认知失败问卷中文版测评大学生样本的效度和信度

发布时间：2018-03-10 21:23

本文选题：认知失败　切入点：效度　出处：《中国临床心理学杂志》2016年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：目的:在中国大学生群体中修订认知失败问卷(Cognitive Failures Questionnaire,CFQ),并检验其信效度。方法:调查了1120名大学生,收回有效问卷1014份,用以评定CFQ中文版的结构效度、内部一致性信度。另用日常记忆问卷、大学生无聊倾向问卷、Conners成人注意缺陷多动障碍自评量表和大五人格量表在163名大学生中检验效标关联效度。1个月后随机选取104名大学生进行重测。结果:CFQ中文版包括干扰、记忆、人际失误、运动协调和人名记忆5个因子,共25个条目;验证性因素分析结果显示5因素模型拟合良好(χ2/df=2.201,CFI=0.902,TLI=0.892,RMSEA=0.052,SRMR=0.045);问卷总分与日常记忆、无聊倾向、注意缺陷多动倾向、神经质的相关系数在0.41~0.50之间,与责任心的相关系数为-0.31;总问卷的内部一致性信度、分半信度和重测信度分别为0.86、0.83和0.87。女生在问卷总分及干扰、记忆、人际失误和运动协调维度上得分显著高于男生。结论:CFQ中文版具有良好的效度和信度,可用于评估大学生的认知失败倾向。
[Abstract]:Objective: to revise the Cognitive Failures questionnaire for cognitive failure and test its reliability and validity in Chinese college students. Methods: 1 120 college students were investigated and 1 014 valid questionnaires were collected to evaluate the structural validity of the Chinese version of CFQ. Internal consistency reliability. Daily memory questionnaire, The self-rating scale for adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the Big five Personality scale (D5) were used to test the correlation validity of the criteria among 163 college students. One month later, 104 college students were randomly selected to retest. Results the Chinese version of the "1: CFQ" included interference. Five factors of memory, interpersonal error, motor coordination and personal name memory, 25 items were included. The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the 5-factor model fitted well (蠂 2 / dfn 2.201 / CFI 0.902 / TLI 0.892 / RMSEAA 0.052% SRMRN 0.045). The total score of questionnaire and daily memory, boredom tendency, attention deficit hyperactivity tendency, the total score of questionnaire and daily memory, boredom tendency, attention deficit hyperactivity tendency, the total score of questionnaire and daily memory, boredom tendency, attention deficit hyperactivity tendency, The correlation coefficient between neuroticism and responsibility was -0.31, the reliability of internal consistency, split-half reliability and test-retest reliability were 0.860.83 and 0.87 respectively. Conclusion the Chinese version of "1: CFQ" has good validity and reliability, which can be used to evaluate college students' cognitive failure tendency.
【作者单位】：哈尔滨师范大学教育科学学院;佳木斯大学学生心理健康教育与咨询中心;
【分类号】：B842.1

【参考文献】