Psychometric Properties and Validation of a German High Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS-G)
Abstract
Abstract. High sensitivity is an individual disposition to perceive and process external and internal stimuli more intensely than the average population. For measuring high sensitivity, Aron and Aron (1997) developed a unidimensional self-report questionnaire. However, Smolewska, McCabe, and Woody (2006) fitted a model with three correlated factors: ease of excitation, aesthetic sensitivity, and low sensory threshold. Both models were questioned by Evans and Rothbart (2008) who postulated a two-factor structure: negative affect and orienting sensitivity. Nonetheless, the studies presented so far are based on small samples and did not address the issues of the ordinal data and measurement invariance. We presented the first study that compared all postulated models, thereby taking the ordinal data into account, and evaluated the measurement invariance. We adopted the High Sensitive Person (HSP)-Scale for German-speaking populations and found that a three-factor model provided the best fit. However, we excluded 13 items because of their low factor loadings or high intercorrelations. The revised HSP-Scale fit a three-factor model. Furthermore, we could establish a high level of measurement invariance (strict invariance), indicating equality of loadings, thresholds, and residual variances across sex. The scale showed good psychometric properties and high test-retest reliability. Finally, relationships with psychological symptoms were presented.
References
2010). Relationship between sensory processing sensitivity, personality dimensions and mental health. Journal of Applied Sciences, 10, 570–574. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsq028
(1997). Sensory-processing sensitivity and its relation to introversion and emotionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 345–368. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.345
(2012). Sensory processing sensitivity: A review in the light of the evolution of biological responsivity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 262–282. doi: 10.1177/1088868311434213
(2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 186–203. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1302_2
(2006). The highly sensitive person: Stress and physical symptom reports. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1433–1440. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.021
(2011). “Hochsensible Persönlichkeit” – Bericht zum Forschungsprojekt Hochsensibilität
([“The highly sensitive personality” – Report to research project high sensitivity] . Psychological Medicine, 22, 59–63.2014). Highly sensitive persons – An empirical investigation to a complex phenomenon. Psychological Medicine, 25, 4–16.
(1973). Cross-cultural research methods. New York, NY: Wiley.
(1993).
(Alternative ways of assessing model fit . In K. A. BollenJ. S. LongEds., Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.1989). A primer of LISREL. Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. New York, NY: Springer.
(2009, February). Interpreting the factors of the Highly Sensitive Person scale. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Tampa, FL.
(2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504. doi: 10.1080/10705510701301834
(1983). The brief symptom inventory: An introductory report. Psychological Medicine, 13, 595–605. doi: 10.1017/S0033291700048017
(2008). Temperamental sensitivity: Two constructs or one? Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 108–118. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.016
(2008). High sensory-processing sensitivity at work. International Journal of Stress Management, 15, 189–198. doi: 10.1037/1072-5245.15.2.189
(2000). BSI. Brief Symptom Inventory – Deutsche version. Manual
([Brief Symptom Inventory – German version. Manual] . Göttingen, Germany: Beltz.2017). BSCL. Brief Symptom Checklist, manual. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
(2015). Die Brief Symptom Checklist (BSCL) im Einsatz bei Patientinnen und Patienten der orthopädischen Rehabilitation
([The Brief Symptom Checklist (BSCL) in use with female and male patients in the orthopedic rehabilitation] Berlin, Germany: Jahrestagung des AK Klinische Psychologie. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/281833605_Die_Brief_Symptom_Checklist_%28BSCL%29_im_Einsatz_bei_Patientinnen_und_Patienten_der_orthopaedischen_Rehabilitation2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. The American Psychologist, 59, 93–104. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.2.93
(2007). Sensory-processing sensitivity in social anxiety disorder: Relationship to harm avoidance and diagnostic subtypes. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 21, 944–954. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.12.003
(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
(1994). Galen’s prophecy: Temperament in human nature. New York, NY: Basic Books.
(2008). The relationship between sensory processing sensitivity, alexithymia, autism, depression, and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 255–259. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.04.009
(2005). Sensory sensitivity, attachment experiences, and rejection responses among adults with borderline and avoidant features. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19, 641–658. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2005.19.6.641
(2002). Behavioural inhibition and symptoms of anxiety and depression: Is there a specific relationship with social phobia? The British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41, 361–374. doi: 10.1348/014466502760387489
(2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514. doi: 10.1007/BF02296192
(2006). A psychometric evaluation of the Highly Sensitive Person Scale: The components of sensory-processing sensitivity and their relation to the BIS/BAS and “Big Five”. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1269–1279. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.022
(2008). Ästhetik von Websites. Wahrnehmung von Ästhetik und deren Beziehung zu Inhalt, Usability und Persönlichkeitsmerkmalen
([Aesthetics of websites. Perception of aesthetics and their relation to content, usability and personality traits] . Münster, Germany: MV Wissenschaft.