Suppr超能文献

评估愤怒表达:三种与情绪表达相关测量方法的结构效度。

Assessing Anger Expression: Construct Validity of Three Emotion Expression-Related Measures.

作者信息

Jasinski Matthew J, Lumley Mark A, Latsch Deborah V, Schuster Erik, Kinner Ellen, Burns John W

机构信息

a Department of Psychology , Wayne State University.

b Department of Behavioral Sciences , Rush University Medical Center.

出版信息

J Pers Assess. 2016 Nov-Dec;98(6):640-8. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2016.1178650. Epub 2016 Jun 1.

Abstract

Self-report measures of emotional expression are common, but their validity to predict objective emotional expression, particularly of anger, is unclear. We tested the validity of the Anger Expression Inventory (AEI; Spielberger et al., 1985 ), Emotional Approach Coping Scale (EAC; Stanton, Kirk, Cameron, & Danoff-Burg, 2000 ), and Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20; Bagby, Taylor, & Parker, 1994 ) to predict objective anger expression in 95 adults with chronic back pain. Participants attempted to solve a difficult computer maze by following the directions of a confederate who treated them rudely and unjustly. Participants then expressed their feelings for 4 min. Blinded raters coded the videos for anger expression, and a software program analyzed expression transcripts for anger-related words. Analyses related each questionnaire to anger expression. The AEI Anger-Out scale predicted greater anger expression, as expected, but AEI Anger-In did not. The EAC Emotional Processing scale predicted less anger expression, but the EAC Emotional Expression scale was unrelated to anger expression. Finally, the TAS-20 predicted greater anger expression. Findings support the validity of the AEI Anger-Out scale but raise questions about the other measures. The assessment of emotional expression by self-report is complex and perhaps confounded by general emotional experience, the specificity or generality of the emotion(s) assessed, and self-awareness limitations. Performance-based or clinician-rated measures of emotion expression are needed.

摘要

情绪表达的自我报告测量方法很常见,但它们预测客观情绪表达,尤其是愤怒表达的有效性尚不清楚。我们测试了愤怒表达量表(AEI;斯皮尔伯格等人,1985年)、情绪应对量表(EAC;斯坦顿、柯克、卡梅隆和达诺夫-伯格,2000年)以及多伦多述情障碍量表-20(TAS-20;巴格比、泰勒和帕克,1994年)在预测95名慢性背痛成年人客观愤怒表达方面的有效性。参与者试图按照一名同盟者的指示解决一个困难的电脑迷宫,该同盟者对他们进行了粗鲁和不公正的对待。然后,参与者表达他们的感受,持续4分钟。不知情的评分者对视频中的愤怒表达进行编码,一个软件程序分析表达记录中与愤怒相关的词汇。分析将每份问卷与愤怒表达联系起来。正如预期的那样,AEI愤怒外显量表预测了更多的愤怒表达,但AEI愤怒内隐量表没有。EAC情绪加工量表预测了较少的愤怒表达,但EAC情绪表达量表与愤怒表达无关。最后,TAS-20预测了更多的愤怒表达。研究结果支持了AEI愤怒外显量表的有效性,但对其他测量方法提出了疑问。通过自我报告评估情绪表达很复杂,可能会受到一般情绪体验、所评估情绪的特异性或普遍性以及自我意识限制的混淆。需要基于表现或临床医生评定的情绪表达测量方法。

相似文献

5
Anger cognitions and cardiovascular recovery following provocation.愤怒认知与挑衅后的心血管恢复
J Behav Med. 2004 Aug;27(4):319-41. doi: 10.1023/b:jobm.0000042408.80551.e1.

本文引用的文献

2
Discrete Neural Signatures of Basic Emotions.基本情绪的离散神经特征。
Cereb Cortex. 2016 Jun;26(6):2563-2573. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhv086. Epub 2015 Apr 29.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验