Background. There is controversy surrounding the factor
structure of the Parental Bonding
Instrument (PBI), a widely used instrument for assessing perceived parental
rearing behaviours.
Recent studies have proposed five different factor structures, including
Parker et al.'s original two-factor model.
Methods. Four hundred and eighteen employed Japanese adults
filled out the PBI. Maximum
likelihood confirmatory factor analyses were performed to compare the five
different factor
structures in terms of model-fit.
Results. Parker's original two-factor structure fitted
the data poorly. In general, three-factor
structures showed better fit. Among the three-factor structures, Murphy's
model and Kendler's
model were superior (the adjusted goodness-of-fit index >0·8),
with the latter providing the best fit
to the data (the goodness-of-fit index >0·9). When considering
invariance of factor structure across
gender subgroups and across age subgroups, only Kendler's model was
acceptable.
Conclusions. Parker's two-factor structure of the PBI
may not be appropriate for assessing perceived
parental rearing behaviours in a Japanese population. Three-factor structures,
in particular
Murphy's model and Kendler's model, are preferable. Kendler's
model provided the best fit to the
data and was relatively invariant across the subgroups in this study. Thus,
Kendler's model might
prove to be very important for obtaining a factor structure invariant across
different cultures.