Chilver Miranda R, Burns Richard A, Botha Ferdi, Butterworth Peter
National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Assessment. 2025 Jun;32(4):622-630. doi: 10.1177/10731911241256430. Epub 2024 Jun 5.
Self-report measures are useful in psychological research and practice, but scores may be impacted by administration methods. This study investigated whether changing the recall period (from 30 to 7 days) and response option order (from ascending to descending) alters the score distribution of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). Participants were presented with the K10 with either different recall periods or different response option orders. There was weak evidence of lower mean K10 scores when using a 7-day recall period than when using the 30-day recall period (B = 1.96, 95% CI [0.04-3.90]) but no evidence of a change in the estimated prevalence of very high psychological distress. Presenting the response options in ascending order did not affect mean scores, but there was weak evidence of reduced prevalence of very high distress relative to the descending order (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.60, 95% CI [0.36-0.98]). These findings suggest that varying the administration method may result in minor differences in population estimates of very high psychological distress when using the K10.
自我报告测量方法在心理学研究和实践中很有用，但分数可能会受到施测方法的影响。本研究调查了改变回忆期（从30天改为7天）和反应选项顺序（从升序改为降序）是否会改变凯斯勒心理困扰量表（K10）的分数分布。向参与者呈现的K10量表具有不同的回忆期或不同的反应选项顺序。有微弱证据表明，使用7天回忆期时的K10平均分数低于使用30天回忆期时（B = 1.96，95%置信区间[0.04 - 3.90]），但没有证据表明极高心理困扰的估计患病率发生变化。按升序呈现反应选项不会影响平均分数，但有微弱证据表明，相对于降序，极高困扰的患病率有所降低（发病率比[IRR] = 0.60，95%置信区间[0.36 - 0.98]）。这些发现表明，使用K10量表时，改变施测方法可能会导致在极高心理困扰的总体估计上出现细微差异。
