• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一种认知信任自我报告测量方法的开发与验证

Development and validation of a self-report measure of epistemic trust.

作者信息

Campbell Chloe, Tanzer Michal, Saunders Rob, Booker Thomas, Allison Elizabeth, Li Elizabeth, O'Dowda Claire, Luyten Patrick, Fonagy Peter

机构信息

Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 16;16(4):e0250264. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250264. eCollection 2021.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0250264
PMID:33861805
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8051785/
Abstract

Epistemic trust (ET) refers to trust in communicated knowledge. This paper describes the development and validation of a new self-report questionnaire, the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ). We report on two studies (Study 1, n = 500; Study 2, n = 705) examining the psychometric properties of the ETMCQ and the relationship between EMTCQ scores (i.e., an individual's epistemic stance) and exposure to adverse childhood experiences, mental health symptoms, attachment, mentalizing and general self-efficacy. The factor structure of the ETMCQ was examined using Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses, and its reliability and test-retest reliability were tested. Both studies yielded three correlated yet distinct factors-Trust, Mistrust and Credulity-and confirmed the reliability and validity of the ETMCQ. Preregistered hypotheses were confirmed and replicated across both studies. Main findings suggest intriguing links between the ETMCQ and developmental psychopathology constructs and are consistent with thinking on the role of epistemic stance in undermining adaptation and increasing the developmental risk of mental health problems. Mistrust and Credulity scores were associated with childhood adversity and higher scores on the global psychopathology severity index and both factors partially mediated the link between early adversity and mental health symptoms. Mistrust and Credulity were positively associated with difficulties in understanding mental states and insecure attachment styles. Post-hoc analysis identified that different attachment styles were associated with differences in epistemic stance. In addition, Trust was not associated with reduced levels of mental health symptoms and did not moderate the impact of childhood adversity-findings are congruent with the suggestion that the reduction of mistrust and credulity may be crucial common factors in promoting resilience and the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic interventions. This investigation and the ETMCQ provide an empirical measure of what until now has been largely a theoretical concept and open new avenues for future research.

摘要

认知信任(ET)是指对所传达知识的信任。本文描述了一种新的自我报告问卷——认知信任、不信任和轻信问卷(ETMCQ)的开发与验证。我们报告了两项研究(研究1,n = 500;研究2,n = 705),考察了ETMCQ的心理测量特性以及ETMCQ得分(即个体的认知立场)与童年不良经历、心理健康症状、依恋、心理化和一般自我效能感之间的关系。使用探索性和验证性因素分析检验了ETMCQ的因素结构,并测试了其信度和重测信度。两项研究均得出了三个相关但不同的因素——信任、不信任和轻信——并证实了ETMCQ的信度和效度。预先注册的假设在两项研究中均得到了证实和重复。主要研究结果表明,ETMCQ与发展性心理病理学结构之间存在有趣联系,并且与关于认知立场在破坏适应和增加心理健康问题发展风险方面作用的思考一致。不信任和轻信得分与童年逆境以及全球心理病理学严重程度指数上的高分相关,并且这两个因素部分介导了早期逆境与心理健康症状之间的联系。不信任和轻信与理解心理状态的困难和不安全的依恋风格呈正相关。事后分析发现,不同的依恋风格与认知立场的差异相关。此外,信任与心理健康症状水平的降低无关,也没有调节童年逆境的影响——这些发现与以下观点一致,即减少不信任和轻信可能是促进复原力和心理治疗干预效果的关键共同因素。这项调查和ETMCQ为迄今为止很大程度上属于理论概念的内容提供了一种实证测量方法,并为未来研究开辟了新途径。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/0bf29670bd29/pone.0250264.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/276f1d7240fb/pone.0250264.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/f7d5450ca7e1/pone.0250264.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/0bf29670bd29/pone.0250264.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/276f1d7240fb/pone.0250264.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/f7d5450ca7e1/pone.0250264.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b3ac/8051785/0bf29670bd29/pone.0250264.g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Development and validation of a self-report measure of epistemic trust.一种认知信任自我报告测量方法的开发与验证
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 16;16(4):e0250264. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250264. eCollection 2021.
2
Unpacking trust: The Italian validation of the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ).拆包信任:意大利版认识信任、不信任和轻信问卷(ETMCQ)的验证。
PLoS One. 2023 Jan 26;18(1):e0280328. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280328. eCollection 2023.
3
Iranian adaptation of the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ): Validity, reliability, discriminant ability, and sex invariance.伊朗版《认知信任、不信任和轻信问卷》(ETMCQ)的适用性、信度、判别能力和性别不变性。
Brain Behav. 2024 Mar;14(3):e3455. doi: 10.1002/brb3.3455.
4
Trust under development: The Italian validation of the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ) for adolescents.正在发展中的信任:青少年认识信任、不信任和轻信问卷(ETMCQ)的意大利验证。
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 26;19(8):e0307229. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307229. eCollection 2024.
5
Validation of the Argentine version of the epistemic trust, mistrust, and credulity questionnaire.验证阿根廷版认知信任、不信任和轻信问卷。
PLoS One. 2024 Oct 3;19(10):e0311352. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311352. eCollection 2024.
6
"Trust me, do not trust anyone": how epistemic mistrust and credulity are associated with conspiracy mentality.“相信我,别相信任何人”:认知不信任和轻信与阴谋心态的关联
Res Psychother. 2023 Dec 28;26(3):705. doi: 10.4081/ripppo.2023.705.
7
Adverse childhood experiences and psychological maladjustment in adolescence: The protective role of epistemic trust, mentalized affectivity, and reflective functioning.不良童年经历与青少年心理失调:认识信任、心理化情感和反思功能的保护作用。
J Clin Psychol. 2024 Nov;80(11):2228-2246. doi: 10.1002/jclp.23733. Epub 2024 Aug 5.
8
A short version of the reflective functioning questionnaire: Validation in a greek sample.反思功能问卷简表:在希腊样本中的验证。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 6;19(2):e0298023. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298023. eCollection 2024.
9
The interplay of mentalization and epistemic trust: a protective mechanism against emotional dysregulation in adolescent internalizing symptoms.心理化与认知信任的相互作用:一种预防青少年内化症状中情绪失调的保护机制。
Res Psychother. 2023 Dec 31;26(3):707. doi: 10.4081/ripppo.2023.707.
10
Mentalizing and epistemic trust as critical success factors in psychosomatic rehabilitation: results of a single center longitudinal observational study.心理化和认知信任作为身心康复的关键成功因素:一项单中心纵向观察性研究的结果
Front Psychiatry. 2023 May 12;14:1150422. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1150422. eCollection 2023.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychometric Properties of the Questionnaire Epistemic Trust in People With Mild to Moderate Intellectual Disabilities or Borderline Intellectual Functioning.针对轻度至中度智力残疾或边缘智力功能人群的问卷认知信任度的心理测量特性
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2025 Jul;38(4):e70111. doi: 10.1111/jar.70111.
2
Attachment and epistemic trust in junior and senior university students: The mediating role of affect regulation and mentalizing. Who is at risk?大学生低年级和高年级学生的依恋与认知信任:情感调节和心理化的中介作用。谁处于风险之中?
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 13;20(8):e0304749. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304749. eCollection 2025.
3

本文引用的文献

1
The Effects of Epistemic Trust and Social Trust on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food: An Empirical Study from China.《知信度和社会信任对公众接受转基因食品的影响:来自中国的实证研究》。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 21;17(20):7700. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17207700.
2
Childhood Adversity and Neural Development: A Systematic Review.童年逆境与神经发育:一项系统综述。
Annu Rev Dev Psychol. 2019 Dec;1:277-312. doi: 10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121318-084950. Epub 2019 Dec 12.
3
The Mentalizing Approach to Psychopathology: State of the Art and Future Directions.
Predicting Engagement With Conversational Agents in Mental Health Therapy by Examining the Role of Epistemic Trust, Personality, and Fear of Intimacy: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Survey Study.
通过审视认知信任、人格和亲密关系恐惧的作用预测心理健康治疗中与对话代理的互动:基于网络的横断面调查研究
JMIR Hum Factors. 2025 Jul 30;12:e70698. doi: 10.2196/70698.
4
Self-other generalisation shapes social interaction and is disrupted in borderline personality disorder.自我-他人泛化塑造社会互动,并在边缘型人格障碍中受到破坏。
Elife. 2025 Jul 14;14:RP104008. doi: 10.7554/eLife.104008.
5
Psychopathological symptoms, personality, and epistemic stances in individuals with myocardial infarction: an empirical investigation.心肌梗死患者的精神病理症状、人格和认知立场:一项实证研究。
Front Psychol. 2025 May 22;16:1587747. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1587747. eCollection 2025.
6
Mechanisms of mistrust: A Bayesian account of misinformation learning.不信任的机制:错误信息学习的贝叶斯解释。
PLoS Comput Biol. 2025 May 14;21(5):e1012814. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012814. eCollection 2025 May.
7
Long-Term Improvements of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (CPTSD) Symptoms After Multimodal Psychodynamic Inpatient Rehabilitation Treatment-An Observational Single Center Pilot Study.多模式心理动力住院康复治疗后复杂性创伤后应激障碍(CPTSD)症状的长期改善——一项单中心观察性试点研究
J Clin Psychol. 2025 Aug;81(8):739-754. doi: 10.1002/jclp.23809. Epub 2025 May 12.
8
Mentalization-based treatment versus bona fide treatment for patients with borderline personality disorder in Germany (MAGNET): study protocol of a prospective, multi-centre randomized controlled trial.德国边缘型人格障碍患者的基于心理化的治疗与真诚治疗对比研究(MAGNET):一项前瞻性、多中心随机对照试验的研究方案
BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Apr 11;25(1):367. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-06809-0.
9
Epistemic Trust, Mistrust and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ) validation in French language: Exploring links to loneliness.法语版认知信任、不信任和轻信问卷(ETMCQ)的验证:探索与孤独感的联系。
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 21;20(3):e0303918. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303918. eCollection 2025.
10
Disruption of Epistemic Trust in Borderline Personality Disorder: A Possible Adaptation to Avoid Making Costly Mistakes.边缘型人格障碍中认知信任的破坏:一种避免犯代价高昂错误的可能适应方式。
Personal Ment Health. 2025 Feb;19(1):e70006. doi: 10.1002/pmh.70006.
心理病理的心理化方法:现状与未来方向。
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2020 May 7;16:297-325. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-071919-015355. Epub 2020 Feb 5.
4
The relation between epistemic trust and borderline pathology in an adolescent inpatient sample.青少年住院患者样本中认知信任与边缘性病理之间的关系。
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2019 Aug 28;6:13. doi: 10.1186/s40479-019-0110-7. eCollection 2019.
5
Borderline personality disorder, complex trauma, and problems with self and identity: A social-communicative approach.边缘型人格障碍、复杂创伤和自我与身份认同问题:一种社会交际方法。
J Pers. 2020 Feb;88(1):88-105. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12483. Epub 2019 May 23.
6
Social power and social class: conceptualization, consequences, and current challenges.社会权力与社会阶层:概念化、后果及当前挑战。
Curr Opin Psychol. 2017 Dec;18:26-30. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.07.028. Epub 2017 Jul 27.
7
A mentalization-based approach to common factors in the treatment of borderline personality disorder.基于心理化的方法治疗边缘型人格障碍的共同因素。
Curr Opin Psychol. 2018 Jun;21:44-49. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.09.005. Epub 2017 Sep 14.
8
Mind matters: A meta-analysis on parental mentalization and sensitivity as predictors of infant-parent attachment.思维 Matters:父母心理化和敏感性作为婴儿-父母依恋预测指标的元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2017 Dec;143(12):1245-1272. doi: 10.1037/bul0000114. Epub 2017 Aug 14.
9
What we have changed our minds about: Part 1. Borderline personality disorder as a limitation of resilience.我们改变主意的内容:第1部分。边缘型人格障碍作为复原力的一种限制因素。
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2017 Apr 11;4:11. doi: 10.1186/s40479-017-0061-9. eCollection 2017.
10
What we have changed our minds about: Part 2. Borderline personality disorder, epistemic trust and the developmental significance of social communication.我们改变想法的内容:第二部分。边缘型人格障碍、认知信任与社会交流的发展意义。
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2017 Apr 11;4:9. doi: 10.1186/s40479-017-0062-8. eCollection 2017.