认知回避问卷在中国大学生中应用的信效度

发布时间：2018-05-05 23:54

本文选题：认知回避 + 认知回避问卷　；参考：《中国临床心理学杂志》2017年06期

【摘要】：目的:引进认知回避问卷(Cognitive Avoidance Questionnaire,CAQ),并考察其在中国大学生被试中的信效度。方法:使用经双盲翻译的中文版CAQ,对600名大学生进行施测,回收有效问卷561份。初次施测后间隔3~4周,选取91名被试进行重测。结果:验证性因素分析的结果表明中文版CAQ符合原五因素模型(χ~2=494.620,df=239,χ~2/df=2.070,RMESA=0.046,CFI=0.954,TLI=0.942,SRMR=0.042),五因素分别为:思维压抑、思维替代、转移注意、回避刺激、图像思维化。信度分析表明,总量表Cronbachα系数为0.930,各分量表Cronbachα系数介于0.732~0.839之间;总量表重测信度为0.652,各分量表介于0.439~0.638之间;总量表分半信度为0.874,各分量表分半信度介于0.689~0.830之间。总量表与思维压抑量表的相关系数为0.584,与抑郁、焦虑、压力、强迫量表的相关系数分别为0.247,0.316,0.354,0.396(P值均0.01)。结论:中文版CAQ具有良好的信效度,可在中国文化下应用。
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate the reliability and validity of Cognitive Avoidance questionnaire (CCQ) in Chinese college students. Methods: 600 college students were tested with double blind Chinese version CAQ.561 valid questionnaires were collected. 91 subjects were selected to retest the interval of 3 ~ 4 weeks after the first test. Results: the results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the Chinese version of CAQ was in accordance with the original five-factor model (蠂 ~ 2 / 2 ~ 2 / 2 ~ (4) 4.620 / d ~ (2 39), 蠂 ~ (2) / d ~ (fr) ~ (2.070) RMESAA ~ (0.046) TLI ~ (0.954) TLI ~ (0.942) ~ (?) SRM ~ (0.042). The five factors were thought depression, thought substitution, diversion of attention, avoidance of stimulation, and image thinking. The reliability analysis showed that the Cronbach 伪 coefficient of total table was 0.930, the Cronbach 伪 coefficient of each subscale was between 0.732 and 0.839, the test-retest reliability of total table was 0.652, the reliability of each subscale was between 0.439 and 0.638, the split-half reliability of total table was 0.874, and that of each subscale was between 0.6890.830 and 0.6890.830. The correlation coefficient between the total scale and the mental depression scale was 0.584, and the correlation coefficient with the depression, anxiety, stress and compulsion scale was 0.2470.3160.3540.396P, respectively. Conclusion: the Chinese version of CAQ has good reliability and validity and can be used in Chinese culture.
【作者单位】：北京师范大学心理学部应用实验心理北京重点实验室;西北师范大学心理学院;首都医科大学;
【分类号】：B841.7

【相似文献】