Amodei Nancy, Lamb R J
Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Mailstop 7818, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2004 Mar 8;73(3):301-6. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2003.11.005.
This study examined the convergent and concurrent validity of the Contemplation Ladder and the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA). Intake data of participants recruited into two concurrent studies were analyzed. One group (n=77) had no plans to quit smoking within the next 6 months, while a second group (n=106) had definite plans to quit. The groups did not differ on any demographic variables except employment status. Contemplation Ladder scores for the entire sample (n=183) correlated positively with the URICA Contemplation and Action subscale scores but negatively with Precontemplation subscale scores. The Contemplation Ladder also correlated positively with the URICA Composite score. Additionally, participants seeking to quit within the next 6 months had significantly higher Contemplation Ladder and URICA Contemplation, Action, and Composite scores, but lower Precontemplation scores than participants not seeking to quit. Controlling for employment status did not change the pattern of results. Our findings provide support for the convergent and concurrent validity of these two measures and suggest that the single-item Contemplation Ladder may be a practical alternative to the URICA in certain situations.
本研究考察了沉思阶梯量表与罗德岛大学改变评估量表(URICA)的聚合效度和同时效度。对两项同期研究中招募的参与者的入组数据进行了分析。一组(n = 77)在未来6个月内没有戒烟计划,而另一组(n = 106)有明确的戒烟计划。除就业状况外,两组在任何人口统计学变量上均无差异。整个样本(n = 183)的沉思阶梯量表得分与URICA沉思和行动分量表得分呈正相关,但与前沉思分量表得分呈负相关。沉思阶梯量表也与URICA综合得分呈正相关。此外,在未来6个月内寻求戒烟的参与者的沉思阶梯量表得分以及URICA沉思、行动和综合得分显著高于不寻求戒烟的参与者,但前沉思得分更低。控制就业状况并未改变结果模式。我们的研究结果为这两项测量工具的聚合效度和同时效度提供了支持,并表明在某些情况下,单项目的沉思阶梯量表可能是URICA的一个实用替代工具。