THE IRRATIONAL BELIEFS INVENTORY: CROSS

Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, Vol. 20, No. 1, Spring 2002 (䉷 2002)

THE IRRATIONAL BELIEFS INVENTORY: CROSS CULTURAL COMPARISONS BETWEEN AMERICAN AND DUTCH SAMPLES K. Robert Bridges The Pennsylvania State University

Robbert Sanderman University of Groningen, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT: The 50-item Irrational Beliefs Inventory (IBI) was developed in the Netherlands for the assessment of irrational thinking. The IBI was derived from the Rational Behavior Inventory (RBI) and the Irrational Beliefs Test (IBT). The present study was designed to assess the applicability of the IBI in a different cultural context. The IBI was administered to a non-clinical sample in the USA; scores were consistent with Dutch findings and support the utility of the English language version of the IBI. KEY WORDS: Irrational Beliefs Inventory; USA; Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION In the years since Ellis (1962) outlined the major irrational beliefs or cognitions considered to be critical determinants of pathology, there has been a high research interest in the role of irrational cognitions in the development and maintenance of depression and other psychological disorders. Irrational beliefs have been defined as unrealistic “reasoning processes by which external events are interpreted and through which emotional distress is mediated” (Koopmans, Sanderman, TimAddress correspondence to K. Robert Bridges, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, New Kensington, PA 15068; e-mail: krb3噝psu.edu.

65

䉷 2002 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

66

Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy

merman, & Emmelkamp, 1994, p. 15). Several measures have been developed to assess irrational cognitions; McDermut, Haaga, and Bilek (1997) submitted that the most commonly used had been the Irrational Beliefs Test or IBT (Jones, 1968) and the Rational Behavior Inventory or RBI (Shorkey & Whiteman, 1977). The scales are still occasionally used; the IBT was used as late as 1992 (Prudhomme & Barron, 1992) and the RBI was used as recently as 1999 (Tassava & Rudeman, 1999); however, both the IBT and RBI have been increasingly criticized for their psychometric inadequacies, e.g., the low reliabilities of their subscales (see Koopmans et al. [1994] for a summary of these criticisms). Further, Zurawski and Smith (1987) found that the total scores of both the IBT and RBI could not be distinguished from measures of distress and negative affect. Their results suggested that these two tests may themselves measure neuroticism or general dysphoria instead of irrational cognitions related to psychopathology. Koopmans et al. (1994) argued that in order to be empirically useful, it is necessary for a measure of irrational beliefs to be distinguishable from negative affect. Consequently, Koopmans and his colleagues developed a more reliable and valid instrument to assess irrational beliefs, based on the item pool of the IBT and RBI. The new scale, named the Irrational Beliefs Inventory or IBI, was found to measure cognitions rather than anxiety or depression. The IBT and the RBI have seen decreasing use as a result of psychometric deficiencies; conversely, the IBI has been utilized in a variety of research settings in several cultures since its publication in 1994. The most frequent use of the IBI has been in the Netherlands, its country of origin. Since its inception, the IBI has been used in seven published Dutch studies (at the time of this writing), including research on the role of irrational beliefs on self norms of personal responsibility for harm to self or others (Aardema, Luteijn, & Sanderman, 1997), therapy for depression (Emmanuels-Zuurveen & Emmelkamp, 1997; Emanuels-Zuurveen & Emmelkamp, 1996), dental phobia (de Jongh, Muris, Shoenmakers, & ter Horst, 1995), obsessive-compulsive disorder (van Oppen, De Haan, van Balkom, Spinhoven, Hoogduin, & van Dyck, 1995) and social phobia (Mersch, Jansen, & Arntz, 1995; Mersch, 1995). In the USA, the English language version has been utilized in studies investigating the role of irrational thinking on paranormal beliefs (Roig, Bridges, Renner, & Jackson, 1998) and procrastination (Bridges & Roig, 1997). The English language version has also been used in Australian research on treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (Kirkby, Berrios, Daniels, Menzies, Clark, & Romano,

K. Robert Bridges and Robbert Sanderman

67

2000). An Estonian version was created for research on the role of irrational beliefs in a study of self-efficacy (Rimm & Jerusalem, 1999). Because of the increasing cross-cultural use of the IBI, it is essential to determine if the psychometric properties of the IBI are consistent across cultures. It has been observed by Butcher and Spielberger (1985) that the initial testing is invariably performed with a non-clinical sample. Using a Dutch and U.S. student sample, the goal of the present study was to (1) compare reliability figures for each IBI scale and (2) to compare the intercorrelations of the IBI subscales.

METHOD Participants The American sample consisted of 248 undergraduate students (143 females, 105 males, mean age ⳱ 21.38, SD ⳱ 6.34) enrolled at a large research university. The Dutch sample consisted of 538 university students (307 females, 227 males, 4 unknown, mean age ⳱ 23, SD ⳱ 5.20). Procedure The Irrational Beliefs Inventory (Koopmans et al., 1994) was developed to serve as a more reliable and valid instrument for assessing irrational beliefs. It was based on the item pool of the IBT and RBI. The IBI evolved from a 137-item measure to a 50-item measure (Bridges, Sanderman, Koopmans, Timmerman, & Emmelkamp, 1993). A factor analysis followed by varimax rotation resulted in five factors plus a total irrationality score. The five factors were: 1. Worrying (i ⳱ 12). This factor is defined by items that measure worrying over possible future accidents and misfortune. 2. Rigidity (i ⳱ 14). This factor is defined by items that reflect the rigidity of the values and norms people have for others and themselves. A high score reflects feelings resulting from any deviations from these norms; e.g., guilt and attribution of guilt, and blame and punishment for mistakes. 3. Need for Approval (i ⳱ 7). This factor deals with the need for approval of others, and measures the fear of failure and rejection.

68


4. Problem Avoidance (i ⳱ 10). This factor consists of items which measure decision making, risk taking, and taking responsibility. A high score suggests that a person finds it more difficult to face problems than to avoid them. Individual decision making is dependent on the behavior of others. 5. Emotional Irresponsibility (i ⳱ 7). This factor reflects the attribution of emotions to external causes rather than to oneself.

Additionally, the IBI has a total irrationality score which can be obtained by summing across all items. A high score reflects irrationality. The complete listing of items and the items which comprise each factor of the English language version of the IBI is given in Koopmans et al. (1994, Appendix A). The respondent evaluates each of the 50 items on a five-point (1–5) Likert-type scale, with 1 ⳱ strongly disagree to 5 ⳱ strongly agree. The raw item scores were used in the statistical analyses. In translating the Dutch IBI into English, guidelines suggested by De Figueiredo and Lemkau (1980), e.g., back-translations, educated-translation, and small-scale pre-testing were taken into account. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS In the present study, the English language version of the IBI was administered to an American sample, and the results were compared to the original Dutch student data. Two indices were examined: (1) the internal consistency reliability of the five subscales expressed in terms of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (Cronbach, 1951) for both American and Dutch samples and (2) the intercorrelations of the five subscales in both samples. In line with guidelines (lower bounds) reported by Nunnally (1978), i.e. ⱖ 0.70 for internal consistency ␣, with one exception reliabilities for the subscales in the American and Dutch samples were of acceptable magnitudes. (The ␣ for the Emotional Responsibility subscale in the American sample was .69.) As can be seen in Table 1, the ␣’s of the American sample were quite similar to those of the Dutch sample. The intercorrelations of the IBI show that the subscales are quite independent from each other in both the English language version (Table 2) and the Dutch language version (Table 3). As noted by Butcher, Nezami, and Exner (1998) cross-cultural use of self-report personality measures is increasing. Instruments that were


69

Table 1 Reliability Coefficients (␣) of the Five Subscales Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

American ␣

Dutch ␣

.79 .74 .78 .73 .69

.84 .71 .80 .73 .72

Worrying Rigidity Need for Approval Problem Avoidance Emotional Irresponsibility

Table 2 Correlations Among the IBI Subscales with the American Sample Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.


1

2

3

4

5

— .29 .46 .18 .19

— .29 .18 .19

— .23 ⳮ.01

— ⳮ.03

—

Note: Correlations equal to or higher than .18 are significant at p ⬍ .01.

Table 3 Correlations Among the IBI Subscales with the Dutch Sample Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.


1

2

3

4

5

— .16 .45 .25 .15

— .14 .09 ⳮ.06

— .19 ⳮ.03

— ⳮ.07

—

Note: Correlations equal to or higher than .13 are significant at p ⬍ .01.

70


developed for use in one culture then adapted for use in other cultures is a phenomenon that is receiving increasing attention in the research literature. There are two purposes for this multicultural use: (1) crosscultural personality research and (2) to provide useful clinical instruments for the target culture. However, Eysenck and Eysenck (1983) cautioned that it cannot be assumed that the psychometric properties obtained with an instrument in one culture can be replicated in other cultures. It is necessary that the assumption for such a generalization must be verified empirically. The findings of the present study support the utility of the English language version of the IBI. Further data from a variety of countries are needed if the IBI is to become an international research and clinical instrument. REFERENCES Aardema, A. J., Luteijn, F., & Sanderman, R. (1997). Appraisal of responsibility: A new questionnaire and its relation to depression, rigid thoughts, and norms. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 13, 216–218. Bridges, K. R., & Roig, M. (1997). Academic procrastination and irrational thinking: A re-examination with context controlled. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 941–944. Bridges, K. R., Sanderman, R., Koopmans, P.C., Timmerman, I., & Emmelkamp, P.M.G. (1993, August). Irrational Beliefs Inventory: Design and Factor Structure. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Convention, Toronto, Canada. Butcher, J. N., Nezami, E. & Exner, J. (1998). Psychological assessment of people in diverse cultures. In Cultural clinical psychology: Theory, research, practice (Edited by S.S. Kazarian and D. R. Evans). New York: Oxford University Press. Butcher, J. N. & Spielberger, C.D. (Eds.). (1985). Advances in Personality Assessment, Volume 4. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. de Jongh, A., Muris, P., Schoenmakers, N., & ter Horst, G. (1995). Negative cognitions of dental phobics: Reliability and validity of the dental cognitions questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 507–515. DeFigueiredo, J. M. & Lemkau, P. V. (1980). Psychiatric interviewing across cultures: Some problems and prospects. Social Psychiatry, 15, 117–121. Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. New York: Lyle-Stuart. Emanuels-Zuurveen, L., & Emmelkamp, P.M.G. (1996). Individual behavioral-cognitive therapy v. marital therapy for depression in maritally distressed couples. British Journal of Psychiatry, 169, 181–188. Emanuels-Zuurveen, L., & Emmelkamp, P.M.G. (1997). Spouse-aided therapy with depressed patients. Behavior Modification, 21, 62–77.


71

Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1983). Recent advances in the cross-cultural study of personality. In Advances in Personality Assessment, Volume 2 (edited by J. N. Butcher and C.D. Spielberger). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA. Jones, R. (1968). A factored measure of Ellis’ irrational beliefs system with personality maladjustment correlates. Dissertation Abstracts International, 29 (II-B), 4379–4380. (University Microfilms No. 69-6443, 1969) Kirby, K. C., Berrios, G. E., Daniels, B. A., Menzies, R. G., Clark, A., & Romano, A. (2000). Process-outcome analysis in computer-aided treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 41, 259– 265. Koopmans, P.C., Sanderman, R., Timmerman, I., & Emmelkamp, P.M.G. (1994). The Irrational Beliefs Inventory (IBI): Development and psychometric evaluation. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 15–27. McDermut, J. F., Haaga, D.A.F., & Bilek, L. A. (1997). Cognitive bias and irrational beliefs in major depression and dysphoria. Cognitive Therapy Research, 21, 459–476. Mersch, P.P.A. (1995). The treatment of social phobia: The differential effectiveness of exposure in vivo and an integration of exposure in vivo, rational emotive therapy and social skills training. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 259–269. Mersch, P.P.A., Jansen, M.A., & Arntz, A. (1995). Social phobia and personality disorder: Severity of complaint and treatment effectiveness. Journal of Personality Disorders, 9, 143–159. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGrawHill. Prudhomme, L., & Barron, P. (1992). The pattern of irrational beliefs associated with major depressive disorder. Social Behavior and Personality, 20, 199–212. Rimm, H., & Jerusalem, M. (1999). Adaptation and validation of an Estonian version of the General Self-Efficacy Scale (ESES). Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 12, 329–345. Roig, M., Bridges, K. R., Renner, C.H., & Jackson, C.R. (1998). Belief in the paranormal and its association with irrational thinking controlled for context effects. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 229–236. Shorkey, C.T. & Whiteman, V.L. (1977). Development of the Rational Behaviour Inventory: Initial validity and reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37, 527–534. Tassava, S. H., & Rudeman, A. J. (1999). Application of escape theory to binge eating and suicidality in college women. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 450–466. van Oppen, P., de Haan, E., van Balkom, A.J.L.M., Spinhoven, P., Hoogduin, K., & van Dyck, R. (1995). Cognitive therapy and exposure in vivo in the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 379–390. Zurawski, R.M., & Smith, T.W. (1987). Assessing irrational beliefs and emotional distress: Evidence and implications of limited discriminant validity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 224–227.