调查麦克林边缘型人格障碍筛查工具(MSI-BPD)中基于性别的不同项目功能:项目反应理论分析。

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2023-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-16 DOI:10.1037/pas0001229
Jacob A Martin, Danielle M Tarantino, Kenneth N Levy
{"title":"调查麦克林边缘型人格障碍筛查工具(MSI-BPD)中基于性别的不同项目功能:项目反应理论分析。","authors":"Jacob A Martin, Danielle M Tarantino, Kenneth N Levy","doi":"10.1037/pas0001229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD) is a popular screening tool for identifying people who may have borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, because women are more frequently diagnosed with the disorder than men, it is possible that the MSI-BPD differs in its ability to identify BPD as a function of gender identity. Using item response theory (IRT), we sought to determine if components of the MSI-BPD would demonstrate differential item functioning (DIF), such that one gender identity would be more likely to endorse certain items. Twenty-two thousand thirty-five college undergraduates (14,305 women) aged 18-55 years (<i>M</i> = 18.77, <i>SD</i> = 1.75) were assessed using the MSI-BPD as part of a subject pool screening between 2008 and 2019. The MSI-BPD contains 10 items that are measured dichotomously, and the authors recommend a cut-off of 7 of 10 items endorsed to maximize sensitivity and specificity to BPD. Results suggested that a two-parameter model was the best fit to the data and that unidimensionality and local independence assumptions were met. The following items demonstrated DIF: self-harm/suicidality, affective lability, abandonment, impulsivity, and anger. At equal levels of the latent construct of BPD, women were more likely to endorse self-harm/suicidality, affective lability, and abandonment. Women were more likely to endorse impulsivity at higher levels of BPD, and men were more likely to endorse anger at lower levels of BPD. Ultimately, the effect sizes of these differences were small, however, and likely do not impact the individual's overall outcome on the measure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":"35 5","pages":"462-468"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating gender-based differential item functioning on the McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD): An item response theory analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jacob A Martin, Danielle M Tarantino, Kenneth N Levy\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pas0001229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD) is a popular screening tool for identifying people who may have borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, because women are more frequently diagnosed with the disorder than men, it is possible that the MSI-BPD differs in its ability to identify BPD as a function of gender identity. Using item response theory (IRT), we sought to determine if components of the MSI-BPD would demonstrate differential item functioning (DIF), such that one gender identity would be more likely to endorse certain items. Twenty-two thousand thirty-five college undergraduates (14,305 women) aged 18-55 years (<i>M</i> = 18.77, <i>SD</i> = 1.75) were assessed using the MSI-BPD as part of a subject pool screening between 2008 and 2019. The MSI-BPD contains 10 items that are measured dichotomously, and the authors recommend a cut-off of 7 of 10 items endorsed to maximize sensitivity and specificity to BPD. Results suggested that a two-parameter model was the best fit to the data and that unidimensionality and local independence assumptions were met. The following items demonstrated DIF: self-harm/suicidality, affective lability, abandonment, impulsivity, and anger. At equal levels of the latent construct of BPD, women were more likely to endorse self-harm/suicidality, affective lability, and abandonment. Women were more likely to endorse impulsivity at higher levels of BPD, and men were more likely to endorse anger at lower levels of BPD. Ultimately, the effect sizes of these differences were small, however, and likely do not impact the individual's overall outcome on the measure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Assessment\",\"volume\":\"35 5\",\"pages\":\"462-468\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"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/pas0001229\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001229","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

麦克林边缘型人格障碍筛查工具(MSI-BPD)是一种流行的筛查工具,用于识别可能患有边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的人。然而,由于女性比男性更常被诊断出患有边缘型人格障碍,因此 MSI-BPD 在识别边缘型人格障碍的能力上有可能因性别认同而有所不同。利用项目反应理论(IRT),我们试图确定 MSI-BPD 的组成部分是否会表现出不同的项目功能(DIF),从而使一种性别认同更有可能赞同某些项目。我们在 2008 年至 2019 年期间使用 MSI-BPD 对 2.235 万名年龄在 18-55 岁之间的大学本科生(14305 名女性)进行了评估(M = 18.77,SD = 1.75),作为受试者库筛选的一部分。MSI-BPD包含10个项目,采用二分法测量,作者建议将10个项目中的7个项目作为分界点,以最大限度地提高对BPD的敏感性和特异性。结果表明,双参数模型是数据的最佳拟合模型,并且符合单维性和局部独立性假设。以下项目显示出 DIF:自残/自杀、情感易变、遗弃、冲动和愤怒。在 BPD 潜在建构的同等水平上,女性更有可能认同自残/自杀、情感易变性和遗弃。在 BPD 水平较高的情况下,女性更有可能认同冲动,而在 BPD 水平较低的情况下,男性更有可能认同愤怒。不过,这些差异的效应大小最终都很小,很可能不会影响个人在测量中的总体结果。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Investigating gender-based differential item functioning on the McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD): An item response theory analysis.

The McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD) is a popular screening tool for identifying people who may have borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, because women are more frequently diagnosed with the disorder than men, it is possible that the MSI-BPD differs in its ability to identify BPD as a function of gender identity. Using item response theory (IRT), we sought to determine if components of the MSI-BPD would demonstrate differential item functioning (DIF), such that one gender identity would be more likely to endorse certain items. Twenty-two thousand thirty-five college undergraduates (14,305 women) aged 18-55 years (M = 18.77, SD = 1.75) were assessed using the MSI-BPD as part of a subject pool screening between 2008 and 2019. The MSI-BPD contains 10 items that are measured dichotomously, and the authors recommend a cut-off of 7 of 10 items endorsed to maximize sensitivity and specificity to BPD. Results suggested that a two-parameter model was the best fit to the data and that unidimensionality and local independence assumptions were met. The following items demonstrated DIF: self-harm/suicidality, affective lability, abandonment, impulsivity, and anger. At equal levels of the latent construct of BPD, women were more likely to endorse self-harm/suicidality, affective lability, and abandonment. Women were more likely to endorse impulsivity at higher levels of BPD, and men were more likely to endorse anger at lower levels of BPD. Ultimately, the effect sizes of these differences were small, however, and likely do not impact the individual's overall outcome on the measure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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