Department of Psychology.
Psychol Assess. 2022 Jun;34(6):546-557. doi: 10.1037/pas0001117. Epub 2022 Feb 17.
Assessment of internalizing symptoms has generally relied on cross-sectional and retrospective self-reports, but ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is increasingly used to capture quick fluctuations in symptoms, enhance ecological validity, and improve recall accuracy. However, there are very few measures of internalizing symptoms that have been validated for use in EMA designs. In Study 1, we chose candidate items for EMA short forms of the Dysphoria and Well-Being scales from the Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms (IDAS), based on principal factor analyses and internal consistency analyses conducted on aggregated cross-sectional datasets (total = 8,876). In Study 2, we tested the items using an EMA design in a sample of college students ( = 279) oversampled for elevated neuroticism. Scale structure, reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity (regarding baseline IDAS scales, baseline affect, and EMA affect) were evaluated at the within- and between-person levels using multilevel structural equation modeling. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses in separate subsamples revealed the expected two-factor structure, yielding a four-item Well-Being scale and a five-item Dysphoria scale. Both scales showed acceptable to good internal consistency, strong convergent validity, and generally adequate discriminant validity. However, some associations of the new scales with EMA affect (i.e., Dysphoria with negative affect; Well-Being with positive affect) were very strong at the between-person level, such that they were not empirically distinct. Overall, this study provides an initial validation of brief EMA-IDAS Dysphoria and Well-Being scales that can be used in research or clinical settings, with particular utility for capturing within-person, dynamic effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
内省症状的评估通常依赖于横断面和回顾性的自我报告,但生态瞬时评估 (EMA) 越来越多地用于捕捉症状的快速波动,增强生态有效性,并提高回忆的准确性。然而,很少有内省症状的测量方法已经过验证,可用于 EMA 设计。在研究 1 中,我们根据汇总的横断面数据集(共 8876 人)进行的主因子分析和内部一致性分析,为 EMA 短式选择了来自抑郁和焦虑症状清单(IDAS)的忧郁和幸福感量表的候选项目。在研究 2 中,我们在一个大学生样本中使用 EMA 设计(n=279,神经质水平偏高)对这些项目进行了测试。使用多层次结构方程模型在个体内和个体间水平上评估了量表结构、信度以及聚合效度(关于基线 IDAS 量表、基线影响和 EMA 影响)和区分效度。在单独的子样本中进行的探索性和验证性因子分析揭示了预期的两因素结构,得出了一个四项目幸福感量表和一个五项目忧郁量表。两个量表都表现出可接受到良好的内部一致性、强聚合效度和通常足够的区分效度。然而,在个体间水平上,新量表与 EMA 影响的一些关联(即忧郁与负性情绪;幸福感与正性情绪)非常强,以至于它们在经验上没有区别。总体而言,这项研究对内省症状的 EMA-IDAS 忧郁和幸福感量表进行了初步验证,这些量表可用于研究或临床环境,特别适用于捕捉个体内的动态效应。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2022 APA,保留所有权利)。