Construct validity of the Anagram Follow-up Questionnaire and the Attributional Style Questionnaire

Attributional style refers to how individuals make causal explanations for events which they experience. Two methods of assessing attributional style were examined in the present study. The Anagram Follow-up questionnaire (AFQ) emerged from the gender differences literature and the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) developed from the depression literature.; Both literature areas described "good" and "bad" attributional styles and it has been proposed that these two areas of attributional style assessment may overlap (Abramson, Seligman, and Teasdale, 1978). It was hypothesized that through factor analysis "good" attributional styles and "bad" attributional style would emerge for positive and negative events.; The final participant group consisted of 90 male and 90 female undergraduate college students. They completed two instruments (Anagram Follow-up Questionnaire and Attributional Style Questionnaire), and an anagram task. Participants were placed into either a positive events group or a negative events group dependent on their responses regarding experienced performance on the anagram task.; The correlation matrix reflects greater intra-relatedness than inter-relatedness between the two measures of attributional style. Factor analysis with an orthogonal rotation was completed. The results indicate that for the positive events group two independent factors emerged accounting for 57% of the total variance. Factor one corresponds to the three ASQ dimensions and Factor 2 reflected AFQ dimensions. Three factors emerged for the negative events group accounting for 64% of the total variance. Factor 1 consists of internality (ASQ) and ability, task difficulty, and luck (AFQ). Factor 2 consists of the remaining ASQ dimensions (globality and stability). Factor 3 consists of the effort AFQ dimension.; In general, the suggested linkage between the two literature areas has not been supported. One consideration regarding the results is that although the AFQ and the ASQ are the best and most accepted forms of attributional style assessment in their particular areas, the instruments demonstrate some poor psychometric properties. Other considerations include the notion that the ASQ and the AFQ assess a qualitatively different attributional style, differences in the operationalization of the construct, differences in format of the questionnaires, and use of an artificial task.; In summary, factor analysis was utilized to examine the ability of the AFQ and the ASQ to measure a singular construct, attributional style. Results indicate that these two instruments appear to measure independent constructs with limited overlap. Future research may include establishing improved psychometrics for the measures. The findings suggest that counselors should use these instruments as process tools for the exploration of clients' attributional styles.