Thomas J, Turkheimer E, Oltmanns T F
University of Virginia, Charlottesville 22904-4400, USA.
Assessment. 2000 Sep;7(3):247-58. doi: 10.1177/107319110000700305.
Black university students scored significantly higher than White students on the Maudsley Obsessional Compulsive Inventory (MOCI). They tended to endorse more Cleaning and Checking subscale items in the pathological direction. Subsequent analyses examined whether this finding is a reflection of valid group differences in the prevalence of OCD or a psychometric artifact. Structured interviews were conducted to determine the correspondence of MOCI scores with OCD diagnoses. The race difference in endorsement frequency on the MOCI did not extend to OCD diagnoses. The MOCI scores showed modest predictive validity in Whites, but they did not predict interview-based diagnoses in Blacks. Multivariate item response theory was then employed to examine race differences in the Cleaning and Checking subscales. Equivalent item discrimination parameters fit the data for Black and White participants for both subscales. A more restrictive model in which relative item difficulties were also constrained to be equal for Black and White participants did not fit. This interaction between race and item difficulty suggests that the items do not have equivalent psychometric properties in Blacks and Whites.
在莫兹利强迫观念与强迫行为量表（MOCI）上，黑人大学生的得分显著高于白人学生。他们倾向于在病理方向上认可更多清洁和检查分量表项目。后续分析探讨了这一发现是反映了强迫症患病率方面有效的群体差异，还是一种心理测量假象。进行了结构化访谈，以确定MOCI得分与强迫症诊断的对应关系。MOCI上认可频率的种族差异并未延伸至强迫症诊断。MOCI得分在白人中显示出适度的预测效度，但在黑人中并不能预测基于访谈的诊断。随后采用多变量项目反应理论来检验清洁和检查分量表中的种族差异。等效的项目区分参数适用于黑人和白人参与者在两个分量表上的数据。一个更具限制性的模型，即相对项目难度也被限制为黑人和白人参与者相等，并不适用。种族与项目难度之间的这种相互作用表明，这些项目在黑人和白人中并不具有等效的心理测量特性。
