IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v14y2019i6p739-751_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spanish validation of General Decision-Making Style scale: Sex invariance, sex differences and relationships with personality and coping styles

Author

Listed:
  • Alacreu-Crespo, Adrián
  • Fuentes, María C.
  • Abad-Tortosa, Diana
  • Cano-Lopez, Irene
  • González, Esperanza
  • Serrano, Miguel Ángel

Abstract

The General Decision-Making Styles (GDMS) scale measures five decision-making styles: rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous. GDMS has been related to coping and some personality factors and sex-differences has been described. In spite of its usefulness, there is not a validated Spanish translation. The aim of this study is to translate to Spanish and provide psychometric evidence considering sex differences and the relationships between GDMS, personality and coping variables. Two samples were used for this study; the first sample composed by 300 participants who completed the GDMS and the Rational-Experiential Inventory (REI), and the second sample of 361 participants who completed the GDMS, the Ten Item Personality Trait Inventory and the brief COPE scales. Participants from second sample filled in GDMS a second time (137 participants) after eight weeks from the first data collection. Confirmatory factor analyses showed a five-factor composition of GDMS with equivalence across sex using invariance analyses. Moreover, GDMS showed acceptable internal consistency and temporal stability. Finally, rational and intuitive styles were related to healthier coping patterns and emotional stability, while dependent, avoidant and spontaneous styles were associated with unhealthy coping patterns and emotional instability.

Suggested Citation

  • Alacreu-Crespo, Adrián & Fuentes, María C. & Abad-Tortosa, Diana & Cano-Lopez, Irene & González, Esperanza & Serrano, Miguel Ángel, 2019. "Spanish validation of General Decision-Making Style scale: Sex invariance, sex differences and relationships with personality and coping styles," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(6), pages 739-751, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:6:p:739-751_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500005453/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:6:p:739-751_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.