Suppr超能文献

PID-5-SRF在线施测:不同数据收集形式之间的心理测量指标及测量不变性

PID-5-SRF online administration: psychometric indicators and measurement invariance between different formats of data collection.

作者信息

Barchi-Ferreira Ana Maria, Osório Flavia

机构信息

Medical School of Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo University, Department of Neurosciences and Behaviour Sciences, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

出版信息

Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2024 May 28. doi: 10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The PID-5 is a tool used to assess maladaptive personality traits according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model. Objective: The objective is to seek evidence of the validity and reliability of the Personality Inventory for DMS-5 (PID-5-SRF) admin-istered online and assess its measurement invariance compared to the paper-and-pencil administration.

METHODS

A sample of 274 individuals from the general population (73.4% of women; 34.76 years old ±11.6) completed the instrument online after the study was dissemi-nated on social media and among the authors' contacts.

RESULTS

Internal consistency (facets α≥0.70; domains α≥0.89) and test-retest reliability (15 to 30 days: facets ICC≥0.63; domains ICC≥0.82) were satisfactory, but a floor effect was found in almost all the items. A large number of facets (N=9) showed better fit to a bifactorial structure, and the Exploratory Factor Analysis suggested that a six-factor model better fits the data. Measurement invariance between the online and paper-and-pencil administrations was not attested at a configural level.

CONCLUSION

The results revealed satisfactory psychometric indicators when the instrument was applied online, confirming its feasibility in collecting data. However, the in-strument's structure is not invariant, and caution must be adopted when compar-ing and interpreting data collected through different formats.

摘要

引言

PID-5是一种根据《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版替代模型来评估适应不良人格特质的工具。目的:旨在寻找在线施测的《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版人格问卷(PID-5-SRF)的效度和信度证据,并评估其与纸笔施测相比的测量不变性。

方法

在研究通过社交媒体和作者的联系人进行传播后,来自普通人群的274名个体(73.4%为女性;34.76岁±11.6)在线完成了该量表。

结果

内部一致性(各方面α≥0.70;各领域α≥0.89)和重测信度(15至30天:各方面组内相关系数ICC≥0.63;各领域ICC≥0.82)令人满意,但几乎所有项目都存在地板效应。大量方面(N = 9)对双因素结构的拟合更好,探索性因素分析表明六因素模型对数据的拟合更好。在线施测和纸笔施测之间在构型水平上未证明测量不变性。

结论

结果显示该量表在线施测时具有令人满意的心理测量指标,证实了其在收集数据方面的可行性。然而,该量表的结构并非不变,在比较和解释通过不同形式收集的数据时必须谨慎。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验