Hughes John R, Naud Shelly
Vermont Center for Behavior and Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05401, United States; University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05401, United States.
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05401, United States.
Addict Behav. 2016 Dec;63:93-6. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.07.009. Epub 2016 Jul 15.
Several scales have been developed to measure expectancies about smoking cessation. This secondary analysis tested the reliability and validity of one of the most commonly used expectancy measures - the Perceived Risks and Benefits of Quitting Scale (PRBQ).
Smokers (n=143) who planned to quit at some point in the next 3months entered an observational study in which they called an Interactive Voice Response system nightly for 3months to report quit attempts and abstinence. They completed the PRBQ at baseline and the end of 1, 2 and 3months. No treatment was provided.
The Risks scores and Benefit scores of the PRBQ had high internal reliability (alpha=0.88-0.96 across administrations) and high test-retest stability (ICC=0.67-0.80), but poor to moderate concurrent validity (correlation with other cessation measures=0.09-0.52), and poor predictive validity (no significant prediction of quit attempts or duration of abstinence). Results were similar for men and women.
The PRBQ appears to be reliable but, similar to other scales of cessation expectancies, its validity appears to be poor. The face valid notion that expectations influence quitting requires further testing.
已经开发了几种量表来衡量戒烟预期。这项二次分析检验了最常用的预期测量方法之一——戒烟感知风险与益处量表(PRBQ)的信度和效度。
计划在未来3个月内某个时间点戒烟的吸烟者(n = 143)进入一项观察性研究,他们在3个月内每晚拨打交互式语音应答系统报告戒烟尝试和戒烟情况。他们在基线时以及第1、2和3个月末完成PRBQ。未提供任何治疗。
PRBQ的风险得分和益处得分具有较高的内部信度(各次施测的α系数 = 0.88 - 0.96)和较高的重测稳定性(组内相关系数 = 0.67 - 0.80),但同时效度较差至中等(与其他戒烟测量方法的相关性 = 0.09 - 0.52),预测效度也较差(对戒烟尝试或戒烟持续时间无显著预测)。男性和女性的结果相似。
PRBQ似乎具有信度,但与其他戒烟预期量表类似,其效度似乎较差。期望影响戒烟这一表面有效的观点需要进一步检验。