Validity and reliability of the Agentive Steadfastness Index and its relation to temperament and character

Abstract

This is a quantitatively designed research study that examined agentive steadfastness, its measurement, and its relation to temperament and character. In response to a hitherto unarticulated construct, the lack of a valid and reliable measure of this construct, and the lack of clarity on how this construct empirically relates to temperament and character, we articulated and developed the construct of agentive steadfastness based on clinical experience and literature on related concepts. Items that captured this construct were formulated and compiled into the Agentive Steadfastness Index (ASI). The validity and the reliability of the ASI were empirically investigated based on both how agentive steadfastness finds expression in one’s life and on the subjective experience and orientation within agentive steadfastness. Study objectives were furthermore to examine the ASI’s association with demographic variables, its association to temperament and character, and which features of temperament and character predicted agentive steadfastness. This study deployed both a cross-sectional and a longitudinal design. The population for this study comprised of adult responders to recruitment through social media who were able to participate in this study in English. A sample of 511 respondents completed an online questionnaire that captured data on demographic variables and a battery of measures including: the Agentive Steadfastness Index; the Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised-240; the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale-10; the Global Assessment of Character Strengths-24; the Psychosocial Inventory of Ego Strengths-32; and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale-14. The ASI was found to be a valid measure as confirmed by its convergent, discriminant and endurance validity. Convergence validity was supported by a strong correlations (r > 0.7) between the ASI and each of the CD-RISC-10 (r = 0.715) and the GACS-24 (r = 0.704). Discriminant validity was confirmed by a weak inverse correlation (r = -0.244) between the ASI and the PIES-32, and a moderate inverse correlation (r = -0.599) between the ASI and the HAM-A-14. Furthermore, the results on the paired t-tests between the total score of each of the PIES-32 and HAM-A-14 showed significant differences between both the ASI and the PIES-32 (p < 0.001) and the ASI and the HAM-A-14 (p < 0.001). Results on the ASI compared to each of the CD-RISC-10, GACS-24 and the scales of the TCI showed significant differences between the ASI and each of the CD-RISC-10 (p < 0.001) , the GACS-24 (p < 0.001), and for each of the seven scales of the TCI (i.e., novelty seeking (p < 0.001); harm avoidance (p < 0.001); reward dependence (p < 0.001); persistence (p < 0.001); self-directedness (p < 0.001); cooperativeness (p < 0.001); and self-transcendence (p < 0.001)) were considered as strong evidence of discriminant validity. The endurance validity of the ASI was confirmed by the strong Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient (r = 0.763) for the total score of the ASI six-months apart; and for each of the 27-items of the ASI over a six-month period was confirmed by the strength of the Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients. Through a factor analysis, the ASI’s reliability was optimised through the removal of redundant items and a clear three factor model emerged expressing “Stably forwards: Secure and grateful from past to future”, “Inner- and interrelatedness: Open and sensitive outwards’ and “Agentively shaping life by goals’. The resulting 22-item ASI measured consistently (α = 0.937) with a split-half reliability coefficient of 0.838. It yielded a low standard error of measurement of 0.656 for a theoretical measurement range of 155. The ASI’s relation to temperament and character was empirically confirmed by the results on the Pearson’s correlations and the regression analysis. Strong Pearson’s correlations pertained between the TCI’s scale of self-directedness and the ASI (r = 0.767); and also between three of the TCI’s subscales in relationship with the ASI (i.e., purposefulness (r = 0.743); anticipatory worry (negative)(r = -0.727); and responsibility (r = 0.705)). Statistically significant relationships at p < 0.001 pertained between the TCI’s scale of self-directedness and the ASI (p < 0.001; β = 0.662); and three of the TCI’s subscales (i.e., of purposefulness (p < 0.001; β = 0.367); anticipatory worry (negative)(p < 0.001; β = -0.321); and responsibility (p < 0.001; β = 0.206)) in relationship with the ASI. Despite the statistically significant relationships probability at β < 0.2 were considered less related in the relationships for three of the TCI’s scales (i.e., harm avoidance (negative)(p < 0.001; β = -0.151); self-transcendence (p < 0.001; β = 0.143); persistence (negative)(p = 0.036; β = -0.070), and reward dependence (p = 0.014 ; β = 0.075)); and for 25 of the 29 subscale of the TCI in relationship with the ASI. Two of the seven TCI’s scales (i.e., cooperativeness (p = 0.780; β = -0.010); and novelty seeking (p = 0.125; β = 0.046)); and one of the 29 TCI’s subscales (i.e., exploratory excitability (p = 0.700; β < 0.001)) were not statistically significantly related to the ASI. The ASI as a valid and a reliable measure of agentive steadfastness has applications and implications to both research and clinical practice. For example in the field of research, regarding screening and evaluation, relevant prognostic parameters and long-term outcomes. For example in clinical practice, in conceptualisation, formulation, prognosis, treatment, and future planning and selecting an approach in psychotherapy.