Department of Psychology (Expertise Group: Clinical Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Department of Psychology (Expertise Group: Psychometrics and Statistics), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2021 Mar 10;16(3):e0248219. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248219. eCollection 2021.
We developed and examined the construct validity of the Disgust Avoidance Questionnaire (DAQ) as a measure of people's inclination to prevent experiencing disgust (disgust prevention) and to escape from the experience of disgust (disgust escape). In a stepwise item-reduction (Study 1; N = 417) using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) based on a 4-subscale distinction (behavioral prevention, cognitive prevention, behavioral escape, cognitive escape), we selected 17 items from a pool of potential items. In order to incorporate the conceptual overlap between dimensions of disgust avoidance, focus (prevention vs. escape), and strategy (behavioral avoidance vs. cognitive avoidance), we specified an adapted model. In this model, we allowed each item to load on one type of dimension and one type of strategy, resulting in four overlapping factors (prevention, escape, behavioral avoidance, cognitive avoidance). Evaluation of this overlapping 4-factor model (Study 2; N = 513) using Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) showed promising model fit indices, factor loadings, factor correlations, and reliability estimates for three of the four factors (prevention, behavioral avoidance, cognitive avoidance). Those three subscales also showed good convergent validity. In contrast, the results related to the escape factor may call the suitability of self-report to assess disgust escape into question. In light of the exploratory nature of the project, future examinations of the DAQ's validity and applicability to more diverse samples are essential. A critical next step for future research would be to examine the DAQ's criterion validity and the distinctive roles of the DAQ subscales in (clinical) psychological constructs and processes.
我们开发并检验了厌恶回避问卷（DAQ）的结构效度，该问卷用于衡量人们预防体验厌恶（厌恶预防）和逃避厌恶体验（厌恶逃避）的倾向。在一项基于 4 个亚量表区分（行为预防、认知预防、行为逃避、认知逃避）的逐步项目删减（研究 1；N=417）中，我们从潜在项目池中选择了 17 个项目。为了纳入厌恶回避、焦点（预防与逃避）和策略（行为回避与认知回避）维度之间的概念重叠，我们指定了一个适应性模型。在该模型中，我们允许每个项目加载到一个维度和一种策略类型上，从而产生四个重叠因素（预防、逃避、行为回避、认知回避）。使用探索性结构方程建模（ESEM）和验证性因素分析（CFA）对重叠的 4 因素模型（研究 2；N=513）进行评估，显示出有希望的模型拟合指数、因子负荷、因子相关性和可靠性估计，其中三个因素（预防、行为回避、认知回避）表现良好。这三个子量表也表现出良好的收敛效度。相比之下，与逃避因子相关的结果可能会对使用自我报告评估厌恶逃避的适宜性提出质疑。鉴于该项目的探索性质，未来对 DAQ 的有效性和对更多样化样本的适用性的检验至关重要。未来研究的一个关键下一步是检验 DAQ 的效标效度以及 DAQ 子量表在（临床）心理结构和过程中的独特作用。
