Reliability, homogeneity and the construct validity of Cattell's 16PF

This paper reviews criticisms of the psychometric properties of Cattell's Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire and examines Cattell's claims that 16PF scale reliabilities and factor validities are seriously underestimated by conventional internal consistency approaches to reliability estimation. On large samples of British adults and undergraduates no evidence was found to support the claim that the 16PF is deliberately heterogeneous in item content. No presence of suppressor effects or balancing of specifics were found in the 16PF scales, most of which were reasonably homogenous by conventional standards. Conventional internal-consistency reliability estimates in fact give very similar results to alternate form reliability coefficients and Cattell's factorial validities. 16PF scales which were particularly poor in terms of scale consistency were L, M and N with C, O and Q4 emerging as measures of essentially the same trait of anxiety.