Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

1976, Vol. 34, No. 3, 394-404

Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style

Robert M. Nideffer
University of Rochester
Several studies are reviewed that focus on the development and validation of
the Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style (TAIS). The TAIS was de-
veloped in an attempt to respond to the criticisms -that assessment procedures
(a) have little predictive utility, (b) fail to lead to the selection of particular
treatment approaches, (c) do not take into account situational variables, and
(d) are not based an a sound theoretical or conceptual base. A summary of
research efforts indicates that the test has good test-retest reliability as well as
some construct and predictive validity. An advantage of the TAIS relative to
other psychological measures is that its test profile describes particular atten-
tional and interpersonal characteristics. These characteristics are operationally
definable, and they permit prediction of performance across a variety of life
situations.

Over the past decade increasing criticism
has been leveled at existing assessment in-
struments. The reliability, validity, and pre-
dictive utility of test results have been ques-
itoned by some of the foremost psychologists
in the country (McClelland, 1973; Meehl,
1954; Rotter, 1973; Wallace, 1966). One
major concern is that traditional assessment
procedures have been oriented to the mea-
surement or inference of needs and/or traits
and have not sufficiently taken into account
the many situational variables that influence
behavior. Although psychologists are aware
of these shortcomings, they have done little
to correct them.
Rotter (1973), writing about the future of
clinical psychology^ cites several reasons for
the failure to develop more effective assess-
ment devices. The proliferation of treatment
procedures in psychology, the obvious im-
portance of situational factors in predicting
behavior, and the lack of a good unifying
theory have resulted in a stimulus jungle. As
the complexity of the problem and the de-
The author is indebted to Emory Cowen of the
University of Rochester for his editorial assistance,
to Tessa Bensew, Walter Keller, Dianne Sherwood,
and Thomas Yock of the University of Rochester,
and to Arthur Wiens of the University of Oregon
Medical School for their assistance in data collec-
tion.
Requests for reprints should be sent to Robert M.
Nideffer, Department of Psychology, University of
Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627.
394
mand for treatment and research productiv-
ity increase, fewer individuals are willing or
able to spend time developing new assessment
techniques. Clinical psychologists are finding
themselves forced either to get involved in the
delivery of health care services or to engage
in a research program with more immediate
payoff. This is particularly disheartening be-
cause unless some methods are developed to
select and evaluate different kinds of treat-
ment approaches to different kinds of clients
and unless some unifying theoretical con-
structs emerge, clinical psychology cannot
expect to advance as a science.
Notwithstanding the difficulties in assessing
the environmental, interpersonal, and intra-
personal variables that influence an individu-
al's behavior, some concrete suggestions have
been offered. Illustratively, it has been ar-
gued that we should define variables more
explicitly to provide more structure for cli-
ents and sample the behavioral criteria we
are attempting to measure. Wallace (1966)
refers to this as assessing the behavioral
competency of the individual in particular
situations. Although this is important, we
must also be able to generalize lest we end
up measuring literally thousands of behav-
ioral competencies that individuals must have
to function effectively in complex job or life
situations.
The concept of personality traits can be
seen as one way of identifying individual
characteristics that allows for the prediction
 TEST OF ATTENTIONAL AND INTERPERSONAL STYLE
of behavior across situations. Unfortunately,
trait concepts, used in the past, have failed
to provide much predictive validity (Mischel,
1968). McClelland (1973) has suggested that
psychologists identify and assess competen-
cies that are involved in "clusters of life out-
comes." Although he does not use the word
trait, he implies that some of these compe-
tencies could be identified as "personality
variables" (e.g., patience). McClelland differs
from prior approaches by emphasizing situa-
tional analyses that can help to locate gen-
eralizable competencies. He also identifies
interpersonal skills (e.g., communication
skills) and "operant thought patterns" (e.g.,
need achievement) as two prime areas to ex-
amine for generalizability.
The arguments thus far reviewed lead to
the position that assessment devices should
be (a) as situation specific as possible (e.g.,
questions should be phrased to reflect actual
behavior in particular settings), (b) designed
in unambiguous ways (i.e., the examinee
should know what is being measured and the
relevance of these measures to his or her life
[Wallace, 1966]), and (c) useful, subject to
evaluation, based on good theoretical con-
structs, and lead to prescriptive statements.
Meeting these requirements will make it
easier to determine the usefulness of assess-
ment devices in selecting and evaluating
treatments (Rotter, 1973). Finally, which-
ever competencies, traits, or personality varia-
bles are measured should be generalizable to
clusters of life situations (McClelland, 1973).
The Need for Unambiguous Constructs
The criticisms mentioned, particularly the
lack of predictive utility associated with most
assessment instruments, underlie the present
attempt to develop a behavioral measure with
good predictive utility. Some past difficulties
in using traditional assessment devices predic-
tively result from limits in their interpreta-
tion (i.e., in applying their implied con-
structs). For example, scales labeled hysteria,
psychesthenia, and ego strength often mean
different things to different people. Because
they all typically include so many elements,
it is difficult to make reliable predictions of
a person's behavior from them (Jackson,
1971).
395
A requirement for a test's predictive utility
is that the variables it presumes to measure
be directly and unambiguously translatable
to particular interpersonal or environmental
situations. Thus, we should be able to look
at a situation and assess the strength of its
demand for "hysterical," "schizophrenic," or
"self-actualized" behavior. Unfortunately, be-
cause most clinical and personality variables
have surplus meaning, this is a very difficult
task.
Given this way of thinking, a logical first
step in developing a useful test should be to
identify variables which, as McClelland sug-
gests, are important across a variety of life
situations and are as free as possible of am-
biguity and surplus meaning. Since most of
the situations to which we ultimately want to
predict involve interpersonal interactions, this
is an area of obvious importance. Beyond
the interpersonal area, however, there is a
large body of theoretical and empirical litera-
ture suggesting that knowledge of an indi-
vidual's attentional processes is critical to
understanding and predicting his or her per-
formance.
Attention and Performance
The importance of attention for under-
standing and predicting behavior has long
been emphasized in psychology. Attentional
constructs have formed the basis of theories
designed to explain phenomena ranging from
schizophrenia (Shakow, 1962) to some al-
tered states considered to reflect "higher lev-
els of consciousness" (Nideffer, 1974). It is
hard to imagine a variable more central to
performance than the ability to direct and
control one's attention (Nideffer, in press).
Attention can be conceptualized on at
least two dimensions: breadth of focus and
direction. Attention can vary from very nar-
rowly focused (filtering out a great deal of
information) to very broad (Cromwell, 1968;
Easterbrook, 1959; Wachtel, 1967). We can
also attend to external (environmental) or
internal (thoughts, feelings) stimuli (Heil-
brun, 1972; Shakow, 1962). Most people
maintain a balance between these two direc-
tions, shifting from one to the other. Figure
1 presents a way of conceptualizing these two
attentional dimensions. At any single time,
396 ROBERT M. NIDEFFER

EXTERNAL
Preoccupied with environmental stimuli.
Responses occur without reflection.
Reinforcement comes from the environ-
ment. Behavior is stimulus-response
pairing at the extreme there is almost a
complete external locus of control

^peractive 2 year old. Color Intellectually bankrupt, concrete.

responses and quick RT s on the Few highly valued objects for
torschach. motivators and reinforcers.
Artists, actors Computer programmer,
Cheerleaders Technical School, Jeweler

BROAD NARROW
When effective integrative how- Persistent, dedicated, focused.
ever, may become overloaded, May be underinclusive, lack
confused by environment. ability to generalize.
Broad internal leads to theoreti- May appear rigid and inflexible
cal analytical thought processes.
Can be overideational.

Humanities and Mathematical theorists,

Social Sciences Sciences, Theoretical
physics.
Philosophy

Overideational Religious Fanatic

INTERNAL
Internal locus of control in that external
controls are not readily apparent. May
be withdrawn, cognitive reinforcers are
most potent. May tune out environment
and have difficulty expressing affect.

FIGURE 1. Theoretical consequences of particular attentional styles.

attention can be described on the basis of
both its width and direction.
Conceptually, it is relatively simple to ap-
ply the attentional dimensions of width and
direction to specific environmental situations.
Conducting sensitivity training, for example,
demands a broad external focus, whereas
working out a computer program calls for a
much narrower internal focus. Attentional
competencies, such as controlling width and
direction, should change adaptively as a func-
tion of specific environmental demands.
Knowledge of attentional abilities and en-
vironmental demands should increase the ac-
curacy of prediction of task success or failure.
The remainder of this paper provides a
description of the development and validation
of the Test of Attentional and Interpersonal
Style (TAIS). The presentation is divided
into the following five sections: (a) test de-
velopment, (b) group difference studies, (c)
construct validity, (d) predictive validity,
and (e) a discussion and summary.
TEST DEVELOPMENT
The Test of Attentional and Interpersonal
Style (TAIS) was developed using college
students as subjects. On the basis of the theo-
retical formulations of Shakow (1962), Crom-
well (1968), and Nideffer (1974), and the
clinical observations of MacKinnon and
Michels (1971) and Frank (1961), 17 dif-
ferent aspects of attentional and interpersonal
behavior were identified. Following sugges-
tions made by McClelland (1973), Wallace
(1966), and Jackson (1971), an attempt was
made to develop a pool of unambiguous items,
reflecting behavioral experiences, in the 17
areas considered important for predicting
 TEST OF ATTENTIONAL AND INTERPERSONAL STYLE 397

performance and making specific treatment
recommendations.
Of the 17 TAIS variables, 6 reflect atten-
tional processes, 2 reflect behavioral and
cognitive control, and 9 describe interpersonal
style. Table 1 defines the TAIS subscales.
An item analysis procedure based on a
sample of 302 undergraduates was used to
develop the 17 rationally defined TAIS sub-
scales. Each subscale item was correlated with
its total subscale score, correcting for the
item's inclusion in the total score. Items that
did not exceed a probability value of .01
were dropped. This procedure identified 144
items belonging to the 17 subscales.
Table 2 reports the number of items on
each TAIS subscale and the amount of item
overlap between scales. There is a consider-
able overlap between two scales measuring
effective broad external and internal atten-
tion (BET and BIT) and the one that mea-
sures the amount of information an individual
processes (INFP).
Table 3 presents the TAIS interscale cor-
relations. These range from .01 to .80 with a
median of .28. Although it is conceptually
useful to think of amount of information
processed independently of attentional width,
it is unreasonable to assume that these varia-
bles are, in fact, unrelated. Some of the over-

TABLE 1
THE TEST or ATTENTIONAL AND INTERPERSONAL STYLE (TAIS) SCALES

Scale Abbreviation Description

Broad external attentional focus
Overloaded by external stimuli
Broad internal attentional focus
Overloaded by internal stimuli
Narrow attentional focus
Reduced attentional focus
Information processing
Behavior control
Control scale
Self-esteem
Physical orientation
Obsessive
Extroversion
Introversion
Intellectual expression
Negative affective expression
Positive affective expression
BET High scores on this scale are obtained by individuals who describe
themselves as being able to effectively integrate many external
stimuli at one time.
OET The higher the score, the more individuals make mistakes because
they become confused and overloaded with external stimuli.
High scores indicate that individuals see themselves as able to
BIT effectively integrate ideas and information from several different
areas. They see themselves as analytical and philosophical.
The higher the score, the more mistakes individuals make because
01T they confuse themselves by thinking about too many things at
once.
The higher the score, the more effective individuals see themselves
NAR with respect to being able to narrow their attention when they
need to (e.g., to study or read a book).
A high score on this scale indicates that the individuals make
RED mistakes because they narrow their attention too much.
INFP High scorers tend to process a great deal of stimulus information.
Their perceptual-cognitive worlds are busy.
BCON A high score indicates that individuals tend to be somewhat im-
pulsive. In addition, they engaged in behavior that could be
considered antisocial, though not necessarily harmful.
CON A high score indicates that individuals are in control of most of the
situations, interpersonal and otherwise, they find themselves in.
It also means they attempt to gain control of situations.
SES The higher the score, the more highly the individuals think of
themselves.
P/O A high score indicates the individual participates in and enjoys
competitive athletics.
OBS A high score indicates the person has a tendency to ruminate and
worry about one particular thing without any real resolution or
movement.
EXT A high score indicates the individual is warm, outgoing, needs to
be with other people, is the life of the party.
INT A high score indicates the person likes to be alone, enjoys quiet
thoughtful times, and avoids being the center of attention.
1EX A high score indicates that individuals express their thoughts and
ideas to other people.
NAE A high score indicates that individuals express their anger and
negative feelings to others.
PAE A high score indicates the individuals express their feelings of affec-
tion to others in both physical and verbal ways.
398 ROBERT M. NIDEFFER

TABLE 2
ITEM OVERLAP ON TAIS SUBSCALES

Total no
Scale BET OET BIT OIT NAR RED INFP BCON CON SES P/O O B S EXT INT IEX NAE PAE items

BET — 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
OET — 0 0 -1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 12
BIT — 0 0 -2 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
OIT — -1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
NAR — 4 -2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 11
RED — -4 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 15
INFP — 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 19
BCON • — 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 13
CON — 4 4 0 1 0 4 3 0 20
SES — 2 0 3 0 3 1 1 18
P/O — 0 1 0 0 0 0 7
OBS — 0 0 0 0 0 9
EXT — 0 1 0 3 14
INT — -1 0 -1 11
IEX — 1 0 8
NAE — 0 9
PAE — 9
Total no.
items 6 12 8 9 11 15 19 13 20 18 7 9 14 11 8 9 9

Note. TAIS = Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style.

lapping items on the three scales are as fol-
lows: "All I need is a little information and I
can come up with a large number of ideas"
(BIT); "Even when I am involved in a game
or sport my mind is going a mile a minute"
(BIT, INFP); "It is easy for me to focus on
a number of things at the same time" (BET,
INFP); "I am good at quickly analyzing com-
plex situations around me such as how a play
is developing in football or which of four or
five kids started a fight" (BET, INFP).
Overlap, where it occurs, obviously acts to
inflate interscale correlations.
Given item overlap and some high TAIS
interscale correlations, questions can be raised
about the independence of the 17 variables.
Jackson (1971) has suggested one method of
assessing subscale independence. The mean
correlation (corrected for bias) between sub-
scale items and total subscale score is com-
puted. The remainder of the test items are
then correlated with total subscale scores to

TABLE 3
TAIS INTERSCALE CORRELATIONS (n =•= 230)

Scale BET OET BIT OIT NAR RED INFP BCON CON SES P/O OBS EXT INT IEX NAE PAE

BET -.26 .52 - . 2 6 .23 -.28 .68 -.15 .51 .43 .29 -.28 .33 -.15 .18 -.11 .35
OET — -.38 .71 - . 6 0 .52 -.22 .63 -.26 -.41 -.22 .39 -.05 .20 -.13 .25 -.13
BIT — -.23 .34 -.48 .80 -.14 .58 .59 .28 -.37 .39 -.10 .47 -.02 .33
OIT AQ
.55 -.16 .54 -.14 -.41 -.13 .36 -.13 .32 -.06 .36 -.21
NAR -.07 .14 -.47 .19 .30 .16 .08 .05 -.07 .14 -.22 .14
RED — -.42 .25 -.28 -.44 -.09 .77 -.16 .21 -.24 .12 -.18
INFP —. .05 .61 .58 .30 -.39 .52 -.16 .45 .02 .46
BCON — .05 -.27 .01 .07 .02 .14 -.01 .55 -.10
CON •— .64 .58 -.27 .51 -.08 .56 .28 .35
SES — .50 -.30 .64 -.36 .54 -.13 .56
P/O — .03 .43 -.15 .07 -.08 .24
OBS — -.10 .12 -.16 .03 -.09
EXT — -.48 .43 -.01 .77
INT — -.11 .17 -.66
IEX — .28 .27
NAE -.09
PAE

Note. TAIS = Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style.

 TEST OF ATTENTIONAL AND INTERPERSONAL STYLE 399
TABLE 4 establish norms for the instrument (Nideffer,
COMPARISON OF IRRELEVANT VERSUS PREDICTED Note 2).
ITEM-TOTAL SCALE CORRELATIONS IN THE
TAIS ITEM POOL There were significant differences between
males and females on five of the 17 TAIS sub-
% of items scales. Males described themselves as (a) bet-
Scale items not scored
mean with correla- ter able to broaden and internally focus at-
Scale No. items correlation tion £ X tention, (b) better able to narrow attention
BET 6 .60 .000 when it is required, (c) more physically ori-
OET 12 .58 .015 ented, (d) more intellectually expressive, and
BIT 8 .55 .000
OIT 9 .59 .007 (e) less expressive of positive affect. These
NAR 11 .46 .007 results are presented in Table 5.
RED 15 .42 .022 The differences between males and females
INFP 19 .40 .016
BCON 13 .45 .000 can be explained on the basis of social learn-
CON 20 .36 .016 ing discrepancies. Men are typically described
SES 18 .44 .015
P/O 7 .71 .000 as more physically oriented, more openly
OBS 9 .45 .000 competitive, and less expressive of positive
EXT 14 .47 .007 affect than females. Thus, differences on these
INT 11 .53 .000
IEX 8 .54 .000 interpersonal scales are not surprising. With
NAE 9 .59 .000 respect to the attentional differences found, it
PAE 9 .55 .000
can be postulated that the need to be in con-
Note. TAIS = Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style. trol and competitive causes men to make
more use of focused (narrow) and more ana-
lytical (broad-internal) attentional processes.
determine the percentage that correlate with
Such an explanation assumes that attentional
the score as high or higher than the mean
processes can be modified through learning.
for the subscale items. Table 4 presents mean
From a therapeutic point of view, one would
item-scale correlations for 17 TAIS scales
and for each scale indicates the percentage of
nonsubscale items that exceed the mean item-
scale r. The highest percentage of overlap is TABLE 5
only .022 (three items). TAIS BETWEEN-GROUP COMPARISONS

Male vs.female
Test-Retest Reliability introductory
psychology
Police applicants
vs. male college
students students
TAIS test-retest reliabilities based on a 2-
Scale ta 2Qb ta 2Qb
week interval were studied for introductory
psychology students (45 males and 45 fe- BET -1.19 >.20 2.73 <01
OET
males). Correlations ranged from a low of .60 BIT -1.88 <.10 -6.68 <.002
2.64 <.01 1.51 >.10
on the obsessive scale to .93 on physical ori- OIT -.95 >!20 -6.55 <.002
entation, with a median of .83 (Wolfe & Ni- NAR 2.20 <.05 5.42 <.002
deffer, Note 1). RED .82 >.20 -3.14 <.002
INFP -.72 >.20 2.21 <.05
BCON .91 >.20 -5.01 <.002
GROUP DIFFERENCE STUDIES CON .97 >.20 2.50 <.02
SES 1.05 >.20 3.99 <.002
An examination of response differences on P/O 3.02 <.01 3.82 <.002
OBS 0.00 >!80 -.58 >.50
the 17 TAIS subscales was examined by com- EXT -.83 >.20 2.87 <.01
paring the scores of 74 male and 123 female INT 1.45 >.10 -6.32 <.002
introductory psychology students. Students
IEX 2.00 <'.O5 -2.40 <.02
NAE .32 >.50 -3.69 <.002
volunteered to take the TAIS to fulfill a PAE 2.39 <.02 4.80 <.002
course requirement for participation in some
Note. TAIS = Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style.
experimental studies. The test was admin- * A negative t value indicates that the second group men-
tioned had a higher score on the particular scale than the first
istered to groups of subjects (35 to 50), who group (e.g., male college students scored higher on OET than
police applicants).
were told that the data were being used to b
2Q indicates that the test for significance was two-tailed.
400 ROBERT M. NIDEFFER

hope that this is the case; however, these to select treatment approaches, the TAIS
changes remain to be demonstrated. scale scores must be able to differentiate reli-
Results of a second group difference study ably between individuals and groups of indi-
are also presented in Table 5. Nideffer and viduals. Data just presented suggest that
Wiens (Note 3) compared the scores on the groups who are identifiably different on the
17 TAIS subscales of 60 white male police basis of sex or some occupational and/or atti-
applicants in a large metropolitan city with tudinal variable(s) do respond differently to
those of 97 male college students. The two TAIS items. The question of task relevance of
groups differed significantly on 15 of the 17 these differences depends on both the con-
subscales. Differences that occurred indicated struct and predictive validity of the instru-
police applicants described themselves as more ment.
in control of both attentional and interper-
sonal processes, more extroverted, less intel- CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
lectually expressive, less expressive of nega- Construct validity has been examined by
tive affect, and more expressive of positive correlating TAIS scale scores with the same
affect. individuals' scores on other psychological in-
The preceding findings seem to be logically struments. Nideffer and Wiens (Note 3) cor-
and internally consistent if it is concluded related the TAIS scores for a group of 60
that, as a function of interests and job de- police applicants with scores on the MMPI,
mand, characteristic applicants for police California F Scale, Rotter Internal-External
training should exhibit greater control than (I-E) Scale, Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale
a group of college males. A potential con- (TMAS), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
found exists, however, since police applicants (WAIS), and the Maudsley Personality In-
believed the test data would have some influ- ventory (MPI). McPherson and Nideffer
ence on their selection for training. In con- (Note 4) compared scores of 28 female under-
trast, college students had no reason to be- graduates on the TAIS with their scores on
lieve that their lives would be affected by the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI;
their test scores. This difference suggests that Shostrom, 1966) and their scores on the
it is appropriate to speculate about the ex- State-Trait Anxiety Index (Spielberger, Gor-
tent to which police applicants may have such, & Lushene, 1970). Finally, Wolfe and
faked test scores to appear more competent Nideffer (Note 1) correlated the TAIS scores
and effective. Although this question has not of 83 introductory psychology students with
been assessed directly, some indirect evidence scores on the State-Trait Anxiety Index
suggests that faking does not account for the (STAI).
observed group differences. Looking first at the TAIS attentional
A large body of experimental literature ex- scales, Table 6 indicates that the predicted
amines relationships between scores on vari- relationship between attentional processes and
ous personality measures and an individual's level of arousal is reflected in the TAIS at-
tendency to give socially desirable responses tentional subscales. We know, for example,
(Edwards, 1957). The Minnesota Multiphasic that as arousal increases, attention narrows
Personality Inventory (MMPI) K scale has and effective cue utilization decreases (Easter-
been found to correlate between .69 and .81 brook, 1959). Thus, anxious individuals de-
with various measures of social desirability, scribe themselves on the TAIS as making
and high K scores are taken to mean that errors of underinclusion. Anxious individuals
respondents are faking well on the test (Dahl- also tend to direct their attention internally
strom & Welsh, 1963). For the applicant sam- and to become overloaded by their own
ple the mean correlation between MMPI K thoughts and feelings. This tendency is re-
and the 17 TAIS scales was .20, suggesting flected in anxious subjects scoring high on
that faking was minimal. the internal overload scale (OIT) and on
To be useful as a predictor of performance, the obsessive subscale (OBS). Relationships
to select individuals for a particular job, or between scores on the TAIS attentional scales
 TEST OF ATTENTIONAL AND INTERPERSONAL STYLE 401

TABLE 6 measures of anxiety deal primarily with bod-

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TAIS AND ily responses (e.g., "I feel tense/' "I have
MEASURES OF ANXIETY frequent headaches"), whereas the TAIS at-
College Introductory
tentional items reflect cognitive and percep-
students Police psychology tual experiences (e.g., "When people talk to
(Pretest) applicants students
me, I find myself distracted by my own
Scale State Trait TMAS State Trait
thoughts and ideas").
BET .09 -.17 -.38** -.13 -.21 There is some content similarity between
OET .05 .48* .41** .33** .31**
BIT -.49* -.60* -.15 -.19 -.29** several of the TAIS interpersonal scales, the
OIT .03 .43* .58** .38** .39** MMPI K and 5 / scales, the Rotter I-E Scale,
NAR .20 -.40* -.22 -.20 -.26* and the MPI neuroticism and extroversion
RED .38* .53* .35** .55** .54**
INFP -.27 -.31 -.14 -.20 -.28** scales. The TAIS scale correlations that may
BCON .22 .63* .41** .23* .26* be artificially inflated due to the content simi-
CON -.09 -.07 -.01 -.19 -.21
SES -.41* -.57* -.35** -.46** -.55**
larity are interpersonal control, self-esteem,
P/O -.08 .04 -.05 -.13 -.09 physical orientation, extroversion, and ex-
OBS .22 .41* .28* .36** .28** pression of positive and negative affect.
EXT -.30 -.21 -.16 -.31** -.35**
INT .29 .24 .38** .26* .37** Overlap between other tests and the TAIS
IEX -.31 -.26 .07 -.20 -.21 interpersonal scales is limited to one or two
NAE .21 .37* .28* .19 .29**
PAE -.32 -.30 -.31* -.27* -.36** items. In addition, each test listed above
overlaps on several TAIS scales because items
Note, n = 28, 60, and 83 for college students, police appli- cover a much broader range of behaviors. For
cants, and introductory psychology students, respectively.
(Abbreviations: TAIS = Test of Attentional and Interpersonal
Style; TMAS = Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale.)
example, the SI scale on the MMPI is com-
* p < .05. posed of items indicating the individual is
**p < . 0 1 .
self-critical, has low self-esteem, shrinks from
responsibility or a crisis, is sensitive to criti-
and measures of anxiety in these three stud- cism, and withdraws.
ies provide some construct validation for the In conclusion, the attentional scales on
TAIS attentional scales. the TAIS appear to measure an aspect of the
Table 7 presents the relationships found individual that is correlated with other mea-
between the TAIS, the California F Scale, sures of personality and arousal but that is
Rotter I-E Scale, MMPI, and the MPI for conceptually distinct. In contrast, there are
the 60 police applicants in Nideffer and some content similarities between TAIS inter-
Wiens's (Note 3) study. This data, along with personal scales and other conceptually re-
the correlations between the TAIS and the lated personality measures. Such overlap is
POI (McPherson & Nideffer, Note 4), pro- not unwanted if it is assumed that the other
vide some construct validation for several instruments reliably measure the same con-
TAIS interpersonal scales. In particular, structs.
TAIS self-esteem correlates .69 with POI self-
regard, TAIS positive affect expression with PREDICTIVE VALIDITY
POI spontaneity (.42), TAIS introversion Two studies have related TAIS scores to
with neuroticism on the MPI (.36) and with actual behavior measures. Nideffer (in press)
spontaneity on the POI ( - . 6 1 ) , TAIS be- correlated a coach's performance ratings of
havior control with K on the MMPI ( — .32), 10 male swimmers (all performing regularly
and extroversion on the TAIS with extrover- in intercollegiate competition) on an 11-item
sion on the MPI (.64) and with social intro- scale with the swimmers' TAIS attentional
version on the MMPI ( — .46). scale scores. Swimmers scoring high on the
In discussing construct validity of the TAIS scale measuring the tendency to make
TAIS it is important to consider the content errors of underinclusion were rated by the
similarity across the various instruments. coach (a) as choking under pressure (r =
Dealing first with the TAIS attentional scales, .75), (b) as falling apart if they make early
there is very little overlap across tests. The performance errors (r=.59)? (c) as having
 o

TABLE 7
TAIS CORRELATIONS WITH OTHER INSTRUMENTS, FOR POLICE APPLICANTS (n = 60)

MPI
MMPI
TAIS Calif Neu- Extro- Psy-
scale F ' I-E L F K Hs D Hy Pd Mf Pa Pt Sc Ma Si roticism version choticism

BET .10 -.25* .08 -.27* .25* -.13 -.23 -.17 -.05 -.39** -.15 -.15 -.01 -.01 -.29* -.30* .11 -.04
OET -.00 .35** -.32* .20 -.24 -.07 .04 -.01 .11 .44** .17 .04 -.16 .06 .09 .49** .03 .13 O
BIT -.05 -.30* .06 —.00 .06 -.13 -.27* .00 -.18 —.11 -.02 -.05 —.11 .22 -.50** -.15 .24 -.06
w
W
OIT .16 .44** -.39** .27* -.35** -.07 .19 -.03 .12 .53** .16 .19 —.00 .13 .19 .56** .02 .01
NAR .13 -.12 .10 -.13 .17 -.09 -.08 -.19 -.03 -.28* -.12 -.13 -.04 -.01 -.09 -.26* .01 .02
S
RED .29* .32* -.35** .16 -.32* -.25* .10 -.28* .22 .21 .07 -.05 -.11 .16 .15 .33** .08 -.02
INFP .06 -.15 .10 -.09 -.02 -.12 -.32* .06 —.21 -.06 .02 -.07 -.14 .28* -.45** — .09 .26* —.11
g
BCON .09 .25* -.32* .18 -.32* -.07 —.00 -.09 .17 .27* .10 .04 -.04 .21 —.04 .50** .15 .12
CON .18 -.03 -.20 .06 -.09 -.22 —.15 -.20 .06 .01 —.01 -.07 -.10 .27* -.51** .03 .51** -.07 g
SES -.02 —.24 .11 -.16 .19 -.15 -.19 -.03 .04 -.14 .04 -.07 -.09 .04 _ # 49** -.32* .38** -.02 5
P/O .22 .09 -.09 -.04 .06 —.12 —.20 -.07 -.04 —.18 -.10 .04 -.03 .18 —.48** -.03 .44** —.14 S
i-rj
OBS .11 .20 -.41** .09 -.18 -.10 .09 -.20 .16 .16 .15 .11 .03 .19 .04 .18 .11 .06 W
EXT .15 .07 -.07 -.02 .19 .03 -.11 .02 .15 .07 .13 -.01 .05 .10 -.46** -.12 .64** —.12
INT -.03 .23 -.34** .25* -.37** -.12 .19 .11 —.09 .52** -.01 .08 -.03 .25* .07 .36** -.27* .01
IEX -.03 -.06 -.27 .26* -.19 -.22 -.12 -.21 .14 .23 .18 -.06 —.10 .22 _.44** .08 .50** .05
NAE .14 .12 -.41** .25* -.30* -.09 .02 -.20 .23 .33** .07 -.02 .02 .30* -.24 .35** .35** -.01
PAE .11 —.03 .23 -.04 .26* -.02 -.11 .03 .05 -.23 .13 -.03 .03 -.07 -.35** -.27* .56** -.06

Note. TAIS = Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style; Calif. F = California F Test; I-E = Rotter Internal-External Scale; MMPI • Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory;
MPI = Maudsley Personality Inventory.
* p < .05.
**p <.01.
 TEST OF ATTENTIONAL AND INTERPERSONAL STYLE
to work hard for everything they obtain (r
= .66), (d) as becoming worried about one
particular thing and being unable to think of
anything else (r = .80). In addition, swim-
mers the coach described as being "very in-
consistent ranging from looking very good at
times to being very poor" tended to become
overloaded with external (r = .60) and in-
ternal stimuli (r = .67), to be unable to inte-
grate thoughts and ideas (r = .63), and to be
unable to effectively narrow attention (r =
.63).
McPherson and Nideffer (Note 4) did a
second study examining the relationships be-
tween TAIS scores and performance mea-
sures at a small, women's liberal arts college.
In this study the instructor, without knowl-
edge of TAIS scores, rated 28 students' be-
havior (on a 20-item scale) in a vocational
counseling course. These ratings were corre-
lated with students' TAIS scores.
A pattern of significant rs between the in-
structor's ratings and TAIS scores was found.
These rs clustered into two major groups.
Students judged to contribute to class discus-
sion, assume leadership, express personal opin-
ions and not back down, and to seek the in-
structor out after class to continue discussions
described themselves on the TAIS as (a)
able to integrate ideas from different areas
effectively, (b) able to avoid errors of under-
inclusion, (c) processing large amounts of
information, (d) in control of interpersonal
situations, (e) having high self-esteem, (f)
being extroverted, and (g) expressive intel-
lectually and affectively.
In contrast to the above, students identi-
fied by the instructor as easily intimidated,
prone to withdrawal, unable to deal with more
than one topic at a time, and unable to be-
have in the ways prescribed by the course
described themselves on the TAIS as (a)
having low self-esteem, (b) being out of con-
trol of both their attentional processes and
interpersonal situations, (c) processing little
information, and (d) being introverted.
DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY
If assessment is to be effective and clini-
cally useful, its procedures must change.
Clinical assessment makes best sense to the
403
extent that it serves the following functions:
(a) shortening treatment duration through
rapid accurate identification of salient areas,
(b) providing clinicians with a conceptual
framework that enables them to select treat-
ment procedures and facilitates understand-
ing of the client's behavior, and (c) improves
communication both ways, between clinicians
and patients. The present study summarizes a
network of research studies constructing and
validating a test measure designed to serve
these functions.
The TAIS consists of 144 items selected
rationally and grouped into 17 attentional and
interpersonal subscales. Each of the 17 sub-
scales was considered on the basis of theo-
retical formulations and/or clinical observa-
tions to be potentially useful in predicting
behavior across a variety of situations. Data
collected thus far suggest several conclusions
about the TAIS psychometric properties.
1. Test-retest reliability for the subscales
ranges from .60 to .93, with a median of .83.
2. TAIS items correlate highly (median
.53) within scales and moderately across
scales, suggesting that the scales are internally
consistent.
3. Group difference studies indicate that
the TAIS will differentiate between subjects
differing on some major variable, such as sex.
4. Correlations between TAIS subscales and
other psychological measures offer some con-
struct validation for the following attentional
subscales: becoming overloaded with internal
stimuli, making errors of underinclusion, and
having an effective broad internal focus. Some
construct validity has also been found for
the following TAIS interpersonal scales: in-
terpersonal control, self-esteem, extroversion,
intellectual expressiveness, and the expression
of both positive and negative affect.
5. Actual behavioral correlates of TAIS
scores were found in two studies. In both
instances poor attentional control and the
tendency to make errors of underinclusion
were found to be associated with performance
deficiencies.
A major potential advantage of the TAIS
when compared with other psychological mea-
sures is that its test profile describes specific
404 ROBERT M. NIDEFFER
attentional and interpersonal characteristics.
These characteristics are operationally de-
finable and they permit prediction of per-
formance across a variety of life situations.
Although the present series of studies shows
that the TAIS has reasonable test-retest reli-
ability and some construct and predictive
validity, the measure has not yet been used
to predict performance on an a priori basis
or to evaluate therapy approaches. Future
research should attempt to assess the TAIS's
predictive utility for anticipating performance
and for selecting intervention techniques. To
date, informal use of the TAIS in this way
has been promising.
REFERENCE NOTES
1. Wolfe, R., & Nideffer, R. M. The use of the
TAIS and SAT scores to predict grade point aver-
age. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the Genesee Valley Psychological Association,
Rochester, New York, November 1974.
2. Nideffer, R. M. Test of attentional and inter-
personal style: Interpreter's manual. Unpublished
manual, University of Rochester, 1974. (Avail-
able from Department of Psychology, University
of Rochester, River Station, Rochester, New
York 14627.)
3. Nideffer, R. M., & Wiens, A. The attentional and
interpersonal styles of applicants for police train-
ing. Paper presented at the annual convention of
the Western Psychological Association, Sacra-
mento, April 1975.
4. McPherson, J., & Nideffer, R. An assessment of
some new directions in vocational counseling with
female college students. Manuscript in preparation,
1975.
REFERENCES
Cromwell, R. L. Stimulus redundancy and schizo-
phrenia. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease,
1968, 146, 360-375.
Dahlstrom, W. G., & Welsh, G. S. An MMPI hand-
book: A guide to use in clinical practice and re-
search, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press, 1963.
Easterbrook, J. A. The effect of emotion on cue
utilization and the organization of behavior.
Psychological Review, 1959, 66, 183-201.
Edwards, A. The social desirability variable in per-
sonality assessment and research. New York:
Dryden Press, 1957.
Frank, J. Persuasion and healing. New York:
Schocken Books, 1961.
Heilbrun, A. B. Style of adaptation to perceived
aversive maternal control and internal scanning
behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy-
chology, 1972, 29, 15-21.
Jackson, D. The dynamics of structured personality
tests. Psychological Review, 1971, 78, 229-248.
MacKinnon, R., & Michels, R. The psychiatric inter-
view in clinical practice. Philadelphia: Saunders,
1971.
McClelland, D. Testing for competence rather than
for intelligence. American Psychologist, 1973, 28,
1-14.
Meehl, P. E. Clinical vs. statistical prediction. Min-
neapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1954.
Mischel, W. Personality and assessment. New York:
Wiley, 1968.
Nideffer, R. M. Altered states of consciousness. In
L. Wheeler, R. Goodall, & J. Deese (Eds.), Gen-
eral psychology. New York: Allyn & Bacon, 1974.
Nideffer, R. M. The relationship of attention and
anxiety to performance. Coach and Athlete, in
press.
Rotter, J. B. The future of clinical psychology.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
1973, 40, 313-321.
Shakow, D. Segmental set. Archives of General Psy-
chiatry, 1962, 6, 1-17.
Shostrom, E. L. Manual for the personal orientation
inventory. San Diego, Calif.: Educational and
Industrial Testing Service, 1966.
Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., & Lushene, R. E.
STAI manual. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psy-
chologist Press, 1970.
Wachtel, P. Conceptions of broad and narrow at-
tention. Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 68, 417-429.
Wallace, J. An abilities conception of personality.
American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 132-138.
(Received October 30, 1975)