Bagby R Michael, Parker James D A, Taylor Graeme J
Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Psychology, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada.
J Psychosom Res. 2020 Jan 23;131:109940. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.109940.
Twenty-five years ago, this journal published two articles reporting the development and initial validation of the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Since then the literature on alexithymia has burgeoned with the vast majority of this research using the TAS-20, including multiple language translations of the scale.
In this article we review the psychometric literature evaluating various aspects of the reliability and validity of the TAS-20 and examine some of the controversies surrounding the scale and the construct it assesses. We reflect on the ways in which the TAS-20 has advanced the measurement of the construct and theory of alexithymia. We also discuss recent developments and some future directions for the measurement of alexithymia.
Although not without some controversy, the preponderance of the accumulated evidence over a 25-year period supports various aspects of the reliability and validity of the TAS-20, including findings from confirmatory factor analytic and convergent and discriminant validity studies which are consistent with Nemiah et al.'s (Nemiah et al., 1976 [3]) and Taylor and colleagues (Taylor et al., 1997 [9]) theoretical formulations and definition of the alexithymia construct.
Based on the accumulated empirical evidence of 25 years, we conclude that the TAS-20 is a reliable and valid instrument and accurately reflects and measures the construct as it was originally defined by Nemiah et al. Nemiah et al. (1976) [3] as composed of deficits in affect awareness and expression and pensée opératoire (operational thinking). Clinicians and researchers can use the TAS-20 to confidently measure alexithymia, the roots of which have foundations in psychosomatic medicine.
25年前，本期刊发表了两篇文章，报道了20项多伦多述情障碍量表（TAS - 20）的开发及初步验证情况。从那时起，关于述情障碍的文献大量涌现，其中绝大多数研究都使用了TAS - 20，包括该量表的多种语言翻译版本。
在本文中，我们回顾了评估TAS - 20可靠性和有效性各个方面的心理测量学文献，并审视了围绕该量表及其所评估结构的一些争议。我们思考了TAS - 20在推进述情障碍结构测量和理论方面的方式。我们还讨论了述情障碍测量的最新进展和一些未来方向。
尽管并非毫无争议，但25年期间积累的大量证据支持了TAS - 20可靠性和有效性的各个方面，包括验证性因素分析以及聚合效度和区分效度研究的结果，这些结果与内米亚等人（内米亚等人，1976年[3]）以及泰勒及其同事（泰勒等人，1997年[9]）关于述情障碍结构的理论表述和定义一致。
基于25年积累的实证证据，我们得出结论，TAS - 20是一种可靠且有效的工具，能够准确反映和测量内米亚等人（1976年）[3]最初定义的结构，该结构由情感意识和表达缺陷以及操作性思维组成。临床医生和研究人员可以放心地使用TAS - 20来测量述情障碍，其根源在于身心医学。
