Advertisement

An assessment of the psychometric properties of the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale and its prediction in safety performance in a Portuguese adult sample

  • Cátia Sousa
  • Gabriela Gonçalves
  • António Sousa
  • Ezequiel Pinto
Article
  • 44 Downloads

Abstract

This study aims to present the psychometric properties of the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale in a Portuguese sample. Three studies were performed: the first study provides psychometric evidence pertaining to its reliability and factor structure, an analysis of the measurement invariance of the BSSS across gender and age, and an examination of the differences scores on the scale regarding gender, age and marital status (n = 526); the second study consists of an assessment of convergent, discriminant and postdictive validity (n = 240); and the third study includes a test-retest of the BSSS (n = 72). A four-factor model yielded the best fit to the data with good reliability and validity. The scale showed non-invariance between genders and between ages, which makes it less generalizable and susceptible to different populations. Convergent validity with the variables risk taking, need for arousal and extraversion, and discriminant validity between neuroticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness, were demonstrated. The scale presents good temporal stability and represent an important tool for psychological assessment of personality and behavior, and as a predictor of safety performance.

Keywords

Brief Sensation Seeking Scale Validation Portuguese population Psychometric properties Invariance Safety performance 

Notes

Funding

“This paper is financed by National Funds provided by FCT- Foundation for Science and Technology through project UID/SOC/04020/2013”.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Aluja, A., García, O., & García, L. (2002). A comparative study of Zuckerman’s three structural models for personality through the NEO-PI-R, ZKPQ-III-R, EPQ-RS and Goldberg’s 50-bipolar adjectives. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(5), 713–725.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00186-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aluja, A., Garcia, O., & Garcia, L. (2003). 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00097-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnett, J. (1991). Still crazy after all these years: Reckless behavior among young adults aged 23–27. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(12), 1305–1313.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90205-P.
  4. Arnett, J. (1994). Sensation seeking: A new conceptualization and a new scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(2), 289–296.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90165-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnett, J., Offer, D., & Fine, M. (1997). Reckless driving in adolescence: 'State' and 'trait' factors. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 29(1), 57–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(97)87007-8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Authority for Working Conditions (2016). Estatísticas de Acidentes de Trabalho [Statistics of Work Accidents]. Retrieved from http://www.act.gov.pt/(pt-PT)/CentroInformacao/Estatistica/Paginas/default.aspx
  7. Ballester-Arnal, R., Ruiz-Palomino, E., Espada-Sánchez, J., Morell-Mengual, V., & Gil-Llario, M. (2018). Psychometric properties and validation of the sexual sensation seeking scale in Spanish adolescents: Brief screening method for use in research and clinical practice. Personality and Individual Differences, 122(1), 47–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.10.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bancroft, J., Janssen, E., Strong, D., Carnes, L., Vukadinovic, Z. & Long, J. (2003). Sexual risk-taking in gay men: The relevance of sexual arousability, mood, and sensation seeking. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(6), 555–572.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026041628364.
  9. Barrault, S., & Varescon, I. (2013). Impulsive sensation seeking and gambling practice among a sample of online poker players: Comparison between non pathological, problem and pathological gamblers. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(5), 502–507.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.04.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bártolo-Ribeiro, R., & Aguiar, R. (2008). Avaliação Rápida da Personalidade: Estudo preliminar da versão portuguesa reduzida de 10 itens do Big Five Inventory [Rapid Personality Assessment: Preliminary study of the reduced 10-item Portuguese version of the Big Five Inventory]. In A. P. Noronha, C. Machado, L. Almeida, M. Gonçalves, S. Martins, & V. Ramalho (Eds.), Actas da XIII Conferência Internacional Avaliação Psicológica: Formas e Contextos [Proceedings of the XIII International Conference on Psychological Assessment: Forms and Contexts]. Braga: Psiquilíbrios.Google Scholar
  11. Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bentler, P., & Bonett, D. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bentler, P., & Wu, E. (2002). EQS for windows user’s guide. Encino: Multivariate Software, Inc..Google Scholar
  14. Bertoquini, V., & Pais-Ribeiro, J. (2006). Estudo de formas reduzidas do NEO-PI-R: Exame do neo FFI, do neo–FFI-R, e do neo FFI-P Para o contexto português [study of reduced forms of NEO-PI-R: Neo FFI, neo-FFI-R, and neo FFI-P for the Portuguese context]. Psicologia: Teoria, Investigação e Prática, 11(1), 85–102 Retrieved from http://www.scielo.mec.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0874-20492014000200001&lng=pt&nrm=iso.Google Scholar
  15. Bratko, D., & Butkovic, A. (2003). Stability of genetic and environmental effects from adolescence to young adulthood: Results of Croatian longitudinal twin study of personality. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 10(1), 151–157.  https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.10.1.151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Breivik, G., Sand, T., & Sookermany, A. (2017). Sensation seeking and risk-taking in the Norwegian population. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 266–272.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.07.039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brewer, G., Carter, G., Lyons, M., & Green, J. (2018). Sensation-seeking in women does not affect their preference for dark triad male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 130, 92–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Burri, A. (2017). Sexual sensation seeking, sexual compulsivity, and gender identity and its relationship with sexual functioning in a population sample of men and women. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 14(1), 69–77.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.10.013.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Buss, D. (2015). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  20. Byrne, B. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  21. Chen, F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indices to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chen, F., Hayes, A., Carver, C., Laurenceau, J., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Modeling general and specific variance in multifaceted constructs: A comparison of the bifactor model to other approaches. Journal of Personality, 80(1), 219–251.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00739.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chen, X., Li, F., Nydegger, L., Gong, J., Ren, Y., Dinaj-Koci, V., Sun, H., & Stanton, B. (2013). Brief sensation seeking scale for Chinese – Cultural adaptation and psychometric assessment. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(5), 604–609.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.007.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Clarke, S., & Robertson, I. (2007). An examination of the role of personality in work accidents using meta-analysis. Applied Psychology, 57(1), 94–108.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00267.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cohen, E., & Fromme, K. (2002). Differential determinants of young adult substance use and high-risk sexual behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1124–1150.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb01429.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653–665.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Curran, P., West, S., & Finch, J. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dahlen, E., & White, R. (2006). The big five factors, sensation seeking, and driving anger in the prediction of unsafe driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(5), 903–915.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dahlen, E., Martin, R., Ragan, K., & Kuhlman, M. (2005). Driving anger, sensation seeking, impulsiveness, and boredom proneness in the prediction of unsafe driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37(2), 341–348.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2004.10.006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. de Vries, R., de Vries, A., & Feij, J. (2009). Sensation seeking, risk-taking, and the HEXACO model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(6), 536–540.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.05.029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. DeVellis, R. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  32. Drane, C., Modecki, K., & Barber, B. (2017). Disentangling development of sensation seeking, risky peer affiliation, and binge drinking in adolescent sport. Addictive Behaviors, 66, 60–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.11.001.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Elander, J., West, R., & French, D. (1993). Behavioral correlates of individual differences in road-traffic crash risk: An examination method and findings. Psychological Bulletin, 113(2), 279–294.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.113.2.279.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Evans, L. (1993). Comments on driver behavior and its role in traffic crashes. Alcohol Drugs Driving, 9, 185–195 Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-47351-001.Google Scholar
  35. Eysenck, S., & Zuckerman, M. (1978). The relationship between sensation-seeking and Eysenck's dimensions of personality. British Journal of Psychology, 69(4), 483–487.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1978.tb02125.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fajkowska, M. (2017). Personality traits: Hierarchically organized systems. Journal of Personality, 86(1), 36–54.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fan, H.-P., Lim, M.-R., Bai, C.-H., Huang, P.-W., Chiang, Y.-H., & Chiu, W.-T. (2014). Validation of the Chinese-language brief sensation seeking scale: Implications for risky riding behaviors of parental motorcyclists and their child passengers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 73, 333–339.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.09.015.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Figner, B., Mackinlay, R., Wilkening, F., & Weber, E. (2009). Affective and deliberative processes in risky choice: Age differences in risk taking in the Columbia card task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 709–730.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Finney, S., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. Hancock & R. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269–314). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Franken, R., Gibson, J., & Rowland, G. (1992). Sensation seeking and the tendency to view the world as threatening. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(1), 31–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90214-A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Fromme, K., Katz, E., & Rivet, K. (1997). Outcome expectancies and risk-taking behavior. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 421–442.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021932326716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Giebel, G., Moran, J., Schawohl, A., & Weierstall, R. (2015). The thrill of loving a dominant partner: Relationships between preference for a dominant male, sensation seeking, and trait anxiety. Personal Relationships, 22(2), 275–284.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Glicksohn, J., & Abulafia, J. (1998). Embedding sensation seeking within the big three. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(6), 1085–1099.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00096-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. González-Iglesias, B., Gómez-Fraguela, J., & Luengo, M. (2014). Sensation seeking and drunk driving: The mediational role of social norms and self-efficacy. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 71, 22–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.05.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(12), 1417–1432.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  48. Hakistan, R. (2002). Biographical information about occupationally descriptive attitudes, traits, and abilities (BIODATA-250). [Unpublished inventory]. University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  49. Hambleton, R. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In R. Hambleton, P. Merenda, & C. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 3–38). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  50. Hare, R. (1985). Comparison of procedures for the assessment of psychopathy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(1), 7–16.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.53.1.7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hassan, T., Vinodkumar, M., & Vinod, N. (2017). Role of sensation seeking and attitudes as mediators between age of driver and risky driving of powered two wheelers. Journal of Safety Research, 62, 209–215.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2017.06.019.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Heino, A., van der Molen, H., & Wilde, G. (1996). Differences in risk experience between sensation avoiders and sensation seekers. Personality and Individual Differences, 20(1), 71–79.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00152-V.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Heinrich, H., Petersen, D., & Roos, N. (1980). Industrial accident prevention: A safety management approach (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  54. Hoyle, R., Stephenson, M., Palmgreen, P., Puzzles, L., & Donohew, L. R. (2002). Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(3), 401–414.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00032-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hughes, B., Newstead, S., Anund, A., Shu, C., & Falkmer, T. (2015). A review of models relevant to road safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 74, 250–270.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.06.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Iversen, H., & Rundmo, T. (2002). Personality, risky driving and accident involvement among Norwegian drivers. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(8), 1251–1263.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00010-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Johnson, T., Shavitt, S., & Holbrook, A. (2011). Survey response styles across cultures. In D. Matsumoto & F. van de Vijver (Eds.), Cross cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 130–175). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Jonah, B. (1997). Sensation seeking and risky driving: A review and synthesis of the literature. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 29(5), 651–665.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(97)00017-1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Khodarahimi, S. (2015). Sensation-seeking and risk-taking behaviors: A study on young Iranian adults. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 10(4), 721–734.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9350-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. LeRoy, Z. (2005). Personality trait and cognitive ability correlates of unsafe behaviours. [Master Thesis]. The University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  61. Li, C., & Tsai, B. (2013). Impact of extraversion and sensation seeking on international tourism choices. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41, 327–334.  https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.2.327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Marôco, J. (2011). Análise Estatística com o SPSS statistics [statistical analysis with SPSS statistics] (5th ed.). Pero Pinheiro: Report Number.Google Scholar
  63. Marôco, J. (2014). Análise de Equações Estruturais [Structural Equation Analysis]. Pero Pinheiro: Report Number.Google Scholar
  64. Marôco, J., & Garcia-Marques, T. (2006). Qual a fiabilidade do alfa de Cronbach? Questões antigas e soluções modernas? [How reliable is Cronbach's alpha? Old issues and modern solutions?]. Laboratório de Psicologia, 4(1), 65–90 Retrieved from http://publicacoes.ispa.pt/index.php/lp/article/viewFile/763/706.Google Scholar
  65. Martin, C. A., Kelly, T. H., Rayens, M. K., Brogli, B., Himelreich, K., Brenzel, A., Bingcang, C. M., & Omar, H. (2004). Sensation seeking and symptoms of disruptive disorder: Association with nicotine, alcohol, and marijuana use in early and mid-adolescence. Psychological Reports, 94(3), 1075–1082.  https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.94.3.1075-1082.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Moghaddam, A., Tabibi, Z., Sadeghi, A., Ayati, E., & Ravandi, A. (2016). Screening out accident-prone Iranian drivers: Are their at-fault accidents related to driving behavior? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 46(b), 451–461.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.09.027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Muñiz, J., Elosua, P., & Hambleton, R. (2013). Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: segunda edición. Psicothema, 25(2), 151–157.  https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. National Road Safety Authority (2016). Estatísticas de Sinistralidade [Accident Statistics]. Retrieved from http://www.ansr.pt/Pages/default.aspx
  69. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc..Google Scholar
  70. Oltedal, S., & Rundmo, T. (2006). The effects of personality and gender on risky driving behaviour and accident involvement. Safety Science, 44(7), 621–628.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2005.12.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Osburn, H. (2000). Coefficient alpha and related internal consistency reliability coefficients. Psychological Methods, 5(3), 343–355.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.5.3.343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Paulhus, D. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of social psychological attitudes, Vol. 1. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Paulhus, D., & Williams, K. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–563.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Paunonen, S., & Jackson, D. (2000). What is beyond the big five? Plenty! Journal of Personality, 68(5), 821–835.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00117.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Pillay, M. (2015). Accident causation, prevention and safety management: A review of the state-of-the-art. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 1838–1845.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 897–903.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  77. Primi, C., Narducci, R., Benedetti, D., Donati, M., & Chiesi, F. (2011). Validity and reliability of the Italian version of the brief sensation seeking scale (BSSS) and its invariance across age and gender. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 18(4), 231–241 Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/836b/b569d1ebc08b6e929f1adf14821a18f4227a.pdf.Google Scholar
  78. Rahemi, Z., Ajorpaz, N., Esfahani, M., & Aghajani, M. (2017). Sensation-seeking and factors related to dangerous driving behaviors among Iranian drivers. Personality and Individual Differences, 116, 314–318.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.05.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less:A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(1), 203–212.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Read, J., Wood, M., Kahler, C., Maddock, J., & Palfai, T. (2003). Examining the role of drinking motives in college student alcohol use and problems. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17(1), 13–23.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164X.17.1.13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Reise, S. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(5), 667–696.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.715555.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Reise, S., Morizot, J., & Hays, R. (2007). The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl. 1), 19–31.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9183-7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Reise, S., Moore, T., & Haviland, M. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 544–559.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.496477.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Roberti, J. (2004). A review of behavioral and biological correlates of sensation seeking. Journal of Research in Personality, 38(3), 256–279.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00067-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Roeser, K., McGregor, V., Stegmaier, S., Mathew, J., Kübler, A., & Meule, A. (2016). The dark triad of personality and unethical behavior at different times of day. Personality and Individual Differences, 88, 73–77.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Rosenbloom, T. (2003). Risk evaluation and risky behaviors of high and low sensation seekers. Social Behaviors and Personality, 31, 375–386.  https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2003.31.4.375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Sabey, B., & Taylor, H. (1980). The known risks we run: The highway (TRRL Supplementary Report 567). Crowthorn: Transport and Road Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
  88. Saletti, S., Chang, D., Pérez-Aranibar, C., & Campos, F. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale in Peruvian teenagers. Psychotema, 29(1), 133–138.  https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schwebel, D., Severson, J., Ball, K., & Rizzo, M. (2006). Individual difference factors in risky driving: The roles of anger/hostility, conscientiousness, and sensation-seeking. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38(4), 801–810.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.02.004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Sireci, S., & Faulkner-Bond, M. (2014). Validity evidence based on test content. Psicothema, 26(1), 100–107.  https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.256. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Spaan, M. (2006). Test and item specifications development. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(1), 71–79.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0301_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Stephenson, M., Hoyle, R., Palmgreen, P., & Slater, M. (2003). Brief measures of sensation seeking for screening and large-scale surveys. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 72(3), 279–286.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2003.08.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Stephenson, M., Velez, L., Chalela, P., Ramírez, A., & Hoyle, R. (2007). The reliability and validity of the brief sensation seeking scale (BSSS-8) with young adult Latino workers: Implications for tobacco and alcohol disparity research. Addiction, 102(2), 79–91.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01958.x.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  95. Tao, D., Zhang, R., & Qu, X. (2017). The role of personality traits and driving experience in self-reported risky driving behaviors and accident risk among Chinese drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 99(A), 228–235.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.12.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Ulleberg, P. (2001). Personality subtypes of young drivers. Relationship to risk-taking preferences, accident involvement, and response to a traffic safety campaign. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 4(4), 279–297.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(01)00029-8.
  97. Ulleberg, P., & Rundmo, T. (2002). Risk-taking attitudes among young drivers: the psychometric qualities and dimensionality of an instrument to measure young drivers’ risk-taking attitudes. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43(3), 227–237.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.00291.
  98. Ulleberg, P., & Rundmo, T. (2003). Personality, attitudes and risk perception as predictors of risky driving behaviour among young drivers. Safety Science, 41(5), 427–443.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(01)00077-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Verma, A., Chakrabarty, N., Velmurugan, S., Bhat, P., & Kumar, D. (2017). Sensation seeking behavior and crash involvement of Indian bus drivers. Transportation Research Procedia, 25, 4750–4762.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Vodanovich, S., Wallace, J., & Kass, S. (2005). A confirmatory approach to the factor structure of the boredom proneness scale: Evidence for a two-factor short form. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85(3), 295–303.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8503_05.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Wåhlberg, A., Barraclough, P., & Freeman, J. (2017). Personality versus traffic accidents; meta-analysis of real and method effects. Transportation Research. Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 44, 90–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.10.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. West, S., Finch, J., & Curran, P. (1995). Structural equation models with non-normal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  103. Whissell, R., & Bigelow, B. (2003). The speeding attitude scale and the role of sensation seeking in profiling young drivers at risk. Risk Analysis, 23(4), 811–820.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00358.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Wishart, D., Somoray, K., Rowland, B. (2017). Reducing reversing vehicle incidents in Australian fleet settings-a case study. In Stanton N., Landry S., Di Bucchianico G., Vallicelli A. (Eds.), Advances in human aspects of transportation. Advances in intelligent systems and computing (vol. 484, pp. 733–744). USA: Springer.Google Scholar
  105. Zakletskaia, L., Mundt, M., Balousek, S., Wilson, E., & Fleming, M. (2009). Alcohol-impaired driving behavior and sensation-seeking disposition in a college population receiving routine care at campus health services centers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 41(3), 380–386.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2008.12.006.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Zuckerman, M. (1971). Dimensions of sensation seeking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36(1), 45–52.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Zuckerman, M. (1978). Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimal level of arousal. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  108. Zuckerman, M., & Neeb, M. (1980). Demographic influences in sensation seeking and expressions of sensation seeking in religion, smoking and driving habits. Personality and Individual Differences, 1(3), 197–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(80)90051-3.
  109. Zuckerman, M. (1987). Biological connection between sensation seeking and drug abuse. In J. Engel & L. Oreland (Eds.), Brain review systems and abuse (pp. 161–176). New York: Raven Press.Google Scholar
  110. Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Zuckerman, M. (2007). The sensation seeking scale V (SSS-V): Still reliable and valid. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1303–1305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Zuckerman, M. (2008). Sensation seeking and risky behavior. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  113. Zuckerman, M., & Glicksohn, J. (2016). Hans Eysenck's personality model and the constructs of sensation seeking and impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 103, 48–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Zuckerman, M., & Kuhlman, D. (2000). Personality and risk taking: Common biosocial factors. Journal of Personality, 68(6), 999–1029.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Zuckerman, M., Eysenck, S., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Sensation seeking in England and America: Cross-cultural age and sex comparisons. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46(1), 139–149.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.46.1.139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Zuckerman, M., Buchsbaum, M., & Murphy, D. (1980). Sensation seeking and its biological correlates. Psychological Bulletin, 88(1), 187–214.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.1.187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Teta, P., Joireman, J., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models of personality: The big three, the big five, and the alternative five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 757–768.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Zumdick, W. (2007). Personality, Sensation Seeking and Holiday Preference [bachelor these]. Münster: University of Twente.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Algarve, Campus de GambelasFaroPortugal
  2. 2.CIP-Centre for Research in PsychologyUniversity of AlgarveFaroPortugal
  3. 3.CIMA - Center for Marine and Environmental ResearchUniversity of AlgarveFaroPortugal
  4. 4.Centre for Research and Development in HealthUniversity of AlgarveFaroPortugal

Personalised recommendations