Marin R S, Biedrzycki R C, Firinciogullari S
Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA.
Psychiatry Res. 1991 Aug;38(2):143-62. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(91)90040-v.
This article presents evidence for the reliability and construct validity of the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). Conceptually, apathy is defined as lack of motivation not attributable to diminished level of consciousness, cognitive impairment, or emotional distress. Operationally, the AES treats apathy as a psychological dimension defined by simultaneous deficits in the overt behavioral, cognitive, and emotional concomitants of goal-directed behavior. Three versions of the AES (clinician, informant, and self-rated) were evaluated for 123 subjects, ages 53-85, meeting research criteria for right or left hemisphere stroke, probable Alzheimer's disease, major depression, or well elderly control. Multiple forms of reliability (internal consistency, test-retest, and interrater) were satisfactory. Several types of validity evidence are presented for each version of the scale, including the following: ability of the AES to discriminate between groups according to mean levels of apathy, discriminability of apathy ratings from standard measures of depression and anxiety, convergent validity between the three versions of the scale, and predictive validity measures derived from observing subjects' play with novelty toys and videogames. Guidelines for the administration of the AES are presented, along with suggestions for potential applications of the scale to clinical and research questions.
本文提供了冷漠评估量表（AES）的可靠性和结构效度的证据。从概念上讲，冷漠被定义为并非由于意识水平下降、认知障碍或情绪困扰导致的动机缺乏。在操作上，AES将冷漠视为一个心理维度，由目标导向行为的明显行为、认知和情感伴随物同时出现的缺陷所定义。对123名年龄在53 - 85岁之间、符合右半球或左半球中风、可能的阿尔茨海默病、重度抑郁症或健康老年对照研究标准的受试者，评估了AES的三个版本（临床医生评定版、知情者评定版和自评版）。多种形式的信度（内部一致性、重测信度和评分者间信度）均令人满意。针对量表的每个版本，都提供了几种效度证据类型，包括：AES根据冷漠平均水平区分不同组别的能力、冷漠评分与抑郁和焦虑标准测量的可区分性、量表三个版本之间的收敛效度，以及通过观察受试者玩新奇玩具和电子游戏得出的预测效度测量。本文还介绍了AES的施测指南，以及该量表在临床和研究问题上潜在应用方面的建议。
