The appearance of multidimensionality: Exploring the case for unidimensionality of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 using a firefighter sample.

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-18 DOI:10.1037/pas0001300
Lynne Steinberg, Anka A Vujanovic
{"title":"The appearance of multidimensionality: Exploring the case for unidimensionality of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 using a firefighter sample.","authors":"Lynne Steinberg, Anka A Vujanovic","doi":"10.1037/pas0001300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rasmussen et al. (2019) described the proliferation of factors for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) measures and raised concerns about the construct validity of factors that include two or three items. In this brief report, we describe how the pattern of covariation among the responses to items of well-established measures, such as the PTSD Checklist for <i>DSM-5</i> (PCL-5), can give the appearance of multidimensionality. We evaluated whether the structure of the 20-item PCL-5 is unidimensional, using the methods of multidimensional item response theory (MIRT) and the concept of a testlet. These analyses were done using a sample of trauma-exposed urban firefighters. A unidimensional and a bifactor model, which includes a general factor composed of all items and four specific factors mirroring the <i>DSM-5</i> conceptualization, were evaluated for both Likert-type multiple-category and binary coding system of the PCL-5 item response data. Seven testlets were created from the 20 PCL-5 items following the seven-factor model (Armour et al., 2015) presented in Table 1 of Rasmussen et al. (2019). Findings using the unidimensional nominal item response theory model for the seven testlets indicated that the PCL-5 may be considered unidimensional with a single score representing individual differences on a continuum that ranges from low to high. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001300","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rasmussen et al. (2019) described the proliferation of factors for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) measures and raised concerns about the construct validity of factors that include two or three items. In this brief report, we describe how the pattern of covariation among the responses to items of well-established measures, such as the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), can give the appearance of multidimensionality. We evaluated whether the structure of the 20-item PCL-5 is unidimensional, using the methods of multidimensional item response theory (MIRT) and the concept of a testlet. These analyses were done using a sample of trauma-exposed urban firefighters. A unidimensional and a bifactor model, which includes a general factor composed of all items and four specific factors mirroring the DSM-5 conceptualization, were evaluated for both Likert-type multiple-category and binary coding system of the PCL-5 item response data. Seven testlets were created from the 20 PCL-5 items following the seven-factor model (Armour et al., 2015) presented in Table 1 of Rasmussen et al. (2019). Findings using the unidimensional nominal item response theory model for the seven testlets indicated that the PCL-5 may be considered unidimensional with a single score representing individual differences on a continuum that ranges from low to high. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多维性的表象:利用消防员样本探讨 DSM-5 创伤后应激障碍清单的单维性。
Rasmussen等人(2019)描述了创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)测量因子的激增,并对包含两三个项目的因子的建构效度提出了担忧。在这份简短报告中,我们描述了创伤后应激障碍核对表 DSM-5(PCL-5)等久经考验的测量项目的反应之间的共变模式是如何呈现出多维性的。我们利用多维项目反应理论(MIRT)的方法和小测验的概念,评估了 20 个项目的 PCL-5 的结构是否是单维的。这些分析是通过对受过创伤的城市消防员样本进行的。针对 PCL-5 项目反应数据的李克特多类别和二进制编码系统,对单维模型和双因子模型进行了评估,其中包括一个由所有项目组成的一般因子和四个反映 DSM-5 概念化的特定因子。根据 Rasmussen 等人(2019)表 1 中列出的七因素模型(Armour 等人,2015 年),从 20 个 PCL-5 项目中创建了七个测试单元。使用单维名义项目反应理论模型对七个小测验进行研究的结果表明,PCL-5可被视为单维的,其单一分数代表了从低到高的连续统一体中的个体差异。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
期刊最新文献
Development and validation of a method for deriving MMPI-3 scores from MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF item responses. Evaluation of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) Unlikely Virtues Scale in the detection of underreporting. Prospectively predicting violent and aggressive incidents in prison practice with the Risk Screener Violence (RS-V): Results from a multisite prison study. Development of the Food Addiction Symptom Inventory: The first clinical interview to assess ultra-processed food addiction. Does the Bayley-4 measure the same constructs across girls and boys and infants, toddlers, and preschoolers?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1