Song Qian, Zheng Kaili, Ding Zixia, Miao Zhengmiao, Liu Zhaoxia, Cheng Ming, Yi Jinyao
Medical Psychological Center, the Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, People's Republic of China.
Medical Psychological Institute, Central South University, Changsha, People's Republic of China.
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2024 Oct 3;17:3405-3418. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S486245. eCollection 2024.
There exist four short forms of the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS): 10-item version (SIAS-10), 6-item version by Peters et al (SIAS-6P), 6-item version by Fergus et al (SIAS-6F), and 5-item version (SIAS-5). This study aims to comprehensively examine the psychometric properties of the SIAS-10, SIAS-6P, SIAS-6F, and SIAS-5 and to determine which one performs relatively better in Chinese population.
This study enrolled 733 Chinese college students. The unidimensionality of the SIAS-10, SIAS-6P, SIAS-6F, SIAS-5 was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Multi-Group CFA was further adopted to assess measurement equivalence across gender. Internal consistency reliability and criteria-related validity were also evaluated. Additionally, the measurement performance of the SIAS-10, SIAS-6P, SIAS-6F, and SIAS-5 was assessed with Item Response Theory (IRT), which estimated the discrimination parameter and the Item Characteristic Curve (ICC) for each item.
Except for the SIAS-5, the SIAS-10, SIAS-6P, and SIAS-6F displayed a good-fit to the one-factor model. Furthermore, the SIAS-10 achieved strict equivalence across gender while other versions did not. The SIAS-10, SIAS-6P, SIAS-6F and SIAS-5 all had acceptable internal consistency and significant correlations with criteria scales. The IRT results showed that the SIAS-10 included more items with higher discrimination and peaked ICCs (indicating more informative), whereas the SIAS-6P included more items with lower discrimination and flat ICCs (indicating less informative).
For assessing social anxiety in Chinese under constrained conditions, the SIAS-10 is recommended to clinicians for it measuring equivalently across gender, reflecting the relevant criteria variables well, and discriminating various levels of social anxiety sensitively.
社交互动焦虑量表(SIAS)有四种简版:10项版本(SIAS - 10)、彼得斯等人的6项版本(SIAS - 6P)、弗格斯等人的6项版本(SIAS - 6F)以及5项版本(SIAS - 5)。本研究旨在全面检验SIAS - 10、SIAS - 6P、SIAS - 6F和SIAS - 5的心理测量特性,并确定哪一个在中国人群中表现相对更好。
本研究招募了733名中国大学生。使用验证性因子分析(CFA)检验SIAS - 10、SIAS - 6P、SIAS - 6F、SIAS - 5的单维性。进一步采用多组CFA评估性别间的测量等效性。还评估了内部一致性信度和标准关联效度。此外,用项目反应理论(IRT)评估SIAS - 10、SIAS - 6P、SIAS - 6F和SIAS - 5的测量性能,该理论估计了每个项目的区分参数和项目特征曲线(ICC)。
除SIAS - 5外,SIAS - 10、SIAS - 6P和SIAS - 6F与单因素模型拟合良好。此外,SIAS - 10在性别间实现了严格等效,而其他版本未实现。SIAS - 10、SIAS - 6P、SIAS - 6F和SIAS - 5均具有可接受的内部一致性,且与标准量表有显著相关性。IRT结果表明,SIAS - 10包含更多具有较高区分度和峰值ICC的项目(表明信息量更大),而SIAS - 6P包含更多具有较低区分度和平坦ICC的项目(表明信息量较小)。
在受限条件下评估中国人群的社交焦虑时,建议临床医生使用SIAS - 10,因为它在性别间测量等效,能很好地反映相关标准变量,并能敏感地区分不同程度的社交焦虑。