Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy (CSIE)

Abstract

The Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy (CSIE) is a standardized 32-item psychometric instrument developed by Kenneth D. Locke and Pamela Sadler to bridge the structural taxonomy of the Interpersonal Circumplex (IPC) with Albert Bandura‘s social-cognitive theory of self-efficacy. The instrument systematically evaluates an individual's subjective confidence in their capacity to execute specific interpersonal behaviors across the full two-dimensional geometric space defined by the primary orthogonal axes of Agency (dominance versus submissiveness) and Communion (warmth versus coldness). Composed of eight distinct 4-item octant scales—Dominant (PA), Arrogant/Competitive (BC), Cold/Detached (DE), Socially Avoidant/Insecure (FG), Submissive (HI), Accommodating (JK), Warm/Affiliative (LM), and Gregarious/Expressive (NO)—the CSIE assesses efficacy expectancies using an 11-point continuous rating format ranging from 0 ("I am not at all confident that…") to 10 ("I am absolutely confident that…"). Extensive psychometric evaluations demonstrate that the CSIE exhibits robust circular structural properties conforming to rigorous circumplex criteria via circular stochastic process and structural equation modeling. The instrument achieves high internal consistency across all eight octants (Cronbach's alphas typically spanning .75 to .88) and demonstrates divergent, convergent, and predictive validity in relation to interpersonal problems, subjective interpersonal values, attachment styles, and behavioral complementarity in dyadic interactions. This comprehensive assessment tool serves vital empirical and diagnostic roles in social psychology, personality assessment, clinical case conceptualization, and psychotherapy research.

Keywords

Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy, CSIE, Interpersonal Circumplex, Self-Efficacy, Agency and Communion, Interpersonal Theory, Social-Cognitive Theory, Dyadic Interaction, Structural Equation Modeling, Circular Stochastic Process, Kenneth D. Locke, Interpersonal Assessment.

Authors

The Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy was conceptualized and developed by Kenneth D. Locke, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology at the University of Idaho, in collaboration with Pamela Sadler, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology at Wilfrid Laurier University. Dr. Locke is an internationally recognized expert in interpersonal psychology, social comparison, and the psychometric operationalization of circumplex models. Correspondence regarding the original validation studies and psychometric research on the instrument may be directed to Kenneth D. Locke, Department of Psychology and Communication, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA (Email: [email protected]).

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy (CSIE) is to quantify an individual's subjective conviction that they can successfully enact a wide array of specific behavioral styles during social interactions. Historically, interpersonal personality psychology focused predominantly on observable behavioral traits, dispositions, or distress—as measured by established circumplex inventories such as the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) or the Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS). Conversely, Bandura's social-cognitive tradition established that individuals do not navigate social environments merely based on habitual motor habits; rather, behavior is heavily governed by efficacy expectancies—the subjective appraisal of one's execution capability under diverse conditions. The CSIE was intentionally engineered to synthesize these two theoretical paradigms into a single, structurally rigorous assessment tool.

From an applied clinical perspective, the CSIE addresses a critical diagnostic blind spot. Individuals presenting for psychotherapy often exhibit marked discrepancies between their interpersonal desires (values), their perceived capabilities (efficacy), and their symptomatic difficulties (problems). For example, a patient presenting with social anxiety disorder may desperately value communal warmth (high LM values) but maintain profound efficacy deficits regarding agency (low PA/NO efficacy) or an inability to tolerate conflict (low BC efficacy). By mapping self-efficacy across all eight circumplex sectors, clinicians can precisely identify whether social avoidance is maintained by an inability to assert dominance, a perceived inability to resist exploitation, or an inability to initiate affiliation. Consequently, the CSIE serves as an invaluable clinical baseline for cognitive-behavioral therapy, assertiveness training, and contemporary interpersonal reconstructive therapies.

In empirical research, the CSIE provides a standardized metric for investigating dyadic interaction dynamics, behavioral complementarity, and systemic behavioral coordination. In social psychology and industrial-organizational contexts, the instrument illuminates how asymmetric efficacy beliefs influence leadership emergence, team negotiation tactics, and conflict resolution trajectories. Because it measures confidence rather than absolute behavioral frequency, researchers can disaggregate motivational intent from behavioral execution competence in laboratory-based or unscripted naturalistic dyadic protocols.

Psychological Construct

The psychological construct evaluated by the CSIE is interpersonal self-efficacy, operationalized as an individual's domain-specific appraisal of their ability to execute behaviors defined by the orthogonal coordinates of the interpersonal circumplex. The interpersonal circumplex represents social behavior around a geometric circle defined by two fundamental axes: the vertical axis of Agency (Dominance vs. Submissiveness, or Control vs. Yielding) and the horizontal axis of Communion (Warmth/Affiliation vs. Coldness/Disaffiliation). The 32 items of the CSIE coalesce into eight distinct octants spaced at 45-degree intervals, each reflecting a specific configuration of agency and communion:

• PA: Dominant / Assured-Dominant (90°): This octant captures high agency with neutral communion. It measures an individual's confidence in taking control, asserting authority, assuming leadership positions, and holding the upper hand in social contexts. Prototypic items evaluate confidence in being able to "take charge" or "be a leader."
• BC: Arrogant-Calculating / Competitive (135°): Combining high agency with negative communion, this octant reflects confidence in maintaining a firm, competitive, and unyielding posture. It measures efficacy in standing one's ground, confronting opposition, winning arguments, and asserting toughness without capitulating to social pressures.
• DE: Cold-Detached / Distant (180°): Reflecting low communion with neutral agency, this octant evaluates confidence in maintaining emotional detachment, setting rigid boundaries, repelling unwanted intrusions, and acting aggressively or coldly when necessary. It assesses the perceived capacity to "get them to leave me alone" or hide internal emotional states.
• FG: Socially Avoidant / Introverted-Unassured (225°): Characterized by low agency and low communion, this octant assesses confidence in retreating, becoming invisible, maintaining quietness, and remaining passive to avoid interpersonal conflict or attention. It taps the perceived capacity to fade into the background when an interaction becomes challenging.
• HI: Unassured-Submissive (270°): Reflecting low agency with neutral communion, this octant captures efficacy in taking a deferential, submissive posture, accepting the leadership of others, and following established social hierarchies without resistance. Prototypic behaviors include being a follower and adhering strictly to normative rules.
• JK: Accommodating / Exploitable (315°): Combining low agency with high communion, this octant reflects confidence in yielding, deferring to the desires of others, avoiding friction, and smoothing over interpersonal tension. It gauges self-efficacy in maintaining interpersonal peace through acquiescence and avoiding eliciting anger.
• LM: Warm / Affiliative (0° / 360°): Representing high communion with neutral agency, this octant measures confidence in providing emotional nurturance, demonstrating kindness, extending help, offering empathy, and soothing hurt feelings. It reflects the perceived capability to connect warmly with others.
• NO: Gregarious / Expressive (45°): Combining high agency and high communion, this octant assesses confidence in being outwardly expressive, speaking up openly in group settings, connecting collaboratively, and capturing the positive attention of conversational partners.

Theoretical Framework

The CSIE is grounded in the theoretical integration of two major traditions in personality and clinical psychology: Interpersonal Theory and Social-Cognitive Theory.

Interpersonal Theory and the Circumplex Tradition

Interpersonal theory, originating in the seminal clinical writings of Harry Stack Sullivan and formalized psychometrically by Timothy Leary and the Kaiser Foundation research group, posits that personality manifests most clearly in transactional configurations between individuals. Leary (1957) demonstrated that interpersonal dispositions arrange systematically around a circular continuum. Decades of subsequent psychometric refining by Jerry Wiggins, Leonard Horowitz, and Michael Pincus established that interpersonal traits, problems, values, and sensitivities conform to a circular bivariate space organized by the orthogonal meta-constructs of Agency (status, control, mastery) and Communion (solidarity, love, belonging).

According to interpersonal complementarity theory (Carson, 1969; Kiesler, 1983; Sadler et al., 2011), human interactions follow predictable reciprocal dynamics: agency pulls for reciprocity (dominance elicits submission; submission elicits dominance), whereas communion pulls for correspondence (warmth invites warmth; hostility invites hostility). To function adaptively, individuals must possess flexible access to a broad repertoire of behaviors across all octants of the circumplex. A structural circumplex implies that the relationship between any two scales is a decreasing monotonic function of their geometric angular separation: adjacent scales ($45^circ$) correlate strongly positively, orthogonal scales ($90^circ$) correlate near zero, and opposing scales ($180^circ$) correlate strongly negatively.

Social-Cognitive Self-Efficacy Theory

Bandura's (1977, 1997) social-cognitive theory posits that psychological functioning is mediated through reciprocal determinism involving cognitive structures, behavioral enactments, and environmental influences. A cornerstone of this architecture is self-efficacy—the belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to manage prospective situations. Self-efficacy beliefs influence whether individuals initiate coping behaviors, how much effort they expend, and how long they persist in the face of obstacles.

Locke and Sadler (2007) recognized that existing circumplex inventories almost exclusively evaluated habitual traits (e.g., "I am forceful") or interpersonal distress (e.g., "It is hard for me to say no"). Such scales conflate performance deficits with motivational values or inhibitory distress. By explicitly phrasing items around Bandura's "can do" paradigm ("I can…") coupled with an explicit, graded certainty scale, the CSIE isolates subjective efficacy expectancies. This integration enables researchers to explore how an individual's perceived efficacy across the circumplex coordinates directly governs their real-time responses to a partner's interpersonal pulls during live, unscripted dyadic exchanges.

Validity

Empirical validation of the CSIE has established high levels of construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity across multiple clinical and non-clinical samples.

Construct and Structural Validity

Construct validity in circumplex methodology requires verifying that empirical intercorrelations among the eight octants conform to a circumplex correlation matrix—specifically, a Toeplitz circulant matrix where correlation coefficients decrease systematically as angular distance increases from $0^circ$ to $180^circ$. Using Hubert's randomization test of circular order and structural covariance modeling via Browne's circular stochastic process criteria, Locke and Sadler (2007) confirmed that the 32 items consistently achieve circular order without dimensional distortions across diverse cohorts. The two extracted principal components systematically represent the Agency and Communion axes, accounting for the vast majority of the shared variance among the eight octants.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent validity has been evaluated extensively against established interpersonal instruments:

• Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Values (CSIV): Locke (2000) developed the CSIV to measure what individuals value in social interactions. Efficacy octants correlate strongly with their corresponding value octants (e.g., CSIE-PA correlates robustly with CSIV-PA, with coefficients typically exceeding $r = .55$, while showing near-zero or negative correlations with opposing octants such as CSIV-HI), supporting convergent and discriminant distinctiveness.
• Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP-C / IIP-64): Octant scores on the CSIE show theoretically coherent negative relationships with corresponding interpersonal problem octants. For instance, low efficacy on CSIE-PA and CSIE-NO predicts high distress on the IIP Nonassertive and Socially Inhibited scales ($r = -.45$ to $-.60$). Crucially, however, the CSIE and IIP are not redundant; an individual may feel highly capable of executing aggression (CSIE-BC/DE) while simultaneously viewing such behavior as problematic or distressing on the IIP.
• General Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem: CSIE agentic octants correlate moderately positively with generalized self-efficacy (Schwarzer & Jerusalem) and Rosenberg Self-Esteem ($r \approx .35-.50$), whereas communal octants correlate primarily with prosociality, empathy, and perspective-taking measures, demonstrating multi-trait divergence.

Predictive and Behavioral Validity

In behavioral studies involving unscripted, laboratory dyadic interactions between strangers (Locke & Sadler, 2007), CSIE scores successfully predicted real-time interactional dynamics. Individuals with elevated PA (Dominant) efficacy reliably displayed higher levels of nonverbal and verbal assertive behaviors, dominated speaking time, and successfully engaged in complementary dominance-submission negotiations. Furthermore, dyadic satisfaction was significantly higher when participants possessed balanced interpersonal efficacy profiles, allowing them to adapt dynamically to their partners' conversational shifts rather than remaining locked in rigid, maladaptive behavioral patterns.

Reliability

The psychometric evaluation of the CSIE indicates strong internal consistency and temporal stability across diverse populations, including undergraduate cohorts, community adults, and clinical samples.

Internal Consistency

Despite each octant subscale containing only four items—a design choice prioritizing brevity and circumplex efficiency—the internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach's alpha) across the eight scales demonstrate high reliability. In the foundational validation studies by Locke and Sadler (2007), the alpha coefficients observed were:

• PA (Dominant): $\alpha = .84$ to $.88$
• BC (Competitive): $\alpha = .78$ to $.82$
• DE (Cold): $\alpha = .77$ to $.81$
• FG (Avoidant): $\alpha = .75$ to $.79$
• HI (Submissive): $\alpha = .76$ to $.80$
• JK (Accommodating): $\alpha = .75$ to $.81$
• LM (Warm): $\alpha = .80$ to $.85$
• NO (Expressive): $\alpha = .82$ to $.86$

Composite structural reliability for the orthogonal vector scores—Interpersonal Agency ($DOM$) and Interpersonal Communion ($LOV$)—regularly exceeds $\alpha = .88$, reflecting exceptional measurement precision for bivariate profile analyses.

Test-Retest Stability

Test-retest reliability assessments conducted across intervals ranging from two to eight weeks have yielded stability coefficients ($r_{tt}$) between $.72$ and $.84$ across the eight octant subscales. The primary axis dimensions ($DOM$ and $LOV$) demonstrate stability coefficients exceeding $.85$. This confirms that while the CSIE is sensitive to psychological interventions (such as targeted assertiveness or communication training), it functions as a highly stable, trait-like cognitive-affective index under baseline conditions.

Factor Analysis

Because the CSIE is explicitly predicated on a geometric circular model, standard linear exploratory factor analysis (EFA) or simple independent-cluster confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) are methodologically insufficient. Circumplex instruments require structural evaluation through specialized circular modeling and circular stochastic confirmatory analyses.

Principal Components Analysis and Geometric Projection

When subjected to unrotated principal components analysis (PCA), the 32 items of the CSIE reliably demonstrate a prominent two-component structure following the extraction of a general elevation factor (which captures an individual's overall sense of interpersonal confidence across all domains). After controlling for general elevation, the first two principal components account for roughly 60% to 70% of the remaining common variance. When the eight octant scale loadings on these two components are plotted in two-dimensional Cartesian space, the octants distribute evenly in a circular pattern around the origin in the exact theoretical order predicted by circumplex theory: PA ($90^circ$), BC ($135^circ$), DE ($180^circ$), FG ($225^circ$), HI ($270^circ$), JK ($315^circ$), LM ($0^circ / 360^circ$), and NO ($45^circ$).

Confirmatory Circumplex Structure Modeling

To statistically evaluate circular fit, Locke and Sadler utilized the structural equation modeling procedures developed by Michael Browne (1992) for circumplex matrices (the CIRCUM program) and Hubert's circular expansion randomization tests. Structural modeling enforces three nested constraints on the correlation matrix: (1) circular order, (2) equal spacing (octants spaced exactly $45^circ$ apart), and (3) equal communalities (equal radius from the center). The CSIE consistently satisfies these stringent criteria:

• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Models evaluated across derivation and validation cohorts consistently yield RMSEA values below $.06$ (typically $.045$ to $.055$, $90% \text{ CI } [0.038, 0.068]$), indicating an excellent fit to a quasi-circumplex structure.
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Values routinely surpass $.94$, reflecting minimal departure from perfect circular symmetry.
• Estimated Angular Displacements: Parameter estimates from circular modeling demonstrate that the empirical angular locations of the octant scales deviate minimally from their theoretical targets (typically within $\pm 5^circ$ to $\pm 8^circ$ of optimal placement), confirming that the CSIE satisfies the strict psychometric requirements of circumplex representation.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Tool Name: Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy (CSIE)
• Developer: Kenneth D. Locke (with Pamela Sadler)
• Construct Assessed: Efficacy expectancies across the two-dimensional interpersonal circumplex (Agency and Communion)
• Test Format: Paper-and-pencil questionnaire or computerized self-report assessment
• Number of Items: 32 items (4 items per octant scale)
• Administration Time: Approximately 5 to 8 minutes
• Target Population: Adolescents (aged 16+) and adults across general, non-clinical, and clinical populations
• Response Format: 11-point continuous rating scale anchored from 0 to 10:
  • 0: I am not at all confident that…
  • 2: I am mildly confident that…
  • 5: I am moderately confident that…
  • 8: I am very confident that…
  • 10: I am absolutely confident that…
  • (Intermediate integers 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 serve as unlabeled or intermediate gradations)
• Octant Subscales & Item Mapping:
  • PA (Dominant / Agentic): Items 04, 07, 20, 25
  • BC (Competitive / Tough): Items 02, 10, 15, 28
  • DE (Cold / Distant): Items 05, 18, 23, 26
  • FG (Avoidant / Quiet): Items 08, 13, 21, 29
  • HI (Submissive / Follower): Items 03, 16, 24, 32
  • JK (Accommodating / Yielding): Items 06, 09, 11, 22
  • LM (Warm / Altruistic): Items 14, 19, 27, 30
  • NO (Expressive / Outgoing): Items 01, 12, 17, 31
• Scoring and Structural Computation:
  • Octant Raw Scores: Calculated by computing the arithmetic mean of the 4 items comprising each octant (ranging from 0.0 to 10.0).
  • General Elevation (Overall Efficacy): The mean of all 32 items: $\text{Elevation} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{8} \text{Octant}_i}{8}$.
  • Interpersonal Vector Scores: Weighted trigonometric formulas are used to project individual scores onto the Cartesian axes of Agency ($DOM$) and Communion ($LOV$):
    
    $DOM = \text{PA} – \text{HI} + 0.707 \times (\text{NO} + \text{BC} – \text{JK} – \text{FG})$
    
    $LOV = \text{LM} – \text{DE} + 0.707 \times (\text{NO} + \text{JK} – \text{BC} – \text{FG})$
  • Angular Displacement ($\theta$) & Vector Length ($d$): The overall directional preference and profile differentiation are given by:
    
    $\theta = operatorname{a\tan2}(DOM, LOV)$
    
    $d = \sqrt{DOM^2 + LOV^2}$

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Efficacy was developed in 2007 and officially detailed in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (Locke & Sadler, 2007). The instrument is in the public academic domain for non-commercial research, educational, and clinical applications. Researchers and clinicians may administer, score, and reproduce the CSIE without paying royalty fees, provided appropriate bibliographic attribution is accorded to Dr. Kenneth D. Locke and the original publication.

Commercial utilization, digital platform integration for fee-based services, or large-scale corporate assessment deployments require explicit written authorization and licensing agreements from the copyright holder and publisher. Additional scoring syntax files (for SPSS, SAS, and R) and circumplex profiling documentation are accessible via Kenneth D. Locke's academic website hosted by the University of Idaho.

References

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
• Browne, M. W. (1992). Circumplex models for correlation matrices. Psychometrika, 57(4), 469–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294416
• Carson, R. C. (1969). Interaction concepts of personality. Aldine Publishing Company.
• Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., Baer, B. A., Ureño, G., & Villaseñor, V. S. (1988). Inventory of Interpersonal Problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 885–892. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.56.6.885
• Kiesler, D. J. (1983). The 1982 Interpersonal Circle: A taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions. Psychological Review, 90(3), 185–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.3.185
• Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality: A functional theory and methodology for personality evaluation. Ronald Press.
• Locke, K. D. (2000). Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Values: Reliability, validity, and applicability to interpersonal problems and personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75(2), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7502_6
• Locke, K. D. (2011). Circumplex measures of interpersonal constructs. In L. M. Horowitz & S. Strack (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal psychology: Theory, research, assessment, and therapeutic interventions (pp. 313–324). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118001868.ch19
• Locke, K. D., & Sadler, P. (2007). Self-efficacy, values, and complementarity in dyadic interactions: Integrating interpersonal and social-cognitive theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(1), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206293375
• Sadler, P., Ethier, N., & Woody, E. (2011). Interpersonal complementarity. In L. M. Horowitz & S. Strack (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal psychology: Theory, research, assessment, and therapeutic interventions (pp. 123–142). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118001868.ch8
• Wiggins, J. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(3), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.395

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)