Page 78 - JCBP-3-1

Journal of Clinical and
Basic Psychosomatics Neuroticism scale: Reliability and validity

Table 3. Criterion validity the general population in a short period, making it an
acceptable screening instrument in general hospitals and
Low Excessive Moodiness Worry Total large-scale studies. Overall, the neuroticism questionnaire
self‑esteem emotional
sensitivity demonstrated good reliability and validity.
NEO-FFI-N 0.651** 0.620** 0.623** 0.576** 0.688** The neuroticism scale showed a strong correlation
PHQ-9 0.657** 0.670** 0.737** 0.655** 0.779** with GAD-7 (r = 0.657 – 0.779), in line with previous
26
GAD-7 0.617** 0.669** 0.578** 0.639** 0.711** results. This suggests that anxiety, which commonly
Note: ** indicates P<0.01. arises in response to threats or stress, is closely related
27
Abbreviation: NEO-FFI: NEO five-factor inventory; PHQ-9: Patient to the neurotic characteristics of individuals. Similarly,
health questionnaire-9; GAD-7: Generalized anxiety disorder-7. the correlation coefficients between the PHQ-9 and
the neuroticism scale were high across each subscale
Table 4. Fitting coefficients (0.578 – 0.711), aligning with previous studies indicating a
strong association between neuroticism and depression.
28
2
Coefficient χ /df TLI CFI SRMR RMSEA Smith et al. also supported the view that neuroticism is a
29
Value 2.506 0.947 0.959 0.032 0.039 heritable risk factor for depression. Anxiety and depression
Note: χ /df: Chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio; CFI: Comparative are prevalent emotional symptoms that positively correlate
2
fit index; RMSEA: Root mean square error of approximation; SRMR: with neuroticism and negative affectivity. 30
Standardized root mean square residual; TLI: Tucker-Lewis index.
4.1. Advantages of the scale
Table 5. Internal consistency coefficient The advantages of the neuroticism scale are reflected in
Low Excessive Unstable Excessive Total several aspects. First, it is a dedicated neuroticism scale
self‑esteem emotional mood worry rather than a single dimension of a broader personality
sensitivity scale. This focused approach allows for a more precise
Cronbach’s 0.823 0.734 0.785 0.706 0.926 assessment of neurotic traits.
α
Second, the scale was specifically developed and
• Low self-esteem (Items 8, 9, 10, and 11): Individuals validated within a specific cultural context, addressing the
with low self-esteem often deny their worth and feel unique characteristics and expressions of neuroticism in
ashamed. the Chinese population. While widely used scales, such
• Excessive emotional sensitivity (Items 1, 2, and 3): as the NEO-PI, were primarily developed in Western
contexts, they may not fully capture culturally specific
People with high emotional sensitivity tend to be overly
attentive to others, perceiving every external feedback manifestations of neurotic traits.
as highly personal. They often experience prolonged Third, the scale’s development involved a rigorous
discomfort after receiving negative feedback. methodological approach, including both exploratory and
• Unstable mood (Items 4, 5, and 6): These individuals confirmatory factor analyses. These steps ensured a robust
exhibit noticeable negative emotions that are difficult factor structure, high reliability, and validity. Although
to control, struggling with emotional regulation. the EPQ and NEO-PI are well-validated tools, they do not
• Excessive worry (Items 11, 12, 13, and 14): This necessarily reflect the same level of cultural and contextual
dimension captures a tendency to frequently worry relevance as our scale.
about events that have not happened, highlighting the Fourth, the scale includes items particularly relevant
multidimensional nature of neuroticism. to individuals with psychiatric disorders, focusing on
These four dimensions effectively summarize the specific symptoms such as difficulty in adjusting negative
characteristics of neurotic individuals from distinct emotions, excessive worry about potential future events,
perspectives. and insomnia due to worry. These aspects are critical for
The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total score effective clinical assessment and intervention, providing
was 0.926, indicating good internal consistency. CFA healthcare providers with a targeted tool.
confirmed that the model fitted the data well, supporting In addition, the scale is designed to assess the level
the theoretical structure of the neuroticism scale. The of neuroticism in both general and clinical populations.
overall model fit was acceptable, validating the utility of Clinically, many psychosomatic patients exhibit high
both the total scale score and the individual subscale neuroticism, which often affects their clinical outcomes.
score. This brief scale can be completed by patients and Therefore, accurately evaluating patients’ neurotic

Volume 3 Issue 1 (2025) 72 doi: 10.36922/jcbp.3791