Psychological Assessment最新文献

Desire intolerance is conceptualized as a motivational counterpoint to the transdiagnostic risk factor of distress intolerance and is defined as the inability or unwillingness to "sit with" the motivation to approach a rewarding object or task. The current work describes the development and validation of a novel measure of desire intolerance. After initial item development and exploratory factor analysis (Study 1) and confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2), the 10-item unidimensional Desire Intolerance Questionnaire (DIQ) was created. Desire intolerance was conceptually related to low self-control (Studies 1-4) and both approach and avoidance motivation (Studies 2, 4, 5) and was distinct from delay of gratification (Study 3). Greater desire intolerance was also associated with higher distress intolerance (Studies 4 and 5). In Study 4, we used qualitative coding to explore what people were thinking about when they considered their "desires." Findings revealed that higher desire intolerance was associated with thinking about desired long-term outcomes more than proximal short-term hedonic pleasures. Finally, Study 4 focused on unique and independent associations between desire and distress intolerance with psychopathology, and we found that both distress intolerance were associated with heightened psychological distress and borderline personality symptoms. Only distress intolerance was uniquely associated with uncontrolled eating and self-criticism, whereas only desire intolerance was uniquely associated with aggressive behavior and dichotomous thinking. The current research supports the DIQ as a psychometrically sound indicator of difficulties withstanding desires and allows for a better understanding of intolerance as a transdiagnostic clinical phenomena. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Whereas existing data verify the importance of support networks in facilitating resilience following trauma, the sociocultural perceptions of posttrauma difficulties that provide context for these interactions remain largely unexplored. Folk psychiatry models propose that lay explanations of mental illness can be quantified along distinct moralizing, medicalizing, and psychologizing dimensions. The current project aimed to develop a trauma-specific measure capturing lay explanations of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) based on this framework. Data were collected from three samples of Mechanical Turk respondents (N₁ = 367; N₂ = 365; N₃ = 401) as well as an independent sample of university students (N₄ = 311). Factor analysis of the final, 13-item Folk Psychiatry Measure-PTSD (FPM-P) indicated close fit of a correlated three-factor model in MTurk and student respondents. Across samples, moralizing beliefs about PTSD (e.g., people with PTSD lack a moral compass) evidenced moderate-to-strong correlations with general attitudes toward those with mental illness, including positive associations with authoritarianism, social restrictiveness, blame, anger, and perceived dangerousness. Negative associations with benevolence and support for community-based care were also noted. Medicalizing beliefs (e.g., PTSD is caused by a chemical imbalance) demonstrated more modest associations with negative attitudes, as noted through weak correlations with increased authoritarianism, anger, and lower benevolence toward those experiencing psychological difficulties. Finally, psychologizing explanations (e.g., people with poor relationships and low social support are at greater risk of developing PTSD) evidenced weak but positive associations with benevolence and pity for those with mental health concerns. Implications and cultural-based nuances of the scale are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Given the far-reaching effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to investigate how executive function (EF) assessments were impacted by changes in measurement protocols, context, and timing due to the pandemic. The present study used data from two projects. The first project occurred prior to the pandemic (N = 244, 44.67% female; M_age = 44.27 months) with teacher ratings and objective EF measures collected in the spring of preschool, fall of prekindergarten (pre-K), and spring of pre-K. The second study was comprised of two cohorts, a transition cohort (i.e., Fall 2019 to Fall/Winter 2020) and a post-COVID lockdown cohort (i.e., Fall 2020 to Fall/Winter 2021). For both cohorts, data were collected in the fall of pre-K, spring of pre-K, and fall/winter of kindergarten (N = 130, 46.2% female, M_age = 44.84 months). Aims included: (1) evaluating the measurement characteristics of a virtual assessment of EF, (2) examining cohort differences in teacher and objective EF measures, (3) testing longitudinal mean-level change in EF, and (4) evaluating associations between COVID impact and change in EF. Teachers reported a marginal decrease in EF for the transition cohort and no change in the post-COVID cohort, whereas objective measurements demonstrated the expected increase in EF. Child and family COVID-19 impact emerged as risk factors for reduced EF for the transition cohort but not the post-COVID cohort. Overall, this study provides novel evidence that the timing and type of EF assessment differentially impacted estimates of children's EF. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of college students was investigated in a cross-sectional design using the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991, 2007). Three large samples of college students were recruited for research purposes and given standard instructions: 825 students from two universities assessed in the 2021-2022 academic year (postpandemic), 558 students from three universities assessed between 2016 and 2019 (prepandemic), and 1,051 students from seven universities assessed in 1989 and 1990 (college norms). Comparisons of PAI scores with the prepandemic cohort revealed several significantly higher scores in the postpandemic cohort, especially for scales related to anxiety and depression. Comparisons with the college norms revealed significantly higher scores on several PAI scales in the prepandemic cohort, and these differences were largest for scales related to anxiety, depression, and somatic symptoms. PAI scales related to impulsivity, alcohol use, and other behavior problems showed no changes or decline from earlier to later cohorts. Taken together, the findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has amplified problems with anxiety and depression that existed before the pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The Epidemic-Pandemic Impacts Inventory (EPII) is a 92-item measure developed to assess tangible impacts of the pandemic including both negative (work, home, social, and health) and positive changes. The EPII has been used in a variety of studies, but a standard scoring system has not been determined. Parents of young children (N = 216) completed the EPII, Perceived Stress Scale, Parenting Stress Scale, Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS-PA and PANAS-NA), and COVID-19 Stress Scale (CSS) online September 2021-May 2022. The EPII was scored in three ways represented in the literature to examine which scoring method accounted for the greatest amount of variance in parents' stress and mood, independent of demographic factors and CSS. Hierarchical linear regression results revealed that one EPII scoring method consistently accounted for the greatest amount of variance in each outcome variable (largest R2) compared to the other two scoring methods. Additionally, number of negative and positive pandemic impacts accounted for more variance (larger β coefficient) in each outcome compared to demographic factors and CSS, with the exception that negative pandemic impacts were not associated with PANAS-PA. One method of scoring the EPII may maximize the measures' potential to account for variance in stress and mood among parents of young children. The EPII may be a valuable measure to include in studies examining the impact of the pandemic on parents' well-being even beyond the peak of the pandemic, as its association with stress and mood appears to be long-lasting and independent of demographic factors and COVID-19 stress. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The Epidemic-Pandemic Impacts Inventory (EPII) was developed to assess pandemic-related adverse and positive experiences across several key domains, including work/employment, home life, isolation, and quarantine. Several studies have associated EPII-assessed pandemic-related experiences with a wide range of psychosocial factors, most commonly depressive and anxiety symptoms. The present study investigated the degree to which specific types of COVID-19 pandemic-related experiences may be associated with anxiety and depression risk, capitalizing on two large, independent samples with marked differences in sociodemographic characteristics. The present study utilized two adult samples: participants (N = 635) recruited online over a 4-week period in early 2020 (Sample 1) and participants (N = 908) recruited from the student body of a large Northeastern public university (Sample 2). We employed a cross-validated, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression approach, as well as a random forest (RF) machine learning algorithm, to investigate classification accuracy of anxiety/depression risk using the pandemic-related experiences from the EPII. The LASSO approach isolated eight items within each sample. Two items from the work/employment and emotional/physical health domains overlapped across samples. The RF approach identified similar items across samples. Both methods yielded acceptable cross-classification accuracy. Applying two analytic approaches on data from two large, sociodemographically unique samples, we identified a subset of sample-specific and nonspecific pandemic-related experiences from the EPII that are most predictive of concurrent depression/anxiety risk. Findings may help to focus on key experiences during future public health disasters that convey greater risk for depression and anxiety symptoms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

To assess the public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, investigators from the National Institutes of Health Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) research program developed the Pandemic-Related Traumatic Stress Scale (PTSS). Based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5) acute stress disorder symptom criteria, the PTSS is designed for adolescent (13-21 years) and adult self-report and caregiver-report on 3-12-year-olds. To evaluate psychometric properties, we used PTSS data collected between April 2020 and August 2021 from non-pregnant adult caregivers (n = 11,483), pregnant/postpartum individuals (n = 1,656), adolescents (n = 1,795), and caregivers reporting on 3-12-year-olds (n = 2,896). We used Mokken scale analysis to examine unidimensionality and reliability, Pearson correlations to evaluate relationships with other relevant variables, and analyses of variance to identify regional, age, and sex differences. Mokken analysis resulted in a moderately strong, unidimensional scale that retained nine of the original 10 items. We detected small to moderate positive associations with depression, anxiety, and general stress, and negative associations with life satisfaction. Adult caregivers had the highest PTSS scores, followed by adolescents, pregnant/postpartum individuals, and children. Caregivers of younger children, females, and older youth had higher PTSS scores compared to caregivers of older children, males, and younger youth, respectively. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).