There have been other studies done Costa and McCrae in 1992, Gould, Dieffenbach, and Moffett in 2002, Stumpf and Parker in 2000 and a few others. Given the reading all the studies where reliable and valid. All participants completed and information and consent form, along with the questionnaire. The athletes completed the questionnaire and mailed them back in, the clinic patients handed the questionnaires back in at the clinic. Measures used where The Positive and Negative Perfectionism Scale (PANPS; Terry-Short et al., 1995), Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders and Personality Disorders (SCID-I/P, Version 2.0; First, Spitzer, Gibbon, & Williams, 1996; SCID-II, Version 2.0; First, Spitzer, Gibbon, Williams, & Lorna, 1994), Beck Depression Inventory - Second Edition (BDI-II; Beck et al., 1996), The NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992), and The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI; Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983)(Egan, S. J., Piek, J. P., & Dyck, M. J.,2015). From the reading as far as I can tell the study was conducted ethically. Privacy of the participants was maintained; no harm came to anyone that participated. The only thing I find with the article is taking athletes and clinic patient, why take people at two different ends of the scale. Did any of the patients at the clinic have more than just anxiety or depression that could have compromised the study? The APA ethics is always trying to improve to continue to keep anyone participating in a study safe and information kept private. This is always important, so the study does not become bias.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read the whole page?
- Fall '15
- Big Five personality traits, egan, Costa, Dyck, McCrae