Broman-Fulks Joshua J, Green Bradley A, Olatunji Bunmi O, Berman Mitchell E, Arnau Randolph C, Deacon Brett J, Sawchuk Craig N
Appalachian State University, Boone, NC 28608, USA.
Assessment. 2008 Jun;15(2):188-203. doi: 10.1177/1073191107311284. Epub 2008 Jan 3.
Anxiety sensitivity has been implicated as a risk factor for the development and maintenance of panic and other anxiety disorders. Although researchers have generally assumed that anxiety sensitivity is a dimensional, rather than categorical, variable, recent taxometric research has raised questions concerning the accuracy of this assumption. The present study examined the latent structure of anxiety sensitivity by applying four taxometric procedures (MAXEIG, MAXCOV, MAMBAC, and L-Mode) to data collected from two large nonclinical samples (n = 1,025 and n = 744) using two distinct measures of anxiety sensitivity (Anxiety Sensitivity Profile and Anxiety Sensitivity Index-Revised). In contrast to previous taxometric analyses of anxiety sensitivity, results of the present research provided convergent evidence for a latent anxiety sensitivity dimension. Several potential explanations for the discrepancy between these findings and those of previous research are discussed, as well as the implications of these findings for the conceptualization and measurement of anxiety sensitivity.
焦虑敏感性已被认为是惊恐障碍和其他焦虑症发生及维持的一个风险因素。尽管研究人员通常认为焦虑敏感性是一个维度变量而非类别变量,但最近的分类分析研究对这一假设的准确性提出了质疑。本研究通过将四种分类分析程序(MAXEIG、MAXCOV、MAMBAC和L-Mode)应用于从两个大型非临床样本(n = 1025和n = 744)收集的数据,使用两种不同的焦虑敏感性测量方法(焦虑敏感性概况和修订后的焦虑敏感性指数),来检验焦虑敏感性的潜在结构。与之前对焦虑敏感性的分类分析不同,本研究结果为潜在的焦虑敏感性维度提供了趋同证据。讨论了这些发现与之前研究结果之间差异的几种潜在解释,以及这些发现对焦虑敏感性概念化和测量的影响。