Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

The Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire shortened form T

(ZKA-PQ/SF)
⁎
Anton Alujaa,b, , Ignacio Lucasa,b, Angel Blancha,b, Oscar Garcíab,c, Luis F. Garcíab,d
a
University of Lleida, Spain
b
Institut of Biomedical Research of Lleida, Spain
c
European University of Madrid, Spain
d
Autonomous University of Madrid, Spain

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study developed a shortened version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ/
ZKA-PQ SF) and tests its psychometric properties using different samples. This brief version has only 80 items (four items
Zuckerman's personality model per facet), in contrast with the 200 items (10 items per facet) of the long version. The validation sample was
ZKA-PQ/SF formed of 1416 volunteers (696 males and 720 females) with a mean age of 34.62 (SD: 14.06). The ZKA-PQ/SF
Personality shortened versions
has a robust five-factor structure, highly similar to the long questionnaire. The average factor congruence is quite
high (0.98). The alpha reliability coefficients of four-item facets range between 0.64 and 0.86. Test-retest
coefficients for a three-month period were 0.83, 0.84, 0.80, 0.78, and 0.82 for Neuroticism, Sensation Seeking,
Extraversion, Activity and Aggressiveness, respectively. Controlling for item overlap, correlations between long
and short forms ranged between 0.65 and 0.80. Regarding validity, the ZKA-PQ/SF showed adequate convergent
and divergent validity with regard to the Revised NEO Personality Inventory shortened form (NEO-FFI-R). The
ZKA-PQ/SF has good psychometric properties retaining the original 20 facets of the ZKA-PQ and, is therefore
well suited for research purposes based on Zuckerman's Alternative Five-Factor model in those cases where the
long version is inappropriate.

1. Introduction
Zuckerman, Kuhlman, Joireman, Teta, and Kraft (1993) proposed a
new Five-factor personality model for research in human personality.
This new model was developed through a process of factor analysis of
previous personality questionnaires assessing temperamental and bio-
logical aspects of personality (Zuckerman, Kuhlman, & Camac, 1988;
Zuckerman, Kuhlman, Thornquist, & Kiers, 1991). As a result of this
process, Zuckerman et al. (1993) developed the Zuckerman-Kuhlman
Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ). This questionnaire consisted of 89
items with a true-false answer format measuring five factors: Neuroti-
cism-Anxiety (N-Anx), Sociability (Sy), Aggression-Hostility (Agg-
Host), Impulsive Sensation Seeking (ImpSS), and Activity (Act). The
original questionnaire has shortened forms of 69 and 50 items (Aluja
et al., 2006; Aluja, García, & García, 2003a). For more information on
the ZKPQ and shortened forms, see Zuckerman (2002, 2008), Joireman
and Kuhlman (2004) and a revision of Zuckerman and Aluja (2014).
Later, Aluja, Kuhlman, and Zuckerman (2010) developed a new
200-item questionnaire (the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality
Questionnaire; ZKA-PQ) including five factors with four facets for each
factor, using a Likert scale for the response format (see description
below). The ZKA-PQ was adapted and validated in several cultures in
different languages (Rossier et al., 2016). The five-factor structure of
the ZKA-PQ replicates well across cultures, suggesting that it can be
used in a large diversity of cultures, and that Zuckerman's model is as
universal as the Five Factor Model (FFM) or Eysenck's Psychoticism-
Extraversion-Neuroticism (PEN) model.
1.1. The ZKA-PQ and other personality questionnaires
The relationships between the ZKA-PQ and other factorial person-
ality questionnaires have also been researched. García, Escorial, García,
Blanch, and Aluja (2012) found that Neuroticism and Extraversion fa-
cets and factors from ZKA-PQ and the Revised NEO Personality In-
ventory (NEO-PI-R) instruments tapped the same constructs with few
differences. ZKA-Aggressiveness had a negative and strong relationship
with NEO-Agreeableness. On the other hand (see Aluja, García, &
García, 2003b; García, Aluja, García, & Cuevas, 2005), ZKA-Activity
was positively related with NEO-Conscientiousness rather than NEO-
Extraversion. ZKA-Sensation Seeking presented a more diverse pattern,

⁎
Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, University of Lleida, Avda. Estudi General, 4, 25001 Lleida, Catalonia, Spain.
E-mail address: aluja@pip.udl.cat (A. Aluja).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.06.015
Received 17 March 2018; Received in revised form 7 June 2018; Accepted 10 June 2018
0191-8869/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Aluja et al.
though some reported relationships (negative with NEO Con-
scientiousness, positive with Extroversion, and positive with Openness
to Experience) were in agreement with previous evidence using the old
ZKPQ and the NEO-PI-R.
Additionally, the ZKA-PQ factors presented a clear pattern of re-
lationships with Temperament and Character traits from Cloninger's
TCI-R (García, Aluja, García, Escorial, & Blanch, 2012). ZKA Neuroti-
cism was positively related with TCI Harm Avoidance and negatively
with Self-Directedness. ZKA Sensation Seeking was strongly related
with TCI-R Novelty Seeking, and ZKA Aggression and negatively with
TC-RI Cooperativeness and Self-Direction. ZKA Extraversion correlated
positively with Reward Dependence and Cooperativeness and nega-
tively with Harm Avoidance and TCI-R Reward Dependence. Lastly,
ZKA Activity correlated positively with Persistence.
Other studies have explored the relationships of the dimensions and
facets of the ZKA-PQ with the EPQ-RS (Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire Revised, shortened version), I7 (Impulsiveness
Questionnaire) and the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to
Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ-20), which is based on Gray's theory.
Factor Analyses showed that Extraversion and Neuroticism from the
EPQ-RS grouped with Extraversion and Neuroticism factors of ZKA-PQ,
respectively. SPSRQ Sensitivity to Reward loaded on the ZKA
Aggressiveness and Sensation Seeking factors, and SPSRQ Sensitivity to
Punishment loaded on the ZKA Neuroticism factor. EPQ-RS
Psychoticism, I7 Impulsivity and Venturesomeness mainly loaded on the
ZKA Sensation Seeking factor (see Aluja et al., 2013).
1.2. The ZKA-PQ and psychopathology
The ZKA-PQ dimensions accounted for between 35% and 61% of the
variance of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic
Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ; Livesley & Jackson, 2009), whereas ZKA-PQ
facets accounted for between 54% and 63% of the variance. Local re-
gression graphical analysis (LOESS) showed ZKA-PQ Neuroticism and
Aggressiveness were the dimensions most related with Emotional Dys-
regulation. ZKA-PQ Sensation Seeking and Aggressiveness were asso-
ciated with Dissocial Behavior. ZKA-PQ Neuroticism and Extraversion
(negative) were associated with Social Avoidance, and ZKA-PQ Ac-
tivity, and Sensation Seeking (negative) with Compulsiveness (Aluja,
Blanch, & Balada, 2013).
The ZKA-PQ was a good predictor of personality disorders (PDs)
measured through the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI
III) in healthy subjects (Aluja, Blanch, García, García, & Escorial, 2012).
ZKA-PQ Neuroticism correlated with most PD scales. ZKA-PQ Aggres-
siveness and Sensation Seeking correlated with the Antisocial PD scale,
and ZKA-PQ Extraversion correlated with several scales such as Avoi-
dant and Histrionic PDs.
1.3. The need for a ZKA-PQ shortened form
In the development of brief forms of personality questionnaires, it is
important to demonstrate that, a) there is great interest in the long-form
measure, b) the long-form measure is valid for its intended purpose, c)
its length prevents its use in important ways, and d) the short form
represents a significant time saving. The development of a brief form of
ZKA-PQ is necessary for several reasons. On the one hand, it can in-
crease the possibility of being included in epidemiological, long-
itudinal, laboratory and cross-sectional studies on health or aging. Short
versions are also useful for on-line research or cross-cultural studies,
and in genetic or clinical studies. In general, short versions save time
and therefore increase the possibility of including in a single session
other measures of interest. For example, short forms have been devel-
oped for the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (Patrick,
Curtin, & Tellegen, 2002), the NEO-PI-R (McCrae & Costa, 2004), the
SPSRQ (Aluja & Blanch, 2011), the HEXACO (Ashton & Lee, 2009), the
TCI-R (Farmer & Goldberg, 2008), the DAPP-BQ (Aluja, Blanch, Blanco,
175
Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181
Martí-Guiu, & Balada, 2014), and the PID5 (Maples et al., 2015).
However, the development of short forms does have several draw-
backs (Levy, 1968; Smith, McCarthy, & Anderson, 2000). Among them
is the reduction of internal consistency reliability coefficients and the
loss of the content of the construct mainly due to having fewer items
than in the longer forms. To avoid these pitfalls, it is necessary that the
short form items have high correlations with the total of the scale, and
that item redundant in form and content are excluded. Additionally, the
factor structure must be equivalent to the long version, and the corre-
lations of the factors of the long and short version must be high after
controlling for spurious variance or item overlap (Levy, 1967). An ad-
ditional desirable condition is that facets should be retained in the short
versions.
1.4. The proposal of a shortened version of the ZKA-PQ
The aim of this work was to develop an abbreviated, research-
screening short form of the ZKA-PQ. For the development of the shorter
ZKA-PQ version, we have adopted the following criteria: a) a robust
orthogonal factor structure equivalent to the long version structure, b)
satisfactory internal consistency reliability for dimensions and facets
and good test-retest reliability, c) high correlations between the long
and short factors, and d) good convergent and divergent validity with
other personality measures. The factorial structure is expected to be
equivalent to the original validation, reaching good congruent coeffi-
cients. Further, we compare the structure of the short and long versions
through confirmatory factor analysis. We also expect strong correla-
tions of factors from the long and short versions. Although alpha reli-
abilities for four-item scales are expected to be lower than the facets
with 10 items, we expect alpha reliabilities around 0.60–0.70.
Regarding convergent and divergent validity with other personality
questionnaire, we expect positive correlations of the ZKA-PQ/SF
Neuroticism and Extraversion dimensions with the same dimensions of
the NEO-FFI-R. In addition, according to previous results obtained with
the old ZKPQ and other personality questionnaires, we expect positive
correlations of ZKA Activity and NEO Conscientiousness, ZKA Sensation
Seeking with NEO Extraversion, and ZKA Aggressiveness with NEO
Neuroticism. In addition, ZKA Aggressiveness should correlate nega-
tively with NEO Agreeableness.
2. Method
The work presented here is based on a set of five independent
samples. All the subjects were recruited with the aid of undergraduate
students, who, as practical work in their degree subject Personality
Psychology, used several questionnaires in the “paper and pencil” form
to collect data from volunteers from the general population. These
students received credits for participating in the internship program.
The participants were neighbors, friends, relatives, etc. The participants
also were selected proportionally with this age range: 18–25, 26–35,
36–50, and higher than 50 years.
The first sample (n = 5874) was a comprehensive database based on
all the studies conducted since 2011 by the first author in the Spanish
version of the above-mentioned ZKA-PQ. Analyses of this first sample
were used to develop a preliminary version of a short form, which was
then further refined in three new calibration samples. These calibration
samples (n's = 463, 437 and 472) were collected for the purposes of
excluding items, incorporating new items, and confirming that the
factor structure was good and the alphas acceptable. These calibration
goals were achieved by the fourth sample. A fifth and final step was to
use a new sample (n = 1416) of the ZKA-PQ/SF, developed by the
fourth calibration sample, to compare with the long form to demon-
strate that the factor structure and reliabilities of the short form were
adequate with regard to the long form.
A. Aluja et al.
2.1. Development of the ZKA-PQ/SF
2.1.1. Sample 1
For the development of the current ZKA-PQ shortened version (ZKA-
PQ/SF), we first performed a factor analysis of the previous Spanish
ZKA-PQ database of 5874 subjects (2900 men and 2974 women) with
an average age of 38.9 (SD = 16.04). In this initial analysis, we selected
four items per facet with the best factor loadings, after we computed the
alpha reliability coefficients for every dimension and the correlations of
each item to total facet.
In this first sample, the AG4 facet had a high secondary loading in
the Neuroticism factor. AC3 obtained a low loading on its factor and
high loading on the SS factor. SS2 obtained high secondary loadings in
EX1. In addition, the facet SS4 had a low loading on its factor. AC3 and
SS4 had an internal consistency lower than 0.50. New items were
written for AG4, AC3, SS2 and SS4 and tested in the next samples. In
each sample, the factor structure was analyzed in order to verify that
the facets had appropriate loads in their respective factors and the
alpha internal consistency was satisfactory. This objective was accom-
plished by the fourth sample.
2.1.2. Samples 2, 3 and 4
For sample 2, n = 463 participants (229 males and 234 females;
mean of age of 35.33 and SD: 14.23); for sample 3, n = 437; (205 males
and 232 females; mean of age of 32.3 and SD: 12.263); for sample 4,
n = 472 (225 males and 247 females; mean of age of 37.60 and SD:
10.58).
In samples 2 and 3, the SS4 continued to have a low loading in its
factor and also a low alpha. AG4 reduced its secondary factorial loading
in the Neuroticism factor, albeit insufficiently. New items were written
for AG4 and SS4 and tested in sample 3. In this sample, the factorial
loading improved for AG4, but did not improve for SS4, and new items
were incorporated to be analyzed in sample 4. The structure and alphas
of the facets were considered satisfactory for all the facets in sample 4.
The questionnaire was then administered to sample 5, confirming the
good structure (factor loadings > 0.50) of the facets and obtaining an
acceptable reliability (between 0.63 and 0.90). The ZKA-PQ/SF final
version has eight new or rewritten items (see Appendix). The rest of the
items come from the long version of the ZKA-PQ.
2.2. Sample 5: evaluation of the ZKA-PQ/SF: comparison with the ZKA-PQ
long form, and correlations with the NEO-FFI-R
This sample consisted of 1416 volunteers (696 males and 720 fe-
males) with a mean age of 34.62 (SD = 14.06). The mean age for males
was 35.07 (SD = 15.90) and for females 34.18 (SD = 16.17). The age
difference for males and females did not differ (t-test: 1.04; p < 0.30;
d: 0.06). The age range was between 18 and 90 years. Percentages of
participants for age ranges were as follows: 18–25 (39.6%), 26–35
(24.2%), and 36–50 (16.2%) and higher than 50 years old (20%). The
data were collected between 2014 and 2016. All participants completed
the following questionnaires: (1) the ZKA-PQ/SF, and (2) the NEO-FFI-
R. Details for each scale are provided below. In addition to the data
provided by sample 5 for the ZKA-PQ/SF, we also used previous data on
the ZKA-PQ to compare the factor structure and facets of these two
scales.
2.3. Instruments in this study
2.3.1. The Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-
PQ) and the ZKA-PQ/SF
The ZKA-PQ (Aluja et al., 2010) and the ZKA-PQ/SF have the same
five-factor structure and the same four facets for each factor. Thus, the
following description of the ZKA-PQ factors and facets applies just as
well to those of the ZKA-PQ/SF. A Spanish validation sample of the
ZKA-PQ found that the alpha consistency reliability of the five factors
176
Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181
ranged from 0.85 to 0.92 and from 0.65 to 0.90 for the facets (Aluja
et al., 2010). The psychometric properties of the ZKA-PQ were de-
monstrated in 23 cultures and languages (Rossier et al., 2016) using an
innovative method of translation and back-translation (Blanch & Aluja,
2016). The ZKA-PQ has five main factors: Aggressiveness (AG), Activity
(AC), Extraversion (EX), Neuroticism (NE), and Sensation Seeking (SS).
Each main factor comprises 40 items for the long form and 16 for the
short form, divided into 4 facets. AG includes Physical Aggression
(AG1), Verbal Aggression (AG2), Anger (AG3), and Hostility (AG4). AC
is divided into Work Compulsion (AC1), General Activity (AC2), Rest-
lessness (AC3), and Work Energy (AC4). EX is divided into Positive
Emotions (EX1), Social Warmth (EX2), Exhibitionism (EX3), and
Sociability (EX4). NE is divided into Anxiety (NE1), Depression (NE2),
Dependency (NE3), and Low self-esteem (NE4). Finally, SS is divided
into Thrill and Adventure Seeking (SS1), Experience Seeking (SS2),
Disinhibition (SS3), and Boredom Susceptibility/Impulsivity (SS4). The
response format is a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (4).
2.3.2. The revised NEO personality inventory shortened form (NEO-FFI-R)
The NEO-FFI-R is a revision of the NEO-FFI shortened version of the
NEO-PI-R (McCrae & Costa, 2004), and measures five personality di-
mensions: Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Openness to Experience
(O), Agreeableness (A), and Conscientiousness (C). The answer format
is a 5-point Likert-type scale (0–4), ranging from “Strongly disagree” (0)
to “Strongly agree” (4). Internal consistency reliability coefficients of the
NEO-FFI-R scales ranged from 0.75 to 0.82. In a Spanish validation
sample, the alpha reliability ranged from 0.71 to 0.82 (Aluja, Garcıa,
Rossier, & Garcıa, 2005).
2.4. Data analysis
Means, Standard Deviations, Kurtosis, Skewness and Cronbach
alpha reliabilities of scales were computed. Cohen's d was computed to
analyze gender differences. Factor analysis was conducted using the
same method as the ZKA-PQ original instrument: Principal Axis and
Varimax rotation (Aluja et al., 2010). We used the O'Connor (2000)
programs for SPSS for determining the number of components using
parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. After Procrustes rotation, factor
congruency coefficients were obtained. Correlations between factors
and dimensions were performed with Pearson product-moment corre-
lations statistic. Cohen (1988) suggested Small, Medium and Large ef-
fect sizes of product-moment correlations for coefficients equal or
larger than 0.10, 0.30 and 0.50, respectively. A correction of short
versus long test forms was estimated controlling for spurious inflation
(item overlap) due to shared error variance using Levy's formula1 (Levy,
1967). Differences between alpha reliabilities of long and short ZKA
versions were analyzed by the Feldt formula for independent samples
(Feldt, 1980) using ALPHATST software (Lautenschlager, 1989). Test-
retest reliabilities were determined using a second application of the
ZKA-PQ/SF in a three-month interval. We compared the goodness-of-fit
indexes obtained in an original ZKA-PQ sample (Aluja et al., 2010) with
the ZKA-PQ/SF of the present study. Convergent and divergent validity
of the ZKA-PQ/SF was analyzed by correlating dimensions and facets of
ZKA-PQ/SF with the NEO-FFI-R. SPSS (2011), AMOS (Arbuckle, 2010),
ALPHATST (Lautenschlager, 1989), and Shortform 1.11 packages were
used for statistical analyses.
1
Available in Paul Barrett Homepage (free statistical software: http://www.pbarrett.
net/Shortform/sform.html#:1. Last access: March 2018).
A. Aluja et al. Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181

Table 1
Descriptive, sex differences, alpha internal consistency reliability and correlation with age (r).
Males Females All Alpha Feldt χ2 p< r age

M SD M SD K S d α 1
α 2

Age 35.07 15.90 34.18 16.18 0.10 0.94 0.06 –

AG 34.99 8.91 34.52 8.96 −0.02 0.45 0.06 0.90 0.90 0.000 0.304 −0.22
AC 42.14 7.40 42.28 6.90 −0.05 0.00 −0.02 0.82 0.87 2.210 0.133 −0.03
EX 49.24 7.35 49.56 7.65 −0.03 −0.45 −0.04 0.86 0.88 0.493 0.487 −0.14
NE 32.49 8.59 35.95 8.67 −0.32 0.25 −0.40 0.86 0.92 6.474 0.010 −0.08
SS 39.78 8.76 36.64 9.16 −0.44 0.09 0.35 0.88 0.85 1.041 0.308 −0.41
AG1 7.43 3.24 6.22 2.79 0.34 1.05 0.40 0.86 0.90 2.365 0.120 −0.15
AG2 10.75 2.77 10.75 2.99 −0.57 −0.17 0 0.76 0.75 0.349 0.659 −0.27
AG3 8.65 2.81 9.16 2.91 −0.50 0.29 −0.18 0.78 0.81 0.450 0.509 −0.08
AG4 8.17 2.36 8.38 2.63 −0.04 0.44 −0.08 0.66 0.68 0.077 0.688 −0.20
AC1 7.98 2.91 7.94 2.70 −0.39 0.44 −0.01 0.74 0.73 0.029 0.649 −0.08
AC2 11.37 2.71 11.52 2.59 −0.34 −0.24 −0.06 0.79 0.76 0.373 0.547 −0.06
AC3 9.84 2.52 10.04 2.43 −0.36 0.14 −0.08 0.63 0.68 0.441 0.513 −0.06
AC4 12.95 2.40 12.78 2.32 0.49 −0.74 0.07 0.79 0.83 0.934 0.775 0.15
EX1 13.32 2.12 13.32 2.14 0.91 −0.85 0 0.76 0.73 0.290 0.591 −0.08
EX2 11.57 2.97 12.46 2.96 −0.65 −0.43 −0.30 0.81 0.81 0.000 0.304 0.04
EX3 11.91 2.60 11.27 2.86 −0.27 −0.49 0.23 0.84 0.76 3.418 0.060 0.24
EX4 12.44 2.35 12.51 2.30 0.06 −0.55 −0.03 0.64 0.75 0.277 0.091 −0.13
NE1 9.74 2.54 9.29 2.56 −0.29 0.21 0.18 0.70 0.72 0.099 0.687 −0.10
NE2 8.65 2.65 9.08 2.57 −0.40 0.35 −0.16 0.74 0.73 0.029 0.649 −0.02
NE3 7.99 2.65 9.06 2.79 −0.35 0.19 −0.39 0.69 0.70 0.022 0.630 −0.03
NE4 8.40 2.52 9.40 2.67 −0.21 0.56 −0.39 0.83 0.81 0.259 0.609 −0.11
SS1 7.45 2.69 8.40 2.85 −0.89 0.36 −0.34 0.78 0.73 0.872 0.351 −0.28
SS2 9.74 3.32 7.38 3.12 −0.55 −0.34 0.73 0.73 0.70 0.235 0.624 −0.33
SS3 11.04 2.97 10.81 3.01 −0.59 0.00 0.08 0.77 0.72 0.805 0.371 −0.45
SS4 10.09 2.95 9.78 2.84 −0.30 0.12 0.11 0.66 0.65 0.017 0.612 −0.29

Note: M: Mean; SD: Standard deviation: K: Kurtosis; S: Skewness; d: Cohen d. α1: Alpha reliability of the ZKA-PQ/SF in the current sample. Α2: Alpha reliability of ZKA-
PQ in the original Spanish sample (Aluja et al., 2010). R: Correlation with the age. AG: Aggressiveness; AC: Activity; EX: Extraversion; NE: Neuroticism; SS:
Impulsive-Sensation Seeking; AG1: Physical Aggression; AG2: Verbal Aggression; AG3: Anger; AG4: Hostility; AC1: Work Compulsion); AC2: General Activity; AC3:
Restlessness; and AC4: Work Energy; EX1: Positive Emotions; EX2: Social Warmth; EX3: Exhibitionism; EX4: Sociability; NE1: Anxiety; NE2: Depression; NE3:
Dependency; NE4: Low Self-Esteem; SS1: Thrill and Adventure Seeking); SS2: Experience Seeking; SS3: Disinhibition; SS4: Boredom Susceptibility/Impulsivity).

Table 2
Factor structure (principal axis) of the ZKA-PQ original Spanish (Aluja et al., 2010) vs the current ZKA-PQ/SF, Varimax Procrustes rotation and congruency coef-
ficients (C·C.).
ZKA-PQ (Sample; n = 1042) ZKA-PQ/SF (n = 1416) Procrustes rotation C.C.

I II III IV V I II III IV V I II III IV V

AG1 0.60 −0.06 −0.20 −0.01 0.27 0.62 0.00 −0.08 −0.07 0.24 0.61 0.01 −0.09 −0.09 0.26 0.98
AG2 0.74 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.23 0.69 −0.08 0.10 0.09 0.19 0.69 −0.07 0.08 0.07 0.21 0.98
AG3 0.87 0.11 −0.09 0.23 0.11 0.82 0.02 −0.06 0.29 0.02 0.82 0.03 −0.09 0.27 0.05 0.99
AG4 0.68 −0.04 −0.21 0.35 0.11 0.63 0.02 −0.14 0.28 0.06 0.63 0.03 −0.16 0.26 0.08 0.99
AC1 0.01 0.60 0.00 0.02 −0.04 −0.06 0.52 −0.09 0.04 0.07 −0.07 0.52 −0.08 0.04 0.08 0.96
AC2 −0.06 0.69 0.05 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.70 0.17 −0.01 0.13 −0.01 0.69 0.19 −0.01 0.14 0.98
AC3 0.24 0.52 0.11 0.09 0.23 0.29 0.52 0.11 0.13 0.21 0.28 0.52 0.11 0.12 0.23 1
AC4 −0.09 0.62 0.27 −0.18 −0.27 −0.10 0.52 0.19 −0.21 −0.15 −0.10 0.52 0.21 −0.20 −0.15 0.99
EX1 −0.14 0.20 0.69 −0.36 0.04 −0.13 0.28 0.57 −0.33 0.12 −0.13 0.26 0.59 −0.32 0.11 0.99
EX2 −0.11 0.09 0.75 −0.18 −0.05 −0.13 −0.04 0.56 −0.11 −0.07 −0.11 −0.05 0.56 −0.10 −0.08 0.97
EX3 0.11 0.09 0.50 −0.18 0.34 0.18 0.08 0.49 −0.09 0.37 0.18 0.07 0.49 −0.09 0.37 0.98
EX4 −0.10 0.03 0.78 −0.14 0.24 −0.01 0.15 0.75 −0.14 0.23 0.00 0.13 0.76 −0.13 0.23 0.98
NE1 0.35 0.15 −0.20 0.62 0.14 0.36 0.24 −0.13 0.61 0.14 0.36 0.25 −0.14 0.60 0.16 0.99
NE2 0.23 0.00 −0.22 0.75 −0.05 0.13 −0.04 −0.24 0.76 0.00 0.14 −0.03 −0.26 0.75 0.02 0.99
NE3 0.01 0.00 −0.05 0.71 −0.15 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.72 −0.04 0.13 0.02 0.00 0.72 −0.03 0.97
NE4 0.02 −0.08 −0.33 0.80 0.03 0.05 −0.13 −0.26 0.75 −0.01 0.06 −0.12 −0.38 0.74 0.00 1
SS1 0.06 0.12 0.04 −0.16 0.72 0.12 0.10 −0.07 −0.17 0.65 0.10 0.09 −0.06 −0.18 0.65 0.99
SS2 0.14 0.02 0.21 −0.02 0.74 0.01 0.07 0.11 0.05 0.72 −0.01 0.06 0.12 0.04 0.72 0.97
SS3 0.19 0.04 0.17 0.03 0.76 0.21 0.08 0.24 0.06 0.73 0.20 0.07 0.24 0.05 0.74 0.99
SS4 0.24 −0.02 −0.07 0.07 0.62 0.18 0.01 0.05 0.10 0.67 0.16 0.00 0.05 0.09 0.68 0.98
C.C 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.99 0.99 0.98
SSL 2.10 1.36 1.44 3.99 4.79 4.24 3.79 1.88 1.52 1.39
% 10.48 6.81 7.21 19.96 23.94 21.26 18.95 9.42 7.63 6.93

Note: AG1: Physical Aggression; AG2: Verbal Aggression; AG3: Anger; AG4: Hostility; AC1: Work Compulsion); AC2: General Activity; AC3: Restlessness; and AC4:
Work Energy; EX1: Positive Emotions; EX2: Social Warmth; EX3: Exhibitionism; EX4: Sociability; NE1: Anxiety; NE2: Depression; NE3: Dependency; NE4: Low Self-
Esteem; SS1: Thrill and Adventure Seeking); SS2: Experience Seeking; SS3: Disinhibition; SS4: Boredom Susceptibility/Impulsivity). SSL: sums of squared loadings.

177
A. Aluja et al. Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181

3. Results
3.1. Descriptive, sex differences and alpha reliability
Table 1 shows descriptive statistics, alphas, gender differences
(Cohen, 1988) and correlations between ZKA-PQ/SF and age. Kurtosis
and skewness values ( ± 1) indicate that frequencies were normally
distributed, whereas gender differences were equivalent to those re-
ported by Aluja et al. (2010). Men scored significantly higher on SS, and
women in NE dimensions with a medium effect size. We found, as ex-
pected, a strong negative correlation between SS and age. Alpha coef-
ficients were satisfactory and, most important, similar to those reported
by Aluja et al. (2010), although some facet alphas in the short version
were moderately lower than the long version.
The average of twenty alpha facets was 0.75 in the present study,
similar to that obtained by the long form in the original one (Aluja
et al., 2010). No statistically significant differences were found in the
alpha internal consistency of the long and short version of the ZKA,
except for NE (Feldt χ2: 6474; p < 0.01).
3.2. Comparison of ZKA-PA and ZKA-PQ/SF structure
We used the same original factor extraction method adopted by
Aluja et al. (2010) in the original ZKA-PQ study: Principal Axis with
Varimax rotation. In this study, we retained five factors using several
methods: eigenvalue ≥1 (Kaiser, 1960), Scree test (Cattell, 1966),
Horn's parallel analysis (Horn, 1965) and Velicer's minimum average
partial test (Velicer, 1976). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sam-
pling Adequacy was 0.83. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity was 10,734.9
(190 degrees of freedom; p < 0.001). The five extracted factors ex-
plained 64.16% of the variance (6.93% to 21.26%). We compared the
factor structure of the ZKA-PQ obtained in the original study (Aluja
et al., 2010) with the current shortened ZKA-PQ/SF. After a Varimax
Procrustes rotation between both factor structures, we obtained a ro-
bust factorial congruence between factors (columns) and facets (rows).
Facets ranged between 0.96 and 1, and factors between 0.97 and 0.99)
(Table 2).
3.3. Correlations between factors (saturations) and dimensions (scores) of
the ZKA-PQ/SF
The AG dimension correlated 0.34 and 0.30 with NE and SS re-
spectively. AC correlated with EX (0.24) positively, and EX correlated
negatively with NE (−0.24) and positively with SS (0.25). Correlations
between factors (factor loadings/saturations) and dimensions (scores
adding facets values) were higher than 0.93 (Table 3).
3.4. Test-retest reliability
Test-retest reliability of the ZKA-PQ/SF factors was conducted in an
independent sample of 240 undergraduate students (113 males and 127
females; mean of age of 22.31 and SD: 2.18). The temporal period be-
tween the first and second administration of the ZKA-PQ/SF was of
Table 4
Correlation between the ZKA-PQ and the ZKA-PQ/SF dimension and correla-
tions controlling the item overlap (ZKA-PQ*).
ZKA-PQ ZKA-PQ*
AG AC EX NE SS AG AC EX NE SS
ZKA-PQ/
SF AG 0.71 0.65
AC 0.90 0.85
EX 0.88 0.83
NE 0.86 0.82
SS 0.88 0.82
Note: AG: Aggressiveness; AC: Activity; EX: Extraversion; NE: Neuroticism; SS:
Sensation Seeking.
three months. The correlations were 0.83 for NE, 0.84 for SS, 0.80 for
EX, 0.78 for AC and 0.82 for AG.
We computed test-retest correlations over a two-month period be-
tween the long and the short ZKA-PQ forms using another independent
sample of 86 ungraduated students (41 males and 45 females; mean of
age of 21.56 and SD: 1.89). The correlations ranged between 0.86 and
0.90. However, given that the short form includes most of the items
from the long form, we used public Paul Barret software (Shortform) for
calculating the correction published by Levy (1967), which adjusts a
short vs long form (Part-Whole) correlation for the correlated error
variance associated with the short form items originally embedded in
the long form test. Adjusted correlations were higher than 0.80 for NE,
EX, SS, AC and 0.65 for AG (Table 4).
3.5. Confirmatory factor analysis: ZKA-PQ versus ZKA-PQ/SF
For confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), we used a Maximum
Likelihood method on the variance-covariance matrices of the 20 ZKA-
PQ facets. Several criteria of model fit were used: The standardized root
mean square residual (SRMS) (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1989); the Tucker-
Lewis index (TLI) (Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Tucker & Lewis, 1973); The
Expected Cross- Validation Index (ECVI)(Browne & Cudeck, 1993); the
comparative fit index (CFI) (Bentler, 1990); and the root mean square
error of approximation (RMSEA) (Steiger, 1990).
For comparing the ZKA-PQ and ZKA-PQ/SF, we used the same
procedure described in Aluja et al. (2010). The following models were
computed for the short version: Simple Structure: Each facet was only
linked to its own single latent factor. The remaining loadings were fixed
to zero. Salient Loadings: All secondary loadings greater than ± 0.40
were included in this model. Modest Loadings: All secondary loadings
greater than ± 0.20 were included in this model, and Correlated error
terms: In each model, the five pairs of facets with the largest mod-
ification indices (MI's) were included. The parameters were freely es-
timated in all CFA analyses. Additionally, in order to identify the
models, the variances of the latent exogenous variables (the factors)
and the regression coefficients of the error terms over the observed
endogenous variables (the facets) were fixed to 1.
In all four models for both ZKA versions, the goodness of fit indexes

Table 3
Correlation between the ZKA-PQ/SF dimensions (scores), dimensions and factors (factor loadings).
ZKA-PQ/SF dimensions ZKA-PQ factors (saturations)

AG AC EX NE SS AG AC EX NE SS

Dimensions AG 0.03 −0.07 0.34 0.30 0.96

AC 0.24 0.00 0.16 0.98
EX −0.24 0.25 0.93
NE 0.04 0.95
SS 0.94

Note: AG: Aggressiveness; AC: Activity; EX: Extraversion; NE: Neuroticism; SS: Sensation Seeking.

178
A. Aluja et al. Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181

Table 5
Goodness of fit indices for ZKA-PQ and ZKA-PQ/SF models.
Oblique five-factor models χ2* d.f. ECVI CFI TLI SRMR RMSEA (90% CI)

ZKA-PQ (n = 1042)(Aluja et al., 2010)

Simple structure 2506.50 160 2.50 0.76 0.72 0.11 0.12 (0.11–0.12)
Salient loadings (> 0.40) 2506.50 160 2.50 0.76 0.72 0.11 0.12 (0.11–0.12)
Modest loadings (> 0.20) 1265.18 142 1.35 0.89 0.85 0.06 0.09 (0.08–0.09)
Correlated error termsa 1000.47 137 1.06 0.91 0.88 0.05 0.08 (0.07–0.08)
AG1-SS1; EX4-SS4; EX1-SS4; NE3-SS1; AC1-AC4

ZKA-PQ/SF (n = 1416)(Current study)

Simple structure 2407.94 160 1.77 0.75 0.79 0.10 0.10 (0.09–0.10)
Salient loadings (> 0.40) 2407.94 160 1.77 0.75 0.79 0.10 0.10 (0.09–0.10)
Modest loadings (> 0.20) 1301.03 144 1.01 0.89 0.86 0.07 0.07 (0.07–0.08)
Correlated error terms AG1-SS1;SS1-NE1; AC4-SS1; AC1-AC4; AC1-AC4 1078.32 139 0.85 0.91 0.88 0.06 0.07 (0.06–0.07)

Note:*The associated p values were always lower than 0.001; S-1: d.f. Degree of freedom; ECVI: Expected Cross-Validation Index. TLI: Tucker-Lewis Index; CFI:
Comparative Fit Index; SRMR: Standardized root mean Square residual; RMSEA: Root mean square error of approximation and its 90% confidence interval.
a
The right number of degrees of freedom and the concrete pairs of facets correlated in this model appear in this table.

were unsatisfactory (Browne & Cudeck, 1993). When salient loadings Table 7
and correlated error terms were included, the goodness-of-fit-indices Correlations between ZKA-PQ/SF and NEO-FFI-R.
improved and the results were very similar for the ZKA-PQ and the O C E A N
ZKA-PQ/SF (Table 5).
Further, a new series of analyses were performed, in which the fa- AG1 −0.06 −0.18 0.08 −0.42 0.12
AG2 0.05 −0.26 0.07 −0.33 0.26
cets of each factor were treated as observed variables and the factor as a
AG3 −0.02 −0.23 −0.10 −0.33 0.53
latent variable. When the five domains were assessed separately for AG4 0.00 −0.27 −0.12 −0.50 0.53
each of the five dimensions, the goodness of fit indices for both ZKA AC1 0.12 0.17 0.13 −0.01 −0.06
versions were satisfactory, excluding the AC domain, in which the TLI AC2 0.03 0.34 0.37 0.02 −0.02
was low (< 0.90) (Table 6). In regard to the results for the Activity AC3 0.04 0.06 0.36 −0.18 0.16
AC4 −0.07 0.66 0.20 0.15 −0.32
trait, the bad fit reported for the long form was replicated (Aluja et al.,
EX1 0.14 0.36 0.52 0.14 −0.40
2010). The reason for the bad fit in the long form was the high corre- EX2 0.14 0.20 0.42 0.34 −0.22
lation between error terms of AC1 (Work Compulsion) and AC4 (Work EX3 0.26 −0.06 0.48 −0.14 −0.05
Energy). When this correlated error was allowed to be freely estimated EX4 0.17 0.14 0.69 0.17 −0.22
in the ZKA-PQ/SF model, the fit was also adequate (χ2 = 22.13; d.f.: 1; NE1 0.08 −0.22 −0.10 −0.13 0.61
NE2 0.14 −0.31 −0.29 −0.10 0.73
TLI: 0.91; CFI: 0.98). NE3 0.04 −0.13 −0.15 0.03 0.57
NE4 0.04 −0.36 −0.34 0.08 0.63
SS1 0.22 −0.11 0.35 −0.24 −0.05
3.6. Convergent and divergent validity
SS2 0.48 −0.21 0.38 −0.15 0.06
SS3 0.40 −0.22 0.49 −0.23 0.10
To assess the convergent and divergent validity of the ZKA-PQ/SF, a SS4 0.40 −0.29 0.28 −0.26 0.13
correlation matrix between the facets and dimensions of the ZKA-PQ/SF AG −0.01 −0.29 −0.02 −0.49 0.44
and the dimensions of the NEO-FFI-R was made (Table 7). Convergent AC 0.05 0.44 0.38 −0.01 −0.08
EX 0.24 0.21 0.71 0.18 −0.29
and divergent validity was demonstrated by strong positive and nega- NE 0.09 −0.32 −0.28 −0.03 0.79
tive correlations of the ZKA-PQ/SF. For the NEO, we found correlations SS 0.46 −0.25 0.46 −0.27 0.07
between ZKA-AG and NEO-N, ZKA-AC and NEO-C, ZKA-EX and NEO-E,
ZKA-NE and NEO-N, and ZKA-SS and both NEO-O and NEO-E (con- Note: N. Neuroticism; E. Extraversion; O. Openness; A. Agreeableness; C.
vergent). ZKA-AG negatively correlated to NEO-A and NEO-C, ZKA-SS Conscientiousness.
has a negative correlation with NEO-A and NEO-C, ZKA-EX correlates Correlations were significant to p < 0.01 starting r: 0.16.
Correlations were significant to p < 0.001 starting r: 0.19.
negatively with NEO-N, and ZKA-NE with NEO-C and NEO-E (di-
vergent). It should be noted that large effect sizes (r ≥ 0.50) were

Table 6
Goodness of fit indices for the factor structure for each of the five ZKA-PQ and ZKA-PQ/SF domains. Each domain consists of four facets (one-factor model).
χ2* d.f. ECVI TLI CFI SRMR RMSEA (90% CI)

ZKA-PQ AG 6.79 2 0.02 0.99 1 0.01 0.05 (0.01–0.09)

(Aluja et al., 2010) AC 166 2 0.05 0.39 0.80 0.09 0.28 (0.24–0.32)
EX 32.25 2 0.05 0.94 0.98 0.03 0.12 (0.08–0.15)
NE 39.24 2 0.05 0.93 0.98 0.03 0.13 (0.10–0.17)
SS 38.49 2 0.05 0.93 0.98 0.03 0.13 (0.09–0.17)
ZKA-PQ/SF AG 33.16 2 0.04 0.95 0.98 0.03 0.10 (0.08–0.14)
(Current study) AC 103.15 2 0.08 0.65 0.88 0.07 0.18 (0.16–0.22)
EX 14.73 2 0.02 0.97 0.99 0.02 0.07 (0.04–0.10)
NE 24.97 2 0.04 0.95 0.98 0.03 0.11 (0.08–0.14)
SS 2.74 2 0.01 0.99 1 0.00 0.02 (0.00–0.06)

Note:*The associated p values were always lower than 0.001 except for SS [S-1 (ns, S-2 (0.05)], AG [S-1 and S-3 (0.05)]. S-1: Spanish calibration sample; S-2: Spanish
validation sample; S-3: English sample; AG: Aggressiveness; AC: Activity; EX: Extraversion; SS: NE: Neuroticism; Sensation Seeking; d.f. Degree of freedom; ECVI:
Expected Cross-Validation Index. TLI: Tucker-Lewis index; CFI: Comparative Fit Index; SRMR: Standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA: root mean square
error of approximation and its 90% confidence interval.

179
A. Aluja et al.
observed among theoretically analogous scales.
4. Discussion
The main objective of this study was to develop a short version of
the ZKA-PQ with acceptable reliability for facets, and retaining the
same theoretical structure as the original long form and the 20 facets
(Aluja et al., 2010). The current trend in personality research is towards
reduced questionnaires in order to assess personality in a faster, but also
accurate, way. As with other personality models mentioned in the in-
troduction section, Zuckerman's personality model now has a short
version of the ZKA-PQ. The process of selection and adjustment of items
was long and laborious, and required an initial large database grouped
from past studies and three calibration studies prior to the current
study. Finally, eight items were replaced or rewritten, but the rest of the
items were included in the long form.
The results of the present study support the use of the ZKA-PQ/SF
given its good psychometric properties and strong equivalence to the
long version. It should be noted that one advantage of the ZKA-PQ/SF
over other short personality questionnaires (Aluja et al., 2014; Farmer
& Goldberg, 2008; Maples et al., 2015; McCrae & Costa, 2004; Patrick
et al., 2002) is that ZKA-PQ/SF retains all 20 facets of the original long
questionnaire.
The alpha reliabilities of the factors were higher than 0.86, and the
average of alpha of facets was 0.75 (range between 0.64 and 0.86),
similar to original ZKA-PQ validation results (Aluja et al., 2010). Only
four facets obtained alpha values slightly lower than 0.70 (AG4: 0.66,
EX4: 64, NE3: 0.69 and SS4: 0.66). Note that somewhat smaller alphas
were expected, since facets have only four items. Only the Neuroticism
factor obtained a significantly higher alpha reliability in the long ver-
sion compared to the short version. There was no significant difference
in the facets.
Test-retest reliability indices and the adjusted correlations between
the short and long versions were also quite satisfactory. Therefore, this
short version has similar reliabilities to other short forms such as the
HEXACO-60 (range from 0.77 to 0.80 [average of 0.78] in the college
sample, and from 0.73 to 0.80 [average of 0.75] in the community
sample for 10-item factors) (Ashton & Lee, 2009). Also, the NEO-FFI-R,
alpha reliabilities of 12-item factors ranged from 0.73 to 0.84 (McCrae
& Costa, 2004; also similar to the original NEO-FFI).
The factor structure of the ZKA-PQ/SF is very similar to the long
version, but the secondary factor loadings in other factors of the facets
of the AG4, EX1 and NE4 are somewhat smaller. Different rules for the
number of factors to retain concur on extracting five factors (Cattell,
1966; Kaiser, 1960; O'Connor, 2000). As Zuckerman's theory suggests,
factor inter-correlations indicate a relative orthogonality among the
five factors. Aggressiveness obtained moderate correlations with Neu-
roticism (0.34) and Sensation Seeking (0.30), while the rest of the ZKA-
PQ/SF inter-correlations ranged between 0.00 and 0.25. Nevertheless,
these coefficients make sense from a theoretical point of view
(Zuckerman, 2008; Zuckerman et al., 1993).
As with the long version of the ZKA-PQ (or other personality
questionnaires such as the NEO-PI-R; see McCrae, Zonderman, Costa,
Bond, & Paunonen, 1996), the simple structure of ZKA-PQ/SF obtained
unsatisfactory goodness-of-fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis.
One of the reasons for poor fit is the non-perfect orthogonality between
factors and facets. When modest loadings > 0.20 and the correlated
error terms are incorporated in the analyses, the adjustments improve
significantly (Aluja, García, García, & Seisdedos, 2005; McCrae et al.,
1996). The present results reproduce this pattern since simple structure
does not fit the data well, but as with ZKA-PQ and NEO-PI-R, the in-
clusion of modest loadings and correlated error terms produces a sa-
tisfactory fit.
The convergent and divergent validity were the last criteria adopted
in the current study. Some substantive aspects of the observed re-
lationships between the ZKA-PQ/SF factors and other personality
180
Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181
measures are noteworthy. The correlations between the ZKA-PQ/SF and
the NEO-FFI-R were similar to the ZKA-PQ and the NEO-PI-R (García,
Aluja, et al., 2012). Neuroticism and Extraversion obtained strong
correlations with similar scales in the NEO-PI-R. Activity correlated
with Conscientiousness, and Sensation Seeking with Extraversion and
Openness.
Summing up, the ZKA-PQ/SF is a short version of the ZKA-PQ, si-
milar in factor structure (20 facets), reliability and convergent and di-
vergent validity. In the introduction, we mentioned several reasons for
developing brief forms of personality questionnaires. In our opinion,
this study meets these considerations. The ZKA-PQ/SF (available in the
appendix for researchers for non-commercial use) is highly re-
commended for research within the Zuckerman personality model fra-
mework in any context which calls for brief measures. A strong point of
this study is the large sample, which is quite representative of the
general population, has a similar number of men and women, and is
without age differences between sexes. Further, the psychometric
characteristics of the ZKA-PQ/SF should be studied in different cultures
and countries, as has been done with the ZKA-PQ, in order to demon-
strate the short form's usefulness and Cross-cultural Generalizability in
the study of Zuckerman's Alternative Five-factor Model (Rossier et al.,
2016).
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.06.015.
Acknowledgments
We want to thank Dr. Michel Kuhlman (University of Delaware) for
reviewing the manuscript and his advice for improving the quality of
the study. We would also like to thank Dr. Marvin Zuckerman of the
University of Delaware for the opportunity to collaborate with him on
many articles and publications over the past 15 years. This article is in
honor to Prof. Zuckerman in recognition of his important contribution
to the psychology of personality.
References
Aluja, A., & Blanch, A. (2011). Neuropsychological behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and
behavioral approach system (BAS) assessment: A shortened sensitivity to punishment
and sensitivity to reward questionnaire version (SPSRQ–20). Journal of Personality
Assessment, 93(6), 628–636. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2011.608760.
Aluja, A., Blanch, A., & Balada, F. (2013). Normal personality versus pathological per-
sonality: Dimensional and predictive study. Personality and Mental Health, 7(4),
288–297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmh.1240.
Aluja, A., Blanch, À., Blanco, E., Martí-Guiu, M., & Balada, F. (2014). The dimensional
assessment of personality psychopathology basic questionnaire: Shortened versions
item analysis. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17(102), 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1017/sjp.2014.109.
Aluja, A., Blanch, A., García, L. F., García, O., & Escorial, S. (2012). Zuckerman-Kuhlman-
Aluja Personality Questionnaire as a predictor of MCMI-III personality disorder
scales: The role of facets. Personality and Mental Health, 6(3), 217–227. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1002/pmh.1185.
Aluja, A., Escorial, S., García, L. F., García, Ó., Blanch, A., & Zuckerman, M. (2013).
Reanalysis of Eysenck's, Gray's, and Zuckerman's structural trait models based on a
new measure: The Zuckerman–Kuhlman–Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ).
Personality and Individual Differences, 54(2), 192–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2012.08.030.
Aluja, A., García, O., & García, L. F. (2003a). Psychometric properties of the Zuckerman-
Kuhlman personality questionnaire (ZKPQ-III-R): A study of a shortened form.
Personality and Individual Differences, 34(7), 1083–1097. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
S0191-8869 (02)00097-1.
Aluja, A., García, O., & García, L. F. (2003b). Relationships among extraversion, openness
to experience, and sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3),
671–680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869 (02)00244-1.
Aluja, A., García, Ó., García, L. F., & Seisdedos, N. (2005). Invariance of the “NEO-PI-R”
factor structure across exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Personality and
Individual Differences, 38(8), 1879–1889. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.11.
014.
Aluja, A., Garcıa, O., Rossier, J., & Garcıa, L. F. (2005). Comparison of the NEO-FFI, the
NEO-FFI-R and an alternative short version of the NEO-PI-R (NEO-60) in Swiss and
Spanish samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(3), 591–604. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.05.014.
Aluja, A., Kuhlman, M., & Zuckerman, M. (2010). Development of the
Zuckerman–Kuhlman–Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA–PQ): A factor/facet
A. Aluja et al.
version of the Zuckerman–Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ). Journal of
Personality Assessment, 92(5), 416–431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.
497406.
Aluja, A., Rossier, J., García, L. F., Angleitner, A., Kuhlman, D. M., & Zuckerman, M.
(2006). A cross-cultural form of the ZKPQ (ZKPQ-50-CC) adapted to English, French,
German, and Spanish languages. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(4),
619–628. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.001.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2010). IBM SPSS Amos 19 user's guide. Crawfordville, FL: Amos
Development Corporation635.
Ashton, M., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions
of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(4), 340–345. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/00223890902935878.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,
107(2), 238–246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis
of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.
Blanch, A., & Aluja, A. (2016). Text mining a self-report back-translation. Psychological
Assessment, 28(6), 750–764. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000213.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A.
Bollen, & J. S. Long (Vol. Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Vol. 154. Testing
structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The screen test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 1(2), 245–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral (2nd Ed.). New Jersey:
Lawrence Earlbam Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Farmer, R. F., & Goldberg, L. R. (2008). A psychometric evaluation of the revised tem-
perament and character inventory (TCI-R) and the TCI-140. Psychological Assessment,
20(3), 281–291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012934.
Feldt, L. S. (1980). A test of the hypothesis that Cronbach's alpha coefficient is the same
for two tests administered to the same sample. Psychometrika, 49(1), 99–105.
García, L. F., Aluja, A., García, Ó., & Cuevas, L. (2005). Is openness to experience an
independent personality dimension? Journal of Individual Differences, 26(3), 132–138.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.26.3.132.
García, L. F., Escorial, S., García, Ó., Blanch, A., & Aluja, A. (2012). Structural analysis of
the facets and domains of the Zuckerman–Kuhlman–Aluja Personality Questionnaire
(ZKA–PQ) and the NEO PI–R. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94(2), 156–163.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2011.645935.
García, Ó., Aluja, A., García, L. F., Escorial, S., & Blanch, A. (2012). Zuckerman-Kuhlman-
Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) and Cloninger's temperament and char-
acter inventory revised (TCI-R): A comparative study. Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, 53(3), 247–257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00943.x.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis.
Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447.
Joireman, J., & Kuhlman, D. M. (2004). The Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality
Questionnaire: Origin, development, and validity of a measure to assess an alter-
native five-factor model of personality. On the psychobiology of personality (pp. 49–
64). Elsevier. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044209-9/50005-1.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications.
Chicago: SPSS publications.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1177/001316446002000116.
Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989). ALPHATST: Testing for differences in values of coefficient
alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 284.
Levy, P. (1967). The correction for spurious correlation in the evaluation of short-form
tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 84–86 (https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-
4679 (196701)23:1 < 84: AID-JCLP2270230123 > 3.0.CO; 2-2).
Levy, P. (1968). Short-form tests: A methodological review. Psychological Bulletin, 69(6),
410–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0025736.
181
Personality and Individual Differences 134 (2018) 174–181
Livesley, W. J., & Jackson, D. N. (2009). Manual for the dimensional assessment of per-
sonality pathology — Basic questionnaire. Port Huron, MI: Sigma Press.
Maples, J. L., Carter, N. T., Few, L. R., Crego, C., Gore, W. L., Samuel, D. B., ... D, J.
(2015). Testing whether the DSM-5 personality disorders trait model can be mea-
sured with a reduced set of items: An item response theory investigation of the
personality inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Assessment, 27(4), 1195–1210. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/pas0000120.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2004). A contemplated revision of the NEO five-factor
inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(3), 587–596. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/S0191-8869 (03)00118-1.
McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T., Bond, M. H., & Paunonen, S. V. (1996).
Evaluating replicability of factors in the revised NEO personality inventory:
Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. of Personality and Social
Psychology, 70(3), 552–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.552.
O'Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of compo-
nents using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods,
Instruments, & Computers. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807 (UNITED
STATES).
Patrick, C. J., Curtin, J. J., & Tellegen, A. (2002). Development and validation of a brief
form of the multidimensional personality questionnaire. Psychological Assessment,
14(2), 150–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.14.2.150.
Rossier, J., Aluja, A., Blanch, A., Barry, O., Hansenne, M., Carvalho, A. F., ... Karagonlar,
G. (2016). Cross-cultural generalizability of the alternative five-factor model using
the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire. European Journal of
Personality, 30(2), 139–157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.2045.
Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M., & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form de-
velopment. Psychological Assessment, 12, 102–111.
SPSS, I. (2011). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, version 20.0. New York: IBM Corp.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estima-
tion approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173–180. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4.
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor
analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170.
Velicer, W. F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial
correlations. Psychometrika, 41(3), 321–327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
BF02293557.
Zuckerman, M. (2002). Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ): An al-
ternative five-factorial model. In B. de Raad, & M. Perugini (Eds.). Big five assessment
(pp. 377–396). Göttingen: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
Zuckerman, M. (2008). Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionnaire (ZKPQ): An op-
erational definition of the alternative five factorial model of personality. The SAGE
handbook of personality theory and assessment: Volume 2 — Personality measurement and
testing (pp. 219–238). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: SAGE Publications Ltd. http://dx.doi.
org/10.4135/9781849200479.n11.
Zuckerman, M., & Aluja, A. (2014). Measures of sensation seeking. In G. J. Boyle, D. H.
Saklofske, & G. Matthews (Eds.). Measures of personality and social psychological con-
structs (pp. 352–380). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
B978-0-12-386915-9.00013-9.
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., & Camac, C. (1988). What lies beyond E and N? Factor
analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 96–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.54.1.96.
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison
of three structural models for personality: The big three, the big five, and the alter-
native five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 757. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.757.
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Thornquist, M., & Kiers, H. (1991). Five (or three) robust
questionnaire scale factors of personality without culture. Personality and Individual
Differences, 12(9), 929–941. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869 (91)90182-B.