Department of Clinical and Experimental Psychology, University of Huelva, Campus de «El Carmen», Avenida de las Fuerzas Armadas, Huelva, Spain.
Psychology Department, University of Almeria, La Cañada de San Urbano, Almería, Spain.
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 21;13(3):e0194390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194390. eCollection 2018.
The UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale (with five dimensions of impulsive behaviour) is being widely used. One of the handicaps of this instrument is its relatively long administration time. This has led to the development of a short version: SUPPS-P. There are no studies comparing the relationship between the SUPPS-P scores and the original UPPS-P scores. The objectives of this study, therefore, were to analyse the psychometric properties, concordance of person measures, and efficiency of the SUPPS-P compared to those on UPPS-P, applying an Item Response Theory Model. The UPPS-P and SUPPS-P were administered to 455 undergraduate students. Confirmatory factorial analysis replicated structures reported in previous studies: the five correlated factors structure and the model with two second-order factors (Urgency and Lack of Awareness) with Sensation Seeking dimension as a different factor. Rasch analysis show that both of the instruments presented adequate model-data fit. The results show the measurement for each dimension of UPPS-P offered more precision than SUPPS-P. The structure of items location was maintained in each dimension of SUPPS-P compared to the UPPS-P, but with better person and item separation indices of the UPPS-P dimensions. The concordance analysis reveals high correlations values between scores on both versions. From the standpoint of reducing items, it can be considered that the reduced version is more efficient. This study does not support the equivalence of items on the dimensions of Sensation Seeking and Lack of perseverance.
冲动行为 UPPS 量表（具有五个冲动行为维度）被广泛使用。该工具的一个缺点是其相对较长的管理时间。这导致了短版 SUPPS-P 的发展。目前尚无研究比较 SUPPS-P 评分与原始 UPPS-P 评分之间的关系。因此，本研究的目的是分析 SUPPS-P 与 UPPS-P 相比的心理测量特性、个体测量的一致性和效率，应用项目反应理论模型。UPPS-P 和 SUPPS-P 被施测于 455 名本科生。验证性因子分析复制了先前研究中报告的结构：五个相关因素结构和具有两个二阶因素（冲动和缺乏意识）的模型，其中感觉寻求维度是一个不同的因素。Rasch 分析表明，两种工具都具有较好的模型数据拟合度。结果表明，与 SUPPS-P 相比，UPPS-P 的每个维度的测量都提供了更高的精度。与 UPPS-P 相比，SUPPS-P 的每个维度的项目位置结构都保持不变，但 UPPS-P 维度的个体和项目分离指数更好。一致性分析显示两个版本的分数之间存在高相关性值。从减少项目的角度来看，可以认为简化版本更有效。本研究不支持感觉寻求和缺乏毅力维度的项目等效性。
