Cherry Kathlyn M, Hoeven Erin Vander, Patterson Timothy S, Lumley Margaret N
Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2021 Mar;84:101973. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2021.101973. Epub 2021 Jan 21.
Psychological flexibility (PF) is a popular construct in clinical psychology. However, similar constructs have existed since the mid-20th century, resulting in different terms, definitions and measures of flexibility, hindering the advancement of the field. The main measure of PF - the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II; Bond et al., 2011) - has also been heavily criticized. To move towards definitional consensus and improved measurement, we surveyed the literature to map PF and related-terms, examine definitional overlaps, and assessthe psychometric quality of prominent flexibility measures. A scoping review was conducted in two databases (PsycNET and SCOPUS). Twenty-three flexibility constructs appeared across 220 articles, and twelve measures were included and rated for quality. PF, psychological inflexibility (PI), and cognitive flexibility (CF) were most prominent. Definitional similarities among prominent flexibility constructs emerged, namely handling distress or interference, taking action, and meeting goals or values. The Personalized Psychological Flexibility Index (PPFI; Kashdan, Disabato, Goodman, Doorley, & McKnight, 2020) appears to be the best measure available to assess PF. Problems with the current use of the AAQ-II were apparent, hindering current knowledge of PF. Definitional consensus and measurement development are vital to advance the field. To this end, recommendations and next steps for researchers and practitioners are outlined.
心理灵活性（PF）是临床心理学中一个流行的概念。然而，自20世纪中叶以来就存在类似的概念，导致灵活性的术语、定义和测量方法各不相同，阻碍了该领域的发展。PF的主要测量工具——接受与行动问卷（AAQ-II；Bond等人，2011年）——也受到了严厉批评。为了达成定义上的共识并改进测量方法，我们对文献进行了调查，以梳理PF及相关术语，检查定义上的重叠之处，并评估突出的灵活性测量方法的心理测量质量。在两个数据库（PsycNET和SCOPUS）中进行了范围综述。220篇文章中出现了23种灵活性概念，并纳入了12种测量方法并对其质量进行了评级。PF、心理僵化（PI）和认知灵活性（CF）最为突出。突出的灵活性概念之间出现了定义上的相似之处，即处理痛苦或干扰、采取行动以及实现目标或价值观。个性化心理灵活性指数（PPFI；Kashdan、Disabato、Goodman、Doorley和McKnight，2020年）似乎是评估PF的最佳可用测量方法。AAQ-II当前使用中存在的问题很明显，这阻碍了对PF的现有认识。定义上的共识和测量发展对于推动该领域至关重要。为此，概述了研究人员和从业者的建议及下一步措施。
