Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/20759070
CITATIONS
READS
121
1,217
2 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
Kay A Wilhelm
University of New South Wales
240 PUBLICATIONS 7,737 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Aust NZ J Psychiatry Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by University New South Wales on 12/10/13
For personal use only.
The long-term reliability of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) and of the
Intimate Bond Measure (IBM) are examined in a non-clinical group, with data
being examined over eleven and five years for the two respective measures.
Such reliability data are compared with reliability data on a number of personality measures within the same cohort. Results demonstrate considerable
stability in the PBI over an extended period and moderate stability in IBM
scores.
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 1990; 24:199-202
The Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) was
developed to measure fundamental parental dimensions of care and protection (control) and to allow
quantification of any parental contribution to subsequent psychiatric disorder. Reliability aspects (internal consistency and short-term test-retest reliability)
were examined in the initial paper [ 11 and its validity,
both as a measure of perceived and actual parenting,
has been examined in several studies [ 2 ] .
If the PBI is a reliable and valid measure of subjects
retrospective memories of their parents in their first
sixteen years, then adult subjects should return consistent scores over time (ie show high test-retest
reliability).
The short-term reliability of the PBI has been examined in several studies. In the initial development
paper [ 11, test-retest reliability in a non-clinical sample
was 0.76 for the care scale and 0.63 for the protection
scale over a three-week interval. Subsequently, in a
sample of depressives initially depressed and then
significantly improved, much higher correlation coefficients (ranging from 0.87 to 0.92) were returned over
a nine-weekinterval [ 2 ] .The higher coefficients in this
group, compared to the initial sample, were judged to
reflect the greater motivation of patients (in comparison to volunteer or importuned non-clinical
groups) to return questionnaire data conscientiously.
Subsequently, in a US study [3] of depressed outpatients attending the Yale Depression Research unit,
48 depressives scored the PBI when depressed and
some four-six weeks later when significantly improved. PBI scores showed no significant change over
time and the coefficients of agreement ranged from
0.90 to 0.96 across the four scales, slightly superior to
the Australian depressed sample. Test-retest reliability
in a group of patients with schizophrenia has been
examined [4] when the coefficients of agreement
ranged from 0.58 to 0.77. This less impressive result
was judged to be a reflection of the sample initially
scoring the PBI shortly after admission to hospital with
an exacerbation of their schizophrenia, with their
judgement and ability to complete the self-report questionnaire impaired. This interpretation is supported by
a n American study [5] of 26 subjects with
schizophrenia who completed the PBI form on two
occasions a few weeks apart, with correlation coeffi-
Aust NZ J Psychiatry Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by University New South Wales on 12/10/13
For personal use only.
200
Results
Table 1 reports the mean data returned for the
several measures, and the level of constancy over time,
with three intervals (1978-1983, 1983-1988, and
Aust NZ J Psychiatry Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by University New South Wales on 12/10/13
For personal use only.
Mean score
Consistency
coefficients (r)
A
0
A
with with with
(A)
(6)
(C)
26.3
14.8
21.9
13.0
26.2
13.8
21.7
12.1
26.3
13.8
21.4
11.9
PBI
Aaternal care
inaternal protection
aternal care
'sternal protection
BM
ntimate care
wholegroup)
ntimate control
wholegroup)
ntirnate care
sub-group)
ntimate control
sub-group)
N/A*
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.50 N/A
6.9 N/A
0.49 N/A
0.48 N/A
6.5
7.0 N/A
0.49 N/A
Personality
qeuroticism
Self-esteem*
lependency
rraitdepression
9.0
8.7
1.0
1.6
52.6 52.8
31.3 31.2
8.7
0.9
53.7
29.4
0.54
0.43
0.64
0.64
0.68
0.61
0.64
0.65
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
Statedepression
Discussion
20 1
N/A
N/A
N/A
57.0
4.6
4.7
5.2
4.7
4.8
5.3
Aust NZ J Psychiatry Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by University New South Wales on 12/10/13
For personal use only.
202
the cohort but suggest that such a group is the appropriate one for such an examination.
The test-retest reliability of the PBI is clearly impressive, both intrinsically when the correlation coefficients are examined and, secondly, in comparison to
the personality tests which we used as our comparative base. Jorm [ 161 considered the test-retest consistency of trait anxiety/neuroticism measures, and
referenced work giving a correlation of 0.54 over the
four-six years and 0.40 over 30 years, with lower
levels for state measures of anxiety. Those data are
compatible with our neuroticism score data, and therefore support the likely accuracy of the latter.
The test-retest data for the IBM are somewhat less
impressive and, as we undertook a separate analysis
on those in stable relationships with similar results,
findings cannot reflect a sub-sample scoring different
intimates over time. As the IBM is a measure of current
intimate relationships, some change in the perception
of the spouse or intimate would be anticipated over
time, particularly in such a sample of young adults.
While change in parenting over the years might also
be theoretically anticipated, the PBI, by contrast, is
designed deliberately to obtain an overall gestalt of the
parent or product moment of innumerable experiences so that the instructions effectively force some
overall judgement in an attempt to minimise variation
at different developmental stages.
Each of the personality measures returned similar
levels of consistency over time despite some of them
(eg trait depression) conceivably being more likely to
be influenced by mood state and therefore potentially
unstable over an extended period. The extent to which
they necessarily reflect intrinsic personality, however,
cannot be addressed by such a study design.
We conclude then that the PBI is a highly reliable
measure over an extended period, supporting its claim
to be accurate measure of perceived parenting, and so
useful in quantifying any parental risk to subsequent
psychiatric disorder in adulthood.