total sample (males and females together) in halves. Addi-tionally, factor solutions were tested for similarity using the KHB procedure.


3. Results

Table 1 summarizes the main findings separately for males and females, showing that femaleswere slightly older than males, scored lower on Venturesomeness, and scored higher on Empathy.They did not differ on Impulsiveness. Furthermore, testing normality using skewness and kurtosisrevealed non-normality of the distributions of Impulsiveness, Venturesomeness, and Empathy (seeTable 1).

Correlational analysis revealed a positive correlation between Impulsiveness and Venturesome-ness, and negative correlations between Impulsiveness and Empathy, and between Venturesome-ness and Empathy. Differences in inter-correlations between the male and female groups were not

Table 1

Study characteristics for males and females

Males Females Mann–Whitney

(n = 193) (n = 855) U-test

Age (in years)

Mean 21.29 19.50 z = 6.29**

SD 5.45 2.68

Median 20 19

Range 17–59 16–43

Skewness 3.84** 4.32**

Kurtosis 18.15** 25.69**

Impulsiveness

Mean 6.09 5.70 z = 1.06ns

SD 4.14 3.87

Median 5 5

Range 0–19 0–18

Skewness 0.67** 0.70**

Kurtosis �0.16ns �0.11ns

Venturesomeness

Mean 11.59 9.51 z = 8.13**

SD 3.31 3.35

Median 12 10

Range 0–16 0–19

Skewness �1.08** �0.36**

Kurtosis 1.14* �0.39*

Empathy

Mean 12.22 14.36 z = 9.31**

SD 3.00 2.37

Median 12 15

Range 4–19 5–19

Skewness �0.13ns �0.54**

Kurtosis �0.21ns 0.19ns

* P < 0.01; ** P < 0.001 (two-tailed); ns = not significant; z = z-score.


significant, as revealed after a Fisher�s r–z transformation (see Table 2). Age did not correlate withany of the three scales in the male group, and only slightly with Empathy (q = �0.15, P < 0.001)in the female group. Reliability (KR-20) levels were acceptable for both groups (see Table 3). Toimprove inter-cultural comparison of these psychometric characteristics, Tables 2 and 3 also sum-marize data from previous studies, but only from those mentioning results for male and femalesamples, separately.

EFA revealed one factor mainly representing Impulsiveness items, one factor mainly represent-ing Venturesomeness items, and one factor mainly representing Empathy items (see Table 4). Thecomparison between factor solutions of Dutch males and females and those of English males andDutch males and of English females and Dutch females revealed KHB coefficients higher than0.90 for Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness, but not for Empathy (KHB was >0.90 for Empathyonly for females) (see Table 5). Some items had non-salient loadings (<0.30) or showed low KHBcoefficients, suggesting low similarity between males and females. For Impulsiveness these in-cluded items 31, 33, 38 and 49; for Venturesomeness these included items 2 and 12, and for Empa-thy these included items 8, 13, 24, 32, 37, 45, 50 and 53. However, no items were omitted, becausethe factor solutions were very similar between genders and cultures (Table 5).

Table 2

Inter-correlations of the three scales for the current study compared with previous studies

Sample Study n Scale inter-correlation Fisher�s r–z

Male Female Scale Male Female

Dutch This study 193 855 I and V 0.18* 0.23� �0.65

I and E �0.07 0.00 �0.87

V and E �0.11 �0.14� 0.38

UK Eysenck, Pearson (1985, study 1) 559 761 I and V 0.35 0.38 �0.62

I and E 0.13 0.06 1.27

V and E �0.06 �0.05 �0.18

Eysenck, Pearson (1985, study 2) 383 206 I and V 0.24 0.11 1.55

I and E �0.04 �0.14 1.16

V and E �0.12 �0.19 0.83

Corulla (1987) 92 215 I and V 0.16 0.21 �0.41

I and E 0.07 0.03 0.32

V and E 0.13 �0.11 1.91

Corulla (1988) 58 134 I and V 0.20 0.22 �0.13

I and E 0.07 0.09 �0.13

V and E 0.17 �0.11 1.78

French Caci et al. (2003) 197 364 I and V 0.17* 0.25� �0.94

I and E �0.02 0.10 �1.35

V and E 0.00 �0.08 0.90

German Eysenck, Daum et al. (1990) 175 214 I and V 0.23 0.35 �1.28

I and E 0.08 �0.06 1.37

V and E �0.04 �0.24 1.99*

I = impulsiveness; V = venturesomeness; E = empathy. Inter-correlations for the English, French and German samples

were derived from the published data.

Inter-correlations for the Dutch and French samples are Spearman�s rank-order coefficients (q); * P < 0.01; � P < 0.001

(two-tailed).

Table 3

Scale reliabilities for the current study compared with previous studies

Sample Study Scale Male Female

Dutch This study Impulsiveness 0.81 0.80

Venturesomeness 0.80 0.75

Empathy 0.67 0.57

English Eysenck, Pearson (1985) Impulsiveness 0.84 0.83


Empathy 0.69 0.69

Corulla (1987) Impulsiveness 0.82 0.84


Empathy 0.72 0.71

Corulla (1988) Impulsiveness 0.83 0.84


Empathy 0.72 0.70

French Caci et al. (2003) Impulsiveness 0.82 0.80


Empathy 0.62 0.64

German Eysenck, Daum et al. (1990) Impulsiveness 0.77 0.79


Empathy 0.78 0.72

Reliability scores for the English, French and German samples were derived from the published data. Reliability scores

for the Dutch and French samples are KR-20 coefficients; the scores of the other samples are Cronbach�s a coefficients.


The factor solution was tested for stability by conducting EFA�s for two subgroups gener-ated by splitting the total sample in halves. Factor similarity between the two subgroups was de-tected with the KHB procedure. Outcomes were all higher than .94, suggesting a stable factorsolution.

4. Discussion

This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Dutch translation of the Eysenck I7

Impulsiveness–Venturesomeness–Empathy questionnaire. Males and females had almost identicalscores on the Impulsiveness scale, although the scores were lower than those found by Eysencket al. (1985) and Corulla (1987, 1988). They found mean scores of approximately eight to nine,whereas we found scores of approximately two to three points lower, which resembles the resultsfound by Caci et al. (2003) and Luengo et al. (1991). For Venturesomeness previous studies re-ported that males scored approximately two points higher than females (Caci et al., 2003; Corulla,1987, 1988; Eysenck et al., 1985; Luengo et al., 1991). This difference between sexes was confirmedin this study, even though the mean scores were slightly higher than those reported previously.The mean score of 12–14 and the difference of two points in favor of the female group on Empa-thy are also consistent with previous results (Caci et al., 2003; Corulla, 1987, 1988; Eysenck et al.,1985; Eysenck et al., 1990; Luengo et al., 1991).

The correlations confirmed the expectations. The positive correlation between Impulsivenessand Venturesomeness was higher than other inter-correlations. As has been argued before by

Table 4

VARIMAX factor structure of the Dutch I7

Item number Males Females

F1 F2 F3 F1 F2 F3

Impulsiveness

7 – �0.50 – 0.65 – –

9 – �0.79 – 0.75 – –

11 – �0.67 �0.33 0.86 – –

16 – �0.75 – 0.65 – –

�19 – �0.75 – 0.78 – –

22 – �0.82 – 0.81 – –

25 – �0.56 – 0.60 – –

26 – �0.48 – 0.47 – –

27 – �0.59 – 0.56 – –

31 – �0.31 – 0.57 – –

33 – �0.54 0.42 0.45 – �0.5135 – �0.43 – 0.36 – –

38 – �0.34 – – – –

42 – �0.49 – 0.39 – –

43 – �0.35 – 0.43 – –

�44 – �0.62 – 0.53 0.31 –

�48 – �0.62 0.34 0.41 0.30 –

49 – – – 0.34 – –

52 – �0.71 – 0.51 – –

Venturesomeness

1 0.70 – – – 0.62 –

�2 – – – – 0.30 –

4 0.74 �0.40 – 0.35 0.49 –

6 0.68 – – – 0.65 –

�12 – – – – – –

14 0.61 – – – 0.54 –

17 0.68 – – – 0.60 –

20 0.60 – – – 0.59 –

�28 0.48 – – – 0.49 –

30 0.82 – – – 0.71 –

�34 0.47 – – – 0.47 –

36 0.83 – – – 0.66 –

39 0.66 – – – 0.55 –

41 0.56 – – – 0.36 –

46 0.53 – – – 0.42 –

�47 0.63 – – – 0.43 –

Empathy

3 – – �0.52 – – 0.41

5 – – �0.66 – – 0.73

8 – – – – – –

10 – – �0.41 – – 0.37

13 – – �0.55 – – –

15 – – �0.43 – – 0.40


Table 4 (continued)

Item number Males Females

F1 F2 F3 F1 F2 F3

18 – – �0.81 – – 0.73

21 – – �0.42 – – 0.51

23 �0.42 – �0.46 – – 0.47

24 – – – – – –

29 – – �0.46 – – 0.44

32 – 0.35 �0.52 �0.34 – 0.46

37 – – �0.33 – – –

40 – – �0.50 – – 0.33

45 – – �0.31 �0.36 – 0.61

50 – – – – – –

51 – – �0.43 – – 0.41

53 – – – – – –

54 – – �0.51 – – 0.58

Eigenvalues 9.11 6.65 5.04 8.54 5.55 4.39

Factor loadings lower than 0.30 are considered non-salient and are therefore not included (indicated by �–�). The highest

loading per item is displayed in bold. Eigenvalues are summations of all loadings.


Eysenck et al. (1985), this indicates that the two scales assess partially overlapping traits. How-ever, the most important purpose of their study was to optimize the differentiation between thetwo traits, which was reflected by the fact that the correlation between the two scales was stillquite low in absolute terms. The correlations found in this study were low, and approached thoseof previous studies (see Table 2), which confirms the idea that in the Dutch translation of the I7,Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness are two independent constructs. Furthermore, scale inter-correlations did not differ between males and females, which is consistent with most other studies(Caci et al., 2003; Corulla, 1987, 1988; Eysenck et al., 1985). Also, scale reliability was similaracross studies, in which Impulsiveness and Venturesomeness had a higher reliability than Empa-thy (see Table 3). These results suggest that, across cultures, the scales Impulsiveness and Venture-someness are more reliable than the scale Empathy is. The scale inter-correlations and scalereliabilities found in the present study differed slightly from those reported by Eysenck et al.(1990), possibly because they used a modified questionnaire (some Impulsiveness and Empathyitems were discarded) to perform statistical analysis on.

EFA extracted three distinct factors for Impulsiveness, Venturesomeness, and Empathy items,respectively, confirming previous studies (Caci et al., 2003; Corulla, 1987, 1988; Eysenck et al.,1985; Eysenck et al., 1990; Luengo et al., 1991; Zimmermann et al., 2004). Furthermore, Impul-siveness and Venturesomeness measured similar constructs in males and females, and measuredthe same construct in England and in the Netherlands. Empathy items possibly assess differentconstructs in Dutch males and females and in English and Dutch males, whereas in Englishand Dutch females Empathy items assess the same construct. This corroborates results foundin the French validation study (Caci et al., 2003). This could be caused by the male sample beingmuch smaller than the female sample, thus reducing the reliability of the outcome of the factoranalysis and of the KHB coefficient. Again, findings for the German sample are different, possibly

Table 5

Factor similarity (KHB coefficients) between genders and UK and Dutch samples

Netherlands England–Netherlands

Male–female Males Females

Impulsiveness 0.91 0.91 0.92

Venturesomeness 0.94 0.91 0.95

Empathy 0.88 0.83 0.94


because Eysenck et al. (1990) performed statistical analyses on a modified form of the I7, thuscomplicating comparability.

It is now possible to assess impulsivity in Dutch-speaking populations directly by the I7, with-out having to resort to extracting information from psychoticism, extraversion, and neuroticismscales. Furthermore, this translation enables the differentiation between rash (risk-taking) behav-ior and risk-taking behavior that was considered beforehand. Using the translation of the I7 inresearch on impulsivity in the Netherlands will make comparisons between outcomes of other(international) published studies, as well as inferences that can be made, more valid. However,transcultural results might be calling for a revision of the I7, as is argued by items that showlow factor loadings (<0.30) (like Impulsiveness items 31 and 38, Venturesomeness items 2 and12, and Empathy items 8, 24, and 53) or low KHB coefficients across different cultures. Further-more, the item format is dichotomous, which reduces the suitability to capture a personality traitthat has actually a certain distribution in the normal population; a 4- or 5-point Likert scalewould be preferable (e.g., Bollen & Barb, 1981). Finally, some items of the Venturesomeness scalemight have had high face validity for risk-taking behavior 30–25 years ago, but that this may nolonger hold currently. We suggest taking a careful look at these items.

Acknowledgement

Thanks are due to professor Paul Barrett for statistical help.

References

Barrett, P. (1986). Factor comparison: an examination of three methods. Personality and Individual Differences, 7,

327–340.

Barrett, P. T., Petrides, K. V., Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1998). The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire: an

examination of the factorial similarity of P, E, N and L across 34 countries. Personality and Individual Differences,

24, 805–819.

Bollen, K. A., & Barb, K. H. (1981). Pearson�s r and coarsely categorized measures. American Sociological Review, 46,

232–239.

Caci, H., Nadalet, L., Bayle, F. J., Robert, P., & Boyer, P. (2003). Cross-cultural study of the impulsiveness–

venturesomeness–empathy questionnaire (IVE-7). Comprehensive Psychiatry, 44, 381–387.

Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (Second ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.


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.

Corulla, W. J. (1988). A further psychometric investigation of the sensation seeking scale form-V and its relationship to

the EPQ-R and the I7 impulsiveness questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 9, 277–287.

DeCarlo, L. T. (1997). On the meaning and use of kurtosis. Psychological Methods, 2, 292–307.

Dickman, S. J. (1990). Functional and dysfunctional impulsivity: personality and cognitive correlates. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 95–102.

Evenden, J. L. (1999). Varieties of impulsivity. Psychopharmacology, 146, 348–361.

Eysenck, S. B. G., Daum, I., Schugens, M. M., & Diehl, J. M. (1990). A cross-cultural study of impulsiveness,

venturesomeness and empathy: Germany and England. Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie,

11, 209–213.

Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness: their position in a dimensional system

of personality description. Psychological Reports, 43, 1247–1255.

Eysenck, S. B. G., Pearson, P. R., Easting, G., & Allsopp, J. F. (1985). Age norms for impulsiveness, venturesomeness

and empathy in adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 6, 613–619.

Friedman, S., Samuelian, J., Lancrenon, S., Even, C., & Chiarelli, P. (2001). Three-dimensional structure of the hospital

anxiety and depression scale in a large French primary care population suffering from major depression. Psychiatry

Research, 104, 247–257.

Luengo, M. A., Carrillo-De-La-Pena, M. T., & Otero, J. M. (1991). The components of impulsiveness: a comparison of

the I7 impulsiveness questionnaire and the Barratt impulsiveness scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12,

657–667.

McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Bond, M. H., Costa, P. T., Jr., & Paunonen, S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of

factors in the revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus procrustes rotation. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552–566.

Sanderman, R., Arrindell, W. A., Ranchor, A. V., Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1995). Het meten van

persoonlijkheidskenmerken met de Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ): een handleiding. Groningen, NL:

Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken.

Zimmermann, G., Rossier, J., & Stadelhofen, M. d. F. (2004). Validation de la version francaise du questionnaire I7

d�impulsivite. Influence de la personnalite, du sexe et de la religion. Annales Medico Psychologiques, 162, 116–121.

Documents

Validation of the Dutch translation of the I7 questionnaire