Examining the Incremental Validity of the Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire (PAQ) Relative to the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20).

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of personality assessment Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-05 DOI:10.1080/00223891.2023.2201831
Aqsa Zahid, Graeme J Taylor, Sharlane C L Lau, Suddene Stone, R Michael Bagby
{"title":"Examining the Incremental Validity of the Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire (PAQ) Relative to the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20).","authors":"Aqsa Zahid, Graeme J Taylor, Sharlane C L Lau, Suddene Stone, R Michael Bagby","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2023.2201831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) is the most widely used instrument for assessing alexithymia, with more than 25 years of research supporting its reliability and validity. The items that compose this scale were written to operationalize the components of the construct that are based on clinical observations of patients and thought to reflect deficits in the cognitive processing of emotions. The Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire (PAQ) is a recently introduced measure and is based on a theoretical attention-appraisal model of alexithymia. An important step with any newly developed measure is to evaluate whether it demonstrates incremental validity over existing measures. In this study using a community sample (<i>N</i> = 759), a series of hierarchical regression analyses were conducted that included an array of measures assessing constructs closely associated with alexithymia. Overall, the TAS-20 showed strong associations with these various constructs to which the PAQ was unable to add any meaningful increase in prediction relative to the TAS-20. We conclude that until future studies with clinical samples using several different criterion variables demonstrate incremental validity of the PAQ, the TAS-20 should remain the self-report measure of choice for clinicians and researchers assessing alexithymia, albeit as part of a multi-method approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":" ","pages":"242-253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2023.2201831","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) is the most widely used instrument for assessing alexithymia, with more than 25 years of research supporting its reliability and validity. The items that compose this scale were written to operationalize the components of the construct that are based on clinical observations of patients and thought to reflect deficits in the cognitive processing of emotions. The Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire (PAQ) is a recently introduced measure and is based on a theoretical attention-appraisal model of alexithymia. An important step with any newly developed measure is to evaluate whether it demonstrates incremental validity over existing measures. In this study using a community sample (N = 759), a series of hierarchical regression analyses were conducted that included an array of measures assessing constructs closely associated with alexithymia. Overall, the TAS-20 showed strong associations with these various constructs to which the PAQ was unable to add any meaningful increase in prediction relative to the TAS-20. We conclude that until future studies with clinical samples using several different criterion variables demonstrate incremental validity of the PAQ, the TAS-20 should remain the self-report measure of choice for clinicians and researchers assessing alexithymia, albeit as part of a multi-method approach.

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
与 20 项多伦多 Alexithymia 量表(TAS-20)相比,研究珀斯 Alexithymia 问卷(PAQ)的增量有效性。
多伦多情感障碍量表(TAS-20)由 20 个项目组成,是目前使用最广泛的情感障碍评估工具,其可靠性和有效性得到了超过 25 年的研究支持。组成该量表的项目是根据对患者的临床观察而编写的,这些项目被认为反映了患者在情绪认知处理方面的缺陷。珀斯情感缺失症问卷(PAQ)是最近推出的一种测量方法,它基于情感缺失症的注意力评估理论模型。对于任何新开发的测量方法,重要的一步是评估它是否比现有的测量方法更有效。本研究使用社区样本(N = 759)进行了一系列分层回归分析,其中包括一系列评估与情感缺失症密切相关的结构的测量方法。总的来说,TAS-20 与这些不同的构建因素都有很强的关联,相对于 TAS-20,PAQ 无法增加任何有意义的预测。我们的结论是,在未来使用多个不同标准变量对临床样本进行的研究证明 PAQ 具有增量有效性之前,TAS-20 仍应是临床医生和研究人员评估情感障碍的首选自我报告测量方法,尽管它是多种方法的一部分。
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
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
8.80%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) primarily publishes articles dealing with the development, evaluation, refinement, and application of personality assessment methods. Desirable articles address empirical, theoretical, instructional, or professional aspects of using psychological tests, interview data, or the applied clinical assessment process. They also advance the measurement, description, or understanding of personality, psychopathology, and human behavior. JPA is broadly concerned with developing and using personality assessment methods in clinical, counseling, forensic, and health psychology settings; with the assessment process in applied clinical practice; with the assessment of people of all ages and cultures; and with both normal and abnormal personality functioning.
期刊最新文献
The Unified Narcissism Scale-Revised: Testing Incremental Validity and Shortening the Measure. Personality Traits in Latin America: A Cross-Cultural Study of the Big Five Factor Structure and its Relationship with Self-Reported Daily Behaviors. Validation of the Approach-Avoidance Temperament Questionnaire in Individuals with Anxiety and Depression. The Development of the Attachment Defenses Questionnaire (ADQ-50): A Preliminary Examination of Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure. The Structure of Identity Dysfunction in Self-Report Measures.
×
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