Assessment OnlineFirst, published on February 18, 2009 as doi:10.1177/1073191108328890 Assessment Volume XX Number X Month XXXX xx-xx © 2009 Sage Publications Development and Initial Validation of 10.1177/1073191108328890 http://asmnt.sagepub.com hosted at the Disinhibition Inventory http://online.sagepub.com A Multifaceted Measure of Disinhibition Lilian Dindo Elizabeth McDade-Montez Leigh Sharma David Watson Lee Anna Clark University of Iowa The broad personality trait of disinhibition reflects the tendency to behave in an underconstrained versus overconstrained manner and is associated with externalizing psychopathology and risk-taking behaviors. This article describes the development and initial validation of the Disinhibition Inventory (DIS-I), a multifaceted measure of disinhibition that helps explicate the nature of this important higher-order dimension more fully. Factor analyses of an initial item pool resulted in five content-distinct, yet correlated scales measuring both high (Manipulativeness, Distractibility, Risk Taking) and low (Prosociality, Orderliness) levels of disinhibition that cross-validated in an independent sample. Evidence for the construct validity of the DIS-I is presented, including convergent and discriminant relations with Big-Three and Big-Five/five-factor model measures of personality. Results indicate that the DIS-I scales are associated most strongly with other measures of disinhibition, but that the DIS-I additionally contains content absent in extant adult measures of disinhibition that may prove useful in the assessment of externalizing psychopathology. Keywords: disinhibition; externalizing; personality; trait; psychopathology he personality trait of disinhibition versus con- motivated by and comply with social conventions and Tstraint is a broad dimension within the Big-Three norms, are straightforward and highly disciplined, tradition of personality, tapping individual differ- lack spontaneity, and plan carefully before acting. ences in the tendency toward underconstrained versus Within the Big-Five or five-factor model (FFM)1 of overconstrained behavior (Watson & Clark, 1993). personality, both low conscientiousness (C; e.g., care- Disinhibited individuals are driven by stimuli of the less, disorganized, and undisciplined ) and low agree- immediate moment rather than by longer term conse- ableness (A; e.g., inconsiderate, noncompliant, and quences of their behavior. Such individuals tend to brash) are empirically and theoretically related to dis- act in accord with their current feelings, often are inhibition, as evidenced in recent analyses of normal careless and disorganized, recklessly pursue thrilling and abnormal personality traits (Markon, Krueger, & and often dangerous experiences, and have little Watson, 2005). regard for the concerns of others. In contrast, con- Evidence for the external validity of disinhibition strained individuals generally are controlled by and related constructs (e.g., sensation seeking) comes longer term consequences of their behavior, are more from research on its associations with a broad range of characteristic behaviors. For example, highly dis- inhibited individuals are more likely to use and abuse Authors’ Note: Correspondence may be addressed to Lee Anna drugs and alcohol (Kosson, Steuerwald, Newman, & Clark, Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, E11 SSH, Iowa City, IA 52242; phone: 319-335-3391; e-mail: la-clark@ Widom, 1994; McGue, Slutske, Taylor, & Iacono, uiowa.edu. 1997) and to engage in antisocial and risky behavior 1 2 Assessment (Frick, Kuper, Silverthorn, & Cotter, 1995), including (1984) four-factor model of temperament also includes promiscuous sexual behavior (Miller & Lynam, 2003) an impulsivity factor consisting of four subscales: and gambling (McCormick, 1993). They also tend to (a) Inhibitory Control, (b) Decision Time, (c) Sensation perform more poorly in college, even after controlling Seeking, and (d) Persistence. for high school grades and Scholastic Aptitude Test As mentioned earlier, the Big-Three dimension of scores (Watson & Clark, 1993). In contrast, con- disinhibition represents a combination of the FFM’s strained individuals exhibit higher levels of spirituality (low) C and A dimensions: “C” primarily reflects impulse and religious conservatism (Watson & Clark, 1993). control and self-discipline, whereas “A” reflects an Disinhibition has been linked to both alcoholism empathic and sensitive interpersonal style (Watson, and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) through Clark, & Harkness, 1994). Clark and Watson (1999) such commonalties as deficits in the ability to delay factor analyzed the Disinhibition items from their gratification, tendency to engage in sensation-seeking General Temperament Survey (GTS; Clark & Watson, behavior, and boredom proneness in the absence of 1990) and found evidence of two subfactors: Carefree high levels of stimulation (Sher & Trull, 1994). In Orientation and Antisocial Behavior, broadly corre- addition, risk taking was a consistent predictor of sponding to the FFM traits of (low) C and (low) A, extensive delinquency in a cross-sectional study of respectively. Thus, disinhibition includes weak social male and female criminal offenders (Krueger et al., inhibition. 1994), and Caspi, Moffitt, Newman, and Silva (1996) found that children identified as undercontrolled at Proposed Facets of Disinhibition age 3 were especially likely to have developed alco- hol problems, to be involved in crime, and to have Although there is general agreement regarding the ASPD at age 21. Thus, relevant associations have nature of higher order traits of personality (e.g., the been found in cross-sectional, prospective, and exper- Big Three and Big Five), there currently is no agreed imental studies, leading Krueger and colleagues on conceptualization of the lower order components (Krueger et al., 2002) to propose a model linking dis- that comprise these superfactors. For example, Watson inhibition with externalizing psychopathology (i.e., and Clark (1993) identified nine content areas with ASPD, alcohol and drug dependence, and conduct convergent/discriminant validity relative to this Big- disorder) based on a common genetic vulnerability. Three domain, whereas their Disinhibition Scale The existence of this common vulnerability has received scores only two subfactors (Clark & Watson, 1999). Clark considerable support subsequently from family, psy- (1993) identified three specific traits—Impulsivity, chophysiological, and structural studies. Thus, a Propriety, and Workaholism—that are strongly greater understanding of the nature and structure of this related to the higher order Disinhibition factor in her construct is clearly important to both normal and Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality abnormal personality research. (SNAP), as well as two others (Manipulativeness and Aggression) that frequently have strong secondary Major Models of Personality (and, in some samples, primary) loadings on this and Disinhibition factor. Tellegen’s (in press) higher order constraint factor also has three scales, but only two are the same A number of prominent Big-Three structural mod- as in the SNAP: Control and Traditionalism parallel els of personality have identified disinhibition, or a (low) Impulsivity and Propriety, but the SNAP has no conceptually and empirically related trait, as one of scale paralleling Harm Avoidance. Zuckerman’s three broad higher order factors, including Eysenck’s (1979) Sensation Seeking Scale is composed of four Psychoticism (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975), Tellegen’s related facets—Disinhibition, Thrill and Adventure (1985) Constraint (i.e., low Disinhibition), Watson Seeking, Experience Seeking, and Boredom and Clark’s (1993) Disinhibition Versus Constraint, Susceptibility, whereas Whiteside and Lynam’s and Gough’s (1987) Norm-Favoring Versus Norm- (2001) UPPS model also includes four traits— Questioning (Gough, 1987; see Clark & Watson, Urgency, Premeditation, Perseverance, and Sensation 1993). Similarly, Rothbart and Ahadi (1994) identi- Seeking—but, again, these only partially overlap fied Effortful Control—consisting of Attention Zuckerman’s four. This may be, at least in part, Focusing, Inhibitory Control, Low-Intensity Pleasure, because the UPPS was developed explicitly to assess and Perceptual Sensitivity—in their three-factor traits associated with “impulsive-like behavior,” so it model of childhood temperament. Buss and Plomin’s does not include much, if any, content related to “A.” Dindo et al. / Development of a Measure of Disinhibition 3 Finally, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory behavior (see Whiteside & Lynam, 2001). Second, (NEO PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) includes six the exact number and nature of its lower order com- facet-level traits each for C and A. Thus, the lower order ponents remain unclear, although research consis- facets that comprise the broad Disinhibition factor in tently links certain more specific traits (e.g., risk recent work are varied, range from 2 to 12, and, as taking, aggression vs. responsibility, and conformity) such, are not well established. Therefore, investigation with the broad disinhibition domain. Finally, research of this trait is important for personality models and also indicates that although the factor is broad in research; furthermore, disinhibition’s substantial rela- scope, and is composed of diverse and relatively dis- tion to psychopathology makes it an important trait tinct content areas, it nonetheless clearly