School of Psychology.
Psychol Assess. 2020 Aug;32(8):726-738. doi: 10.1037/pas0000830. Epub 2020 Apr 30.
Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is typically assessed using either single-item questionnaires or checklists of common behaviors, but preliminary research suggests that checklists produce higher lifetime prevalence rates. In 2 preregistered studies (combined n = 1,364), we tested whether memory cueing afforded by behavioral checklists accounts for this discrepancy. Participants reported their lifetime NSSI history using both a single-item and a checklist, with presentation order randomized across participants. Nearly a third of participants reported inconsistent NSSI histories on the 2 assessments, with participants 1.57 times more likely to report an NSSI history on a checklist than on a single-item. Counter to the memory account, this discrepancy was evident even when participants completed the checklist first, suggesting that the increased prevalence estimates captured by checklists are unlikely to simply reflect memory facilitation. Across the 2 samples, 12.5% of participants would have been incorrectly screened out in 2-step assessments; these participants were more likely to have engaged in NSSI historically, less likely to self-injure by cutting, and (in Study 2 only) were more likely to be men. These studies suggest that the inconsistencies across 2 of the most common NSSI assessments arise because people dissimilar to the lay conceptualization of self-injury are less likely to endorse a single-item, even when they have affirmed engaging in self-injury behaviors on a checklist. We argue that single-item and checklist assessments capture different aspects of NSSI, such that future research should distinguish between behaviorally identified NSSI assessed with behavioral checklists and self-identified NSSI assessed with single-item assessments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
非自杀性自伤 (NSSI) 通常通过单项问卷或常见行为检查表进行评估,但初步研究表明检查表会产生更高的终生患病率。在 2 项预先注册的研究(合并 n = 1364)中,我们测试了行为检查表提供的记忆提示是否解释了这种差异。参与者使用单项和检查表报告他们的终生 NSSI 史,呈现顺序在参与者之间随机化。近三分之一的参与者在两项评估中报告了不一致的 NSSI 史,参与者报告检查表上有 NSSI 史的可能性是单项的 1.57 倍。与记忆解释相反,即使参与者首先完成检查表,这种差异也很明显,这表明检查表中捕捉到的患病率增加估计不太可能仅仅反映记忆促进。在这两个样本中,12.5%的参与者在两步评估中会被错误地排除在外;这些参与者过去更有可能进行 NSSI,不太可能通过切割自我伤害,而且(仅在研究 2 中)更有可能是男性。这些研究表明,最常见的 NSSI 评估中的两项不一致是因为与一般人对自伤的概念化不同的人不太可能认同单项,即使他们在检查表上确认了自己的自伤行为。我们认为,单项和检查表评估捕捉到了 NSSI 的不同方面,因此未来的研究应该区分行为识别的 NSSI,使用行为检查表进行评估,以及自我识别的 NSSI,使用单项评估进行评估。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2020 APA,保留所有权利)。