系统评价比较两种评估 D 型人格效应的常用方法。
A systematic review comparing two popular methods to assess a Type D personality effect.
机构信息
Department of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, the Netherlands; Center of Research on Psychology in Somatic diseases (CoRPS), Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, the Netherlands.
Center of Research on Psychology in Somatic diseases (CoRPS), Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, the Netherlands.
出版信息
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2021 Jul-Aug;71:62-75. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2021.04.002. Epub 2021 Apr 20.
INTRODUCTION
Type D personality, operationalized as high scores on negative affectivity (NA) and social inhibition (SI), has been associated with various medical and psychosocial outcomes. The recent failure to replicate several earlier findings could result from the various methods used to assess the Type D effect. Despite recommendations to analyze the continuous NA and SI scores, a popular approach groups people as having Type D personality or not. This method does not adequately detect a Type D effect as it is also sensitive to main effects of NA or SI only, suggesting the literature contains false positive Type D effects. Here, we systematically assess the extent of this problem.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic review including 44 published studies assessing a Type D effect with both a continuous and dichotomous operationalization.
RESULTS
The dichotomous method showed poor agreement with the continuous Type D effect. Of the 89 significant dichotomous method effects, 37 (41.6%) were Type D effects according to the continuous method. The remaining 52 (58.4%) are therefore likely not Type D effects based on the continuous method, as 42 (47.2%) were main effects of NA or SI only.
CONCLUSION
Half of the published Type D effect according to the dichotomous method may be false positives, with only NA or SI driving the outcome.
简介
性格类型 D，通过负性情感（NA）和社交抑制（SI）高分来操作化定义，与各种医学和心理社会结果相关。最近，由于评估性格类型 D 效应的各种方法不同，几个早期发现未能得到重复。尽管建议分析连续的 NA 和 SI 评分，但一种流行的方法是将人群分为具有性格类型 D 或不具有性格类型 D。这种方法不能充分检测到性格类型 D 效应，因为它也容易受到仅 NA 或 SI 的主效应的影响，这表明文献中存在虚假的阳性性格类型 D 效应。在这里，我们系统地评估了这个问题的严重程度。
方法
我们进行了一项系统综述，包括 44 项已发表的研究，这些研究使用连续和二分法操作化评估了性格类型 D 效应。
结果
二分法与连续性格类型 D 效应的一致性较差。在 89 项具有显著二分法效应的研究中，根据连续法，有 37 项（41.6%）为性格类型 D 效应。根据连续法，其余 52 项（58.4%）可能不是性格类型 D 效应，因为其中 42 项（47.2%）仅是 NA 或 SI 的主效应。
结论
根据二分法判断的一半发表的性格类型 D 效应可能是假阳性，只有 NA 或 SI 驱动结果。
Zotero 插件